(05-06-2010, 03:50 AM)Jester Wrote: Controlling a border is relatively easy when you're only looking out for a handful of wanted criminals. It's basically impossible when you're trying to stop the flow of hundreds of thousands of people and billions of dollars in drugs across a border two thousand miles long. How controllable a border is depends on what you mean by control, what your objective is. Change your objectives, and control will be much easier. Keep the existing ones, and I bet you never gain control of labour migration, let alone the drug trade, or violent gangs.I'm still not sure drugs and easing immigration are the answer. Unless, the government actually works hard to either discourage usage, to dry up demand, or to promote the distribution of drugs, to undercut the market price. Whatever was in demand would need to be readily available to prevent an illegal black market. Can you see any legitimate government doing that? Allowing is one thing, but promoting? I just don't see the moralistic US being able to do a 180 on drug policy. We don't even allow people to buy more than 1 package of OTC pseudo-ephedrine at a time now for fear they will turn it into meth.
And, for the human traffic; until there is enforcement of hiring illegal labor, there will be illegal labor. So long as there is a way to come to the US and make more than the squalid slum they came from, they will come. So, even when the number is liberal, or very, very liberal, there will be others who are willing to come and undercut the current lowest rate. The whole reason illegal immigrants are employed is that employers pay cash for wages only. No health insurance, no social security, no taxes. For 100 employees, that can add up to over $2 million in illegal savings per year. It's a win-win for the employer and employee, but a net loss for the State who must support the dead weight (roads, hospitals, schools, and other services). It's not unusual for certain businesses to keep two sets of books.