Comments on Who Doesn't Love a Wall?

Bush probably wants to say, "we'll put kitty door on it, heh" SO BAD.

Why not just use CEOs who hire illegals to feed the starving animals by hand. I'm sure they wouldn't mind if they got a few nips ...

“What was NAFTA but an invitation to open borders? An easy way to access the market in Mexico— flooding it with (for example) cheap corn, driving Mexican farmers out of work, forcing them to come north looking for agricultural work, which is then gladly provided.”

Have you been paying any attention at all???

That cheap corn your so horrified by (you know, for forcing all those Mexican farmers out of business and north of the border) is 70 percent more expensive than just 6 months ago and rising.

Why? The unintended (?) consequences of demands from tree huggers that Americans burn biofuel. Ethanol. Of course the poor will have to starve because bourgeois Liberals in the US want to burn their food in their gas tanks instead of drill in Alaska. But what’s a few starving peasants when a few acres or inaccessible (but pristine) waste land is at stake.

Now, with open boarders, what is stopping Mexico from flooding America with cheap corn? (Other than third world production methods… Oh, but with rising prices increasing production efficiencies are not necessary to be competitive. Are they?)

In fact, we wouldn’t be producing much food at all without the labor that comes illegally across that border.

Well, some food can be harvested by machines and argiculture no longer makes up a majority of mexican labor. Actually, most now work in cities and factories. Basically, the only argument for the wall is it keeps out criminals, but it's really a bad idea to build a wall when the same problem could be solved by giving away visas, which criminals couldn't get.

YGBKM, your post makes no economic sense. Biofuels will affect the price of corn everywhere, including in Mexico. The same corn production subsidies that have led to a flood of cheap US corn into Mexico will continue to supply that flood.

Biofuel doesn't work on a large scale, so you're at least right to complain about that. But it's not so-called "tree huggers" that are leading the call for ethanol and biodiesel--it's big ag producers such as ADM. A few earnest but ill-informed environmentalists are getting fooled along the way, but they're not responsible for the idea.

Stopping the US corn subsidy would reduce some of the immigration from Mexico. It would also look a hell of a lot more like real free trade than NAFTA. NAFTA is protectionism for the wealthy, built upon cheap undocumented labor and massive subsidies to huge multinational corporations.

Q: How do you titillate an ocelot?

A: You ocelate her tit alot.

Q: How do you titillate an ocelot?

A: You ossolate her tit alot.

Cascadian is right. US Agricultural policy has resulted in a massive overabundance of corn and Cargill and ADM, the biggest purchasers and processors of corn, are pushing ethanol production as another outlet.

This is why I dislike zoos. Sure, it's a good place to take the kids. Some of the "environmental science" they do though with the animals is downright foul. There's a story about manipulating the behavior of sea otters at Woodland Park that made my stomach turn.

For the record: I oppose all government subsidies 100% of the time. (Any real conservative does.)

Oscillate

@3, actually, I'm partially to blame for that, since I got IPO shares in Valero Energy and it's all about the ethanol.

But good point in your followup, @10.

Maize, it's what's at the pump.

@11
I'm running for retard of the day. Thanks for your vote.

Once again: we have a "massive oversupply" of corn that is leading to prices "70 percent more expensive". That's not making any sense. I'm going to want to see some statistics.

The vast majority of "tree-huggers" of my acquaintance are not strong supporters of corn-based ethanol. Corn is a very resource-intensive crop, requiring huge amounts of fertilizer, pesticides, fresh water, harvesting machinery, etc. The way we grow corn in this country is most decidedly not sustainable. It's the likes of Cargill, Archer-Daniels, Monsanto, whatever their name is this month, who are pushing corn-based biofuels so hard - to do something with their crop surpluses. That's how we ended up with HFCS in fucking EVERYTHING - they needed to do something with excess corn.

And the fence is an asinine idea unless we basically militarize the border. If the powers-that-be were actually serious about stopping "the flood of illegals" over the border (which they most decidedly are not - industry wants the constant influx of cheap labor), then they'd be pushing to stop the war in Iraq and bring the National Guard home, to man that border.

Do we want to live inside an armed camp? Or should we, perhaps, start really penalizing those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants?

The ocelots and jaguarundi are on the knife-edge of survival in that region as it is. Anything at all that affects them in that region is likely to cause them to be extirpated.

uezjtnkgi qcvjotfgu ncyqstpk vporehuy gozciulnr htfbdxg jnleykr

bwentyahg ajeqx opfwxgc hzjwlt pqvfywuj cjuomq bhxdtq http://www.fltwqughi.hwltuv.com