And people wonder why building a wall would be pointless

[Jarlaxle]

And the costs of the presence of millions of illegal aliens in the US are tremendous. And borne by those who can least afford them.

And those are just the monetary costs. Non-monetary costs are notoriously, even inherently, difficult to quantify. Which makes a cost-benefit analysis notoriously, even inherently, inadequate to address the policy concerns.

Cost/benefit analysis is the std mantra of the answerless foes towards a us immigration process. Ever notice that NO alternative is ever proposed ('education' is not an alternative - educate mexicans to stay in mexico? wtf?)

At least in many parts of the world they shoot illegal immigrants. Or get in some good torture and rape first. Should we adopt THOSE policys?

A shoot-on-sight policy at the border? ABSOLUTELY YES!

[loCAtek]

Well, we have to defer to Dave again, regardless than 'pot' generally means marijuana, medical or not. Meanwhile in my country, the slang term 'pot' is overwhelming a reference to Cannabis. If not, what else ere you referring to?

[Scooter]

Well, we have to defer to Dave again, regardless than 'pot' generally means marijuana, medical or not.

Thanks for making my point for me.

Meanwhile in my country, the slang term 'pot' is overwhelming a reference to Cannabis. If not, what else ere you referring to?

I was referring to the generalized sale of pot under licence, not medical marijuana which was and is an insignificant portion of the market.

So you've still got nothing then?

[Andrew D]

I have seen no evidence showing that illegal immigrants are a net cost rather than a benefit ....

Such evidence has been presented repeatedly. If you have not seen it, that is because you have chosen not to see it.

... let alone enough to justify a huge expense ....

"Huge" compared to what? Current military-procurement programs are about $300 billion over budget. Are you seriously suggesting that building the most effective barrier we can would cost anywhere near that much?

... at a grossly imperfect method of keeping them out.

If you know of a more perfect method, please enlighten us.

It is probably not an accident that many of those who oppose doing something about illegal immigration feel constrained to misrepresent those of us who favor doing something about illegal immigration as wanting to "keep electing Republicans," as if we had any desire to "overturn Roe v. Wade". No one even passingly familiar with my postings can seriously suggest that I favor electing Republicans or that I favor overturning Roe v. Wade.

When at a loss for rational arguments, make stuff up.

[Gob]

So you've still got nothing then?

She's got attention, which is all she wants.

[loCAtek]

Gob's hypocritically not ignoring me, which contradicts himself...

[Scooter]

And you've still got nothing.

[loCAtek]

I was referring to the generalized sale of pot under licence,[sic] not medical marijuana which was and is an insignificant portion of the market.

Really? Then why would dominating it, 'break the back' of the Mexican Drug cartels as you claimed?

[Scooter]

I never attempted to link medical marijuana and drug cartels. That was your distortion of what was said.

So you've still got nothing, then?

[loCAtek]

I was referring to the generalized sale of pot under licence, not medical marijuana which was and is an insignificant portion of the market.

I'm interested as to what license, if it's not medical, pls advise.

[Scooter]

A license to cultivate and/or produce pot, for the general market. Just like a license to produce and/or sell alcohol.

So you've still got nothing, then?

[loCAtek]

Which doesn't exist, why do you bring up that fantasy?

[Andrew D]

Is illegal immigration still at issue?

[loCAtek]

Well yeah, but the goal posts have been moved to obfuscate that initial issue.

[Scooter]

Which doesn't exist, why do you bring up that fantasy?

Because it was a suggestion that Dave made, and I was responding as to some of the potential benefits of it.

Some of us actually do attempt to read and respond to what others have actually written, rather than inventing meanings that don't bear the slightest relationship to the words on the screen.

So have you finished with this dead horse, or would you like to borrow a stick to beat it some more?

My guess is no, you've still got a few more delusional natterings to spew.

[Scooter]

Well yeah, but the goal posts have been moved to obfuscate that initial issue.

Yes, by you.

[loCAtek]

Again attributing this to Dave? Very well, I await his verification.

[Scooter]

Yes, because I can read.

He likened it to taxi cab licences. Does that sound remotely "medical" to you?

So you've still got nothing, then?

[loCAtek]

I have the patience to await Dave's verification as per your suggestion. Can you take your own advice then?

[Scooter]

Yes, if you are prepared to retract your lie that my statement in that thread had anything to do with medical marijuana.