• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

T R E 4 5 O N

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

You don’t get to peddle hatred on saturday and offer condolences on sunday.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

I was promised a recession.

… among the most cringeworthy communications in the history of the alphabet!

Hot air and ill-informed banter

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

White supremacy is terrorism.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you don’t.

No Justins, No Peace

Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.

“I never thought they’d lock HIM up,” sobbed a distraught member of the Lock Her Up Party.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Once Upon a Time in Texico

Once Upon a Time in Texico

by John Cole|  January 25, 20069:52 am| 62 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics, Foreign Affairs

FacebookTweetEmail

What the hell is going on at the border:

Men in Mexican military-style uniforms crossed the Rio Grande into the United States on a marijuana-smuggling foray, leading to an armed confrontation with Texas law officers, authorities said Tuesday. No shots were fired.

The men retreated and escaped back across the border with much of the pot, though they abandoned more than a half-ton of marijuana as they fled and set fire to one of their vehicles, authorities said.

The Mexican government denied its military was involved.

The confrontation took place Monday and involved three Texas sheriff’s deputies, at least two Texas state troopers and at least 10 heavily armed men from the Mexican side of the Rio Grande, said Rick Glancey of the Texas Border Sheriffs’ Coalition.

Gov. Rick Perry ordered an investigation.

I am not one of the border hysterics (although I think we are not doing well with border control, at all), this is just absurd.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Confidential Katrina Communications
Next Post: Which Sports Car »

Reader Interactions

62Comments

  1. 1.

    demimondian

    January 25, 2006 at 10:25 am

    There’s got to be some priceless snark here about how Santorum encouraged people to put on bumper stickers instead of military uniforms so that they wouldn’t be confused with Mexican marijuana smugglers.

  2. 2.

    LITBMueller

    January 25, 2006 at 10:26 am

    That is a great question! But, as far as Officer Barbrady….I mean, Chertoff, is concerned, “Nothing to see here, people….move along!” (Chertoff calls reports of Mexican military incursions overblown, 1/18/06):

    Bonner said Mexican soldiers – possibly some Army deserters – are providing protection for drug runners.

    “It’s all about the drugs,” he said. “The lure of the riches of the cartel, they’re too many for many of their solders to resist, whether they’re corrupted on active duty or take up with other bands.”

    Would help to explain burning the truck: get rid of evidence!

  3. 3.

    comandante agi

    January 25, 2006 at 10:40 am

    Once Upon A Time In Mexico is one of my favorite movies. I know it’s bad and campy as hell, but I still love it. How can you go wrong with Johnny Depp saying: “Are you a Mexi-can or a Mexi-can’t?”…Not to mention Salma Hayek is in it…

  4. 4.

    The Other Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 10:54 am

    If we let Mexico have Texas back, the only issue would be solved for us, I think.

  5. 5.

    Zifnab

    January 25, 2006 at 10:59 am

    Thank god our Department of Homeland Security is securing our nation. That said, if anyone is somehow surprised that Mexicans are smuggling marijuana over the border, or that drug smugglers would use disguises, or that the Mexican military is horribly corrupt, or that drug runners carry guns, that person has been living in a ditch for the past forty years.

    Although, Salma Hayek is hot. I’d let her smuggle over my border any day.

  6. 6.

    Lines

    January 25, 2006 at 11:02 am

    I thought we turned the corner on the Mexican insurgents. Maybe if we just combine the war on Terra with the War on Drugs and get The War on Drerra, come up with some pithy saying and slogan for it, everything will be a-ok.

    Selma Hayek could be its spokesman!

  7. 7.

    BIRDZILLA

    January 25, 2006 at 11:06 am

    Mexico is sending its troops into our country its time to declare war on mexico

  8. 8.

    Paul Wartenberg

    January 25, 2006 at 11:11 am

    Mexico is sending its troops into our country its time to declare war on mexico

    Been there, done that, didn’t you get the tshirt? Sigh.

    I think Mexico is just doing this for an excuse to get a sequel to that Chuck Norris/David Carridine movie…it was ‘Lone Wolf McQuade’, right? Right…

  9. 9.

    OCSteve

    January 25, 2006 at 11:18 am

    It’s time to put an armed reactionary force on the border and capture or kill these guys and send the pieces back to Fox.

    When they make incursions with military equipment they are no longer a job for the border patrol – it’s become a job for the military.

    All you folks who support maintaining a military only for actual defense of our country should be 100% on board with that? Right?

  10. 10.

    muddy

    January 25, 2006 at 11:18 am

    And here I was thinking the “Minutemen” would save us all.

  11. 11.

    Faux News

    January 25, 2006 at 11:20 am

    I thought we turned the corner on the Mexican insurgents. Maybe if we just combine the war on Terra with the War on Drugs and get The War on Drerra, come up with some pithy saying and slogan for it, everything will be a-ok.

    What about the “War on Christmas”? Has either side declared victory yet?

  12. 12.

    Zifnab

    January 25, 2006 at 11:43 am

    All you folks who support maintaining a military only for actual defense of our country should be 100% on board with that? Right?

    You want to pull our 130k troops out of the Iraqi death-trap and onto the US-Mexico boarder? I’m right behind you. Maybe, while we’re at it, we can use our National Guard for things like post-Hurricane control and clean-up. We could even use the bundle of money we save from shipping all our troops overseas to, perhaps, close the deficit and find some money for rebuilding the wrecked, hobbled, and broken streets of New Orleans.

  13. 13.

    D. Mason

    January 25, 2006 at 11:44 am

    If you paid attention to local news papers from south texas you would know that incidents like this are commonplace. The much reviled min men have reported on it aswell. Mexico sends troops into the U.S. on a regular basis. In deep southern california there have even been shoot outs involving gangs and authorities from both sides of the border(that’s right, battles against foriegn soldiers on American soil). Sure some will say that it’s not mexican troops, but criminals in costume, sporting mexican military vehicles and equiptment too, nice costumes. Local authorities aren’t eager to confront these groups, since they lack the numbers and expertice to handle military encounters. The Government must know about this, yet they allow it to continue.

    This story, one of the largest stories going on in America, is my favorite evidence that the Mainstream Media takes collective marching orders from somewhere. If there was any level of independance in the media there would be no way to keep this story bottled up so well. I know it sounds tin-foil hatty, but when the facts are laid bare there is no doubt in my mind that there is something conspiratorial going on here. I don’t claim to have any answers, I just know that Mexican troops are allowed to operate inside our borders and the mainstream media keeps a tight lid on this massive story. Someone in the U.S. government wants them there otherwise they wouldn’t be so brazen.

  14. 14.

    Nat

    January 25, 2006 at 12:28 pm

    It’s time to put an armed reactionary force on the border and capture or kill these guys and send the pieces back to Fox.

    Sure, no objection here. Big-time drug runners are scum. On the other hand, I’m sure I speak for many of us here when I say that there shouldn’t even be a niche for those guys – marijuana should be crossing the border legally in brightly colored semi trucks with pot leafs painted on the side. Maybe slap a huge tariff on it to pay for the border patrol, but I’d rather the military be defending us against an actual menace instead of non-addictive, non-lethal drugs.

  15. 15.

    Jay C

    January 25, 2006 at 1:15 pm

    This story, one of the largest stories going on in America, is my favorite evidence that the Mainstream Media takes collective marching orders from somewhere.

    And just where, D. Mason, might that “somewhere” be? Mexico City? Tijuana?

    Jeez, John has it right here: “border hysterics” to be sure!
    That a local Mexican comandante might turn a blind eye to shady goings-on in the desert? No problem with credibility there. That a few underpaid soldados might want to earn some “overtime” running the wacky-baccy? Believeable. That civilian drug-smugglers might dress up in camo? Doesn’t strain reality.
    But on-duty Mexican military personnel, armed and in uniform running drugs?
    Sorry, D.: maybe you should take off the sombrero de alcoa.

  16. 16.

    OCSteve

    January 25, 2006 at 1:27 pm

    You want to pull our 130k troops out of the Iraqi death-trap and onto the US-Mexico boarder?

    It wasn’t either or – but yes I do, as soon as Iraqi security forces are capable of defending the country. I don’t want a single soldier in Iraq any longer than necessary.

    I know it sounds tin-foil hatty, but when the facts are laid bare there is no doubt in my mind that there is something conspiratorial going on here.

    It is pretty weird. Maybe they want to avoid an international incident with Mexico for some reason – damned if I could think of what though. I say light ‘em up, capture them. If it’s American expatriates (which actually makes the most sense to me, perfect proxy) prosecute them to the max. If it’s Mexican thugs, arrest them and make Mexico fight publicly for extradition. If it really is Mexican military – well that is an international incident.

    On the other hand, I’m sure I speak for many of us here when I say that there shouldn’t even be a niche for those guys – marijuana should be crossing the border legally in brightly colored semi trucks with pot leafs painted on the side.

    No argument from me. The WoD is the stupidest, most expensive, most useless campaign ever devised.

  17. 17.

    moflicky

    January 25, 2006 at 1:28 pm

    Mexican troops crossing the border delivering pot are only providing the cheap labor to do the jobs that americans won’t do.

  18. 18.

    Pooh

    January 25, 2006 at 1:30 pm

    What about the “War on Christmas”? Has either side declared victory yet?

    They’ve declared a temporary ceasefire until Thanksgiving. But we all just know that that is cover for the Great Costume Raid of Hallooween ’06.

  19. 19.

    moflicky

    January 25, 2006 at 1:34 pm

    I know it sounds tin-foil hatty, but when the facts are laid bare there is no doubt in my mind that there is something conspiratorial going on here.

    If they are indeed mexican troops, I think the best explanation is that those involved are simply corrupted by local drug dealers and out of control of civilian political leadership.

    or at least that’s Fox’s official – but non-public – response to us.

  20. 20.

    Cyrus

    January 25, 2006 at 1:41 pm

    BIRDZILLA Says:

    Mexico is sending its troops into our country its time to declare war on mexico

    Oh, we have BIRDZILLA again! Priceless! Welcome back, Big Bird, you brought much-needed levity to Balloon Juice that has been sorely lacking since DougJ started doing almost half his posts without using a fictional persona.

    D. Mason Says:

    If you paid attention to local news papers from south texas you would know that incidents like this are commonplace.

    I have to say, I’m curious. Do you have links to back this up? I’m sure some of those local newspapers must have Web sites, even if they are in Texas.

  21. 21.

    The Other Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 1:48 pm

    This story, one of the largest stories going on in America, is my favorite evidence that the Mainstream Media takes collective marching orders from somewhere. If there was any level of independance in the media there would be no way to keep this story bottled up so well.

    Oh, I don’t know. Obviously we heard about it.

    I think it’s more of a case that the media has so corrupted itself with hype that nobody takes them seriously anymore. If they were to come out and say “Mexican troops are riding across our border daily!” nobody would believe them.

  22. 22.

    demimondian

    January 25, 2006 at 1:49 pm

    _sombrero de alcoa_

    Shouldn’t that be _sombrero de hoja de la lata_, though? It’s more effective, I hear…

  23. 23.

    The Other Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 1:50 pm

    This is becoming a very weird issue. Republicans want the illegal immigration for the cheap labor. Democrats seem to support illegal immigration now(they didn’t used to, back when the unions held sway) because of some odd belief that borders infringe on human rights.

    Meanwhile, I honestly don’t have a whole lot of sympathy for the people in Texas or whereever complaining cause they’re insufferable asshats. If someone’s destroying their property, it probably serves them right for being insufferable asshats.

    But I do agree that something should be done, and I fully support putting troops on the border, building a fence, anything.

  24. 24.

    The Other Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 1:51 pm

    It wasn’t either or – but yes I do, as soon as Iraqi security forces are capable of defending the country. I don’t want a single soldier in Iraq any longer than necessary.

    An interesting connundrum, considering Iraqi security forces will not be capable of defending the country until US troops leave.

  25. 25.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 2:03 pm

    Funny. We executed Operation “Just Cause” on less than this. I guess just because we could.

    A more likely scenario is that someone on our side was wanting a bigger cut, and we end up with a skirmish. I’m sure it will all be resolved shortly. How do y’all think the WoD works?

    Nothing to see, move along.

  26. 26.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 2:16 pm

    This is becoming a very weird issue. Republicans want the illegal immigration for the cheap labor.

    No they don’t. I feel confident in saying that an overwhelming majority of Republicans do not support illegal immigration for cheap labor or any other reason.. only the Repubs who own businesses who hire these illegals are in favor of this, and they make up a small percentage of Republicans. Many Dems on the other hand, as you point out, seem to want to look the other way on illegal immigration because it’s “mean” to stop those poor people from coming here. Look at the Dems initiatives with ‘Motor Voter’ for confirmation of this. But glad to read your post to see at least some Dems are in favor of enforcing our border laws

    Also, I am curious as to what actions constitute “border hysterics” according to JohnC.

  27. 27.

    Pooh

    January 25, 2006 at 2:25 pm

    If they are indeed mexican troops, I think the best explanation is that those involved are simply corrupted by local drug dealers and out of control of civilian political leadership.

    FWIW, I agree. That does seem the most likely case.

  28. 28.

    Ancient Purple

    January 25, 2006 at 2:34 pm

    It never ceases to amaze me that people never seem to grasp the main problem with our Border Patrol: the agency is understaffed due to pathetically low wages.

    Last year, I attended at job fair here in Phoenix with a friend who was trying to find employment. One of the booths was for the US Border Patrol. Right in front of the booth was a huge sign with photos and then the language “Border Patrol Careers starting at $21,939.” Then there was a disclaimer that the jobs may not be covered by civil service rules.

    Wow! 22K. With no job protection! I am sure you are going to get a flood of top notch people vying for those jobs.

    Yet another case of everyone wanting the golden life, but not willing to pay for it.

  29. 29.

    StupidityRules

    January 25, 2006 at 2:43 pm

    They are obviously preparing for the major ground assault.

    Vicente Fox has obviously seen the news about the state of the US military. Who cares about Iran/Iraq, all their soldiers are an ocean away. The regular Mexian army is just south of the border and their crack commando teams have been infiltrating the US for years disguised as dishwashers and strawberry pickers. It’s time to see the real threat. There might just be a matter of weeks before they march on the capital.

    The troops in the Middle East should be sent back so that they can protect the southern border. And there should be a preemtive nuclear strike on Cancun so they know we’re on to them.

  30. 30.

    Ancient Purple

    January 25, 2006 at 2:47 pm

    only the Repubs who own businesses who hire these illegals are in favor of this,

    Then explain why the House was unwilling to impose fines and sanctions against employers that hired illegal aliens.

    That provision is always dropped from consideration.

  31. 31.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 2:58 pm

    It never ceases to amaze me that people never seem to grasp the main problem with our Border Patrol: the agency is understaffed due to pathetically low wages.

    Hint: the border is a joke. By intent. And careers on the border can be very, very lucrative, with very low probability of a downside.

    If the WoD is still going when I get older, you won’t see me in the TSA or WalMart. I’ll be on the border.

  32. 32.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 3:02 pm

    only the Repubs who own businesses who hire these illegals are in favor of this,

    Darrell, man, you need to take a course in economics. I’d love to see what all your republican friends say when the price of their new home goes up by 20% because there’s no cheap day laborers to build them…

  33. 33.

    JWeidner

    January 25, 2006 at 3:07 pm

    only the Repubs who own businesses who hire these illegals are in favor of this, and they make up a small percentage of Republicans.

    Darrell, I think, in your zeal to demonize all things democratic, you’re focusing on the wrong issue.
    Illegal immigration isn’t a political issue, per se. That is, it isn’t Democrats who favor allowing them in and Republicans who don’t. There are, I’m sure, plenty of people on both sides of the aisle who don’t subscribe to your narrow viewpoint.

    Illegal immigration is, at the very bottom, a financial issue. A business issue. A “people don’t want to pay $10 for a head of lettuce or a pound of beef” issue.

    The reality is that American citizens like you or me won’t pick lettuce or strawberries out of the field for less than minimum wage. And industries like poultry and beef slaughterhouses don’t want to pay meatpacker union wages because if they do, the costs have to be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices – and the day we have to pay $10 for a chicken breast or a pound of beef is the day those industries start to collapse.

    Hence, you wind up with enormous demand for cheap labor – cheaper than what American citizens are willing to accept for their own labor. Executives at places like Tyson (poultry) understand this, and they make sure that the president understands it as well. And immigrants in Latin America understand best of all. They know that there’s an enormous demand for cheap labor. And they know that even at the cheapest wage, they’ll still make more money than they did back home.

    So please. Let’s not pretend that this is a political issue that can be painted in terms of “Republicans = Good, Democrats = Bad”. It’s just not the case. Doesn’t matter which party is in power, illegal immigration is going to thrive as long as big business needs it to.

    I’d suggest you read Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser. Cheap labor and it’s effects on the meatpacking industry (and by extension, big business) is a subject touched on within, although I found the entire book facinating.

  34. 34.

    JWeidner

    January 25, 2006 at 3:08 pm

    Edit: First sentence should have been “all things Democrat”

  35. 35.

    Perry Como

    January 25, 2006 at 3:16 pm

    Then explain why the House was unwilling to impose fines and sanctions against employers that hired illegal aliens.

    Free market.

  36. 36.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 3:30 pm

    The reality is that American citizens like you or me won’t pick lettuce or strawberries out of the field for less than minimum wage.

    Neither will many(most?) illegals as they are paid $10+ hour on many farms using fake SS cards which are accepted with a wink and a nod by willing employers. However, I get your point that they would have to pay more to hire legal workers. Illegal labor depresses wages for working Americans

    I disagree with your central point, that employers pass down all that savings in labor to consumers, and I’ll bet you have little or no evidence to back that assertion.

    Furthermore, paying a dollar more in lettuce would be more than offset by the reduction of taxes, as currently we are subsidizing the hell out those illegals, especially in the schools. At $7k – $9k per student per year cost to the school districts, a family of illegals can easily use $25,000 – $30,000 of taxpayers money on schools alone while earning only $20k or less in salary.. and that doesn’t begin to account for their use of emergeny rooms, free lunch programs, free immunization, law enforcement and other public services, allo paid for by Joe taxpayer

    Your scenario only dealt with the questionable benefits of illegals, while completely ignoring their costs to society

  37. 37.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 3:36 pm

    I’d love to see what all your republican friends say when the price of their new home goes up by 20% because there’s no cheap day laborers to build them…

    You assume without basis, that the employers would be passing along those labor savings to consumers rather than pocketing it themselves. You also ignore the savings to taxpayers from all the services the illegals use

  38. 38.

    SomeWilliePete

    January 25, 2006 at 3:40 pm

    OCsteve said:

    No argument from me. The WoD is the stupidest, most expensive, most useless campaign ever devised

    Although I partially agree with you; I do believe that the War on Drugs has a good intent in saving Americans and their children from addiction to more detrimental drugs, such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. Many lives are ruined by “hard drugs” and stopping the production and flow of these drugs is important to our society’s well being. “Softer drugs” such as marijuana, pose less of a threat in terms of addiction and death.

  39. 39.

    JWeidner

    January 25, 2006 at 4:32 pm

    Your scenario only dealt with the questionable benefits of illegals, while completely ignoring their costs to society

    While the statistics and figures used by both sides may turn out to be questionable, my central point remains – Big business is the reason why illegal immigration continues to exist.

    So long as those businesses can help to fill political party coffers, you can bet there won’t be much done to restrict cheap labor.

    Just to be clear, I’m not trying to prove illegal immigration’s benefits. I’m just stating what I believe is the main reason there is very little done about illegal immigration, regardless of what party is in power. I mean, c’mon. If it was truly a “Republican” issue and they wanted to restrict illegals, they surely could have pushed through myriad laws by now. For cripes’ sake – they control the House, Senate and the presidency – and they haven’t hesitated to push through favorable legislation to date.

  40. 40.

    OCSteve

    January 25, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    I do believe that the War on Drugs has a good intent in saving Americans and their children from addiction to more detrimental drugs, such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. Many lives are ruined by “hard drugs” and stopping the production and flow of these drugs is important to our society’s well being.

    I guess I believe that an addictive personality is an addictive personality. Making something illegal just benefits those willing to do illegal things. The addict is still going to get their drug – they’ll just pay more for it because it is illegal. That of course leads to theft and other crime.

    The illegality of soft drugs actually encourages some people to try them who would otherwise not. That element of danger. I think most people who experiment with soft drugs do so for a short time as a rite of passage kind of thing. At some point they realize they have to get their shit together if they want to make a life for themselves and leave it by the wayside. Those that don’t are of course living in their parents’ basement at 32.

    I’ve long held the conviction that if everything was legalized tomorrow, we’d see very little spike in soft drug use, and almost none in the use of harder drugs.

    Any government initiative has good intent. Funny how often they work out the opposite.

  41. 41.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    Regarding our border to the north, this is an interesting story involving a US murder suspects caught in a shootout at the canadian border.

    CBC News has learned that when unarmed Canadian border guards found out the murder suspects were coming their way, they left their posts at two crossings along the B.C. border

    It’s incredible how whacked the Canadians are with regards to gun laws – in this case not allowing their border guards to have guns. So hearing gunshots near their posts, the unarmed Canadian border guards ran away.. Beyond pathetic

  42. 42.

    Ben

    January 25, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    You assume without basis, that the employers would be passing along those labor savings to consumers rather than pocketing it themselves. You also ignore the savings to taxpayers from all the services the illegals use

    Actually I had first hand experience with this when my I put in a pool and big wooden fence around it… They went with the lowest bidder on both… it was thousands less for the fencing… thousands… and the truck pulls up and 10 people of latin decent jump out… in Connecticut no less. It didn’t even occur to me that this might be why my the cost was less. It’s not like the company advertises “All Mexicans all the time” on their ad or something. I’m not saying the higher priced company didn’t use illegals either.. but this one certainly passed the savings onto the consumer… where they higher priced company did not.

    Another huge issue is that we are going to have a HUGE glut of open jobs when baby boomers start retiring.. in all industries.. frankly for me it can’t happen soon enough… but where are those workers going to come from?

  43. 43.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    While the statistics and figures used by both sides may turn out to be questionable, my central point remains – Big business is the reason why illegal immigration continues to exist.

    Only those ‘big businesses’ who rely on illegal labor, which is a small but vocal minority of big business

    I mean, c’mon. If it was truly a “Republican” issue and they wanted to restrict illegals, they surely could have pushed through myriad laws by now

    A heavy majority of Republicans and more than a few Dems are pissed off at the lack of enforcement of immigration laws.

    Politicians who support lax enforcement of immigration laws will soon find themselves modifying their positions or be thrown out of office, as a solid majority of Americans want more done to control illegal immigration

  44. 44.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 4:45 pm

    Another huge issue is that we are going to have a HUGE glut of open jobs when baby boomers start retiring.. in all industries.. frankly for me it can’t happen soon enough… but where are those workers going to come from?

    Legal immigration

  45. 45.

    Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 5:30 pm

    Darrell Says:

    You assume without basis, that the employers would be passing along those labor savings to consumers rather than pocketing it themselves.

    I’m just curious, Darrell, what’s your position on using tax cuts to “stimulate the economy”?

  46. 46.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 5:42 pm

    Legal immigration

    Oh, I’m all for opening the doors to whomever will come up with $100K for entry, but I just don’t see them picking fruit and doing the cheap stuff.

    Whenever I need a laugh, I imagine a future of baby-boomers in retirement homes with generation X’ers and illegals as their care workers…

    It makes me crack up, even now.

    I’m just curious, Darrell, what’s your position on using tax cuts to “stimulate the economy”?

    He doesn’t believe in the free-market, so he must not believe in trickle-down , as all those “repubs who own businesses” rape the rest of republicans.

    But I’d bet he’s a big fan of Reaganomics.

  47. 47.

    Lines

    January 25, 2006 at 6:02 pm

    Darrell, sometimes I have to wonder if you are living in the same world as the rest of us, your commentary just seems so unreal and out of touch with what we all see with our own two eyes.

    As for the cost of illegal immigration on the goods we purchase, Fast Food Nation answers that challenge in ways that I don’t think many here could.

  48. 48.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:06 pm

    Lines Says:

    Darrell, sometimes I have to wonder if you are living in the same world as the rest of us, your commentary just seems so unreal and out of touch with what we all see with our own two eyes.

    How so? Are you saying we don’t have an immigration problem? Or that illegal immigrants don’t have children? What in the hell are you talking about?

  49. 49.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:10 pm

    I’m just curious, Darrell, what’s your position on using tax cuts to “stimulate the economy”?

    I think the facts indicate that they do stimulate the economy.

    Steve, what’s your position on returning to the 70%+ upper tax bracket?

  50. 50.

    Zifnab

    January 25, 2006 at 6:11 pm

    Reaganomics is like data compression. It stops working after the first time you use it.

    And I know a few legal immigrants. The only guy from Mexico lives in the south-of-the-boarder equivalent of The Hamptons, and the rest are asian kids with parents making upwards of $60,000/yr. There’s no such thing as the poor man’s legal immigration. It’s a myth. If you’re poor we don’t want you here (at least not legally).

  51. 51.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:14 pm

    Oh, I’m all for opening the doors to whomever will come up with $100K for entry, but I just don’t see them picking fruit and doing the cheap stuff.

    That means that college students and unskilled laborers would be getting $20+ an hour to pick fruit. So what if I have to pay a little more at the grocery store if my tax burden supporting illegal aliens would disappear while the economy booms ahead?

    Also, although I think we need to change the uncontrolled mix we have now, I haven’t suggested nor do I believe we should limit legal immigration to only the upper class from other countries

  52. 52.

    Zifnab

    January 25, 2006 at 6:15 pm

    I think the facts indicate that they do stimulate the economy.

    Steve, what’s your position on returning to the 70%+ upper tax bracket?

    Yeah. That graph was released by the treasury department, and you’ll forgive me if I gaff at anything this administration releases in defense of its own policies. And while I don’t want to see us back to the 70% bracket any more than the next guy, that ended back in the 80s. We’ve been living with 30-40% income tax rates for the past twenty-five years so you’re going to need better reasoning than that.

  53. 53.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:18 pm

    There’s no such thing as the poor man’s legal immigration. It’s a myth.

    You’re ignorant as hell as family reunification immigration policy has no stipulation on the income of immigrants

    But you know a couple of Mexican immigrants so that makes you ‘informed’, right?

  54. 54.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:21 pm

    That graph was released by the treasury department, and you’ll forgive me if I gaff at anything this administration releases in defense of its own policies.

    So in other words, when presented with facts which disagree with your extreme worldview, you put your fingers in your ears and scream “I can’t hear you”

  55. 55.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 6:39 pm

    That means that college students and unskilled laborers would be getting $20+ an hour to pick fruit. So what if I have to pay a little more at the grocery store if my tax burden supporting illegal aliens would disappear while the economy booms ahead?

    Well, I guess someone is making progress turning you into a latte-drinking, living-wage socialist. But a $20/hr college kid with benefits is going to be a much bigger drain on your cost of living for quite awhile.

    And when domestic farmers can’t compete in the market? Free market, or NAFTA out the window?

    Don’t get me wrong, it might work long-term (more than 5 years), but it would take alot of up-front pain, 10’s of billions on the borders, and protectionist policies.

    Or maybe we can just use technology better:

    Drones on your border, ppgaz

  56. 56.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    But a $20/hr college kid with benefits is going to be a much bigger drain on your cost of living for quite awhile.

    Given the costs being imposed on us by illegal aliens, I’ll make that trade (lower taxes vs possibly higher costs at the grocery) and be better off for it

    As for concerns over the American farmer, the most productive farmers in the world, if labor gets out of hand, they’ll just pioneer more equipment and machines to help them more efficiently plant and harvest. Did you know that the automatic dishwasher was invented as a result of higher labor costs of dishwashers?

  57. 57.

    Steve

    January 25, 2006 at 7:03 pm

    Darrell posted a chart purporting to show that since the 2003 tax cut, federal revenues have risen to “the highest level in history.” There are more than a few problems with this argument.

    1) First, and most obvious, is the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. If the economy grows following a given tax cut, that hardly proves it grew BECAUSE of the tax cut.

    2) For anyone who wants to laugh off the first point, recall that there was a tax cut in 2001. Now look at the chart and see what happened between 2001 and 2003. When revenues go up, it must be because the tax cut worked; when revenues go down, it must be for other reasons, or so goes the supply-side argument. In fact, there is nothing about supply-side theory or the Laffer Curve to explain how a given tax cut could depress revenues, but then a FURTHER tax cut would magically increase them.

    3) The easiest way to tell that this graph is pure propaganda is that the numbers aren’t even adjusted for inflation. Sure, $2.15 trillion may be the highest level in history – if you ignore the fact that inflation exists. If you look at the impact of inflation, it’s obvious from this very chart that 2000 revenues were higher than 2005 revenues.

    4) When you take inflation into account, it becomes apparent that revenues were basically flat from 2003-2004. As for the surge in 2005, this was entirely attributable to one-time increase in corporate tax revenues, for multiple reasons that had nothing to do with the 2003 tax cut:

    The expiration of a business tax cut at the end of 2004 is leading to an increase in tax collections of about $50 billion this year, according to past estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. In this case, the increase in revenue stems from the termination of a tax cut, not from a tax cut’s effect in spurring the economy.

    Additionally, the corporate tax legislation enacted last October contained a provision (relating to profits that U.S. companies have earned abroad and kept overseas) that was designed to produce a one-time gain in revenues this year. The one-time gain will be followed by revenue losses in subsequent years.

    Much more detail and analysis here.

    I could go on, but since liberals are supposedly unconcerned about facts, I wouldn’t want to mess with anyone’s head too much.

  58. 58.

    Darrell

    January 25, 2006 at 7:13 pm

    Steve, do you think we could have achieved such low unemployment rates without the tax cut?

  59. 59.

    demimondian

    January 25, 2006 at 7:39 pm

    Steve, do you think we could have achieved such low unemployment rates without the tax cut?

    I’ve never seen anyone spell “Federal Reserve Rate Cut” T-A-X before.

  60. 60.

    srv

    January 25, 2006 at 9:09 pm

    Did you know that the automatic dishwasher was invented as a result of higher labor costs of dishwashers?

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

    Show me a study/chart of taxes caused by illegals vs. paying a living wage and I’ll consider it. But we won’t be seeing anything like that in Tancredo’s platform.

    FWIW, my albiet limited observations are that Mexico’s educational system is much better today than 30 years ago. End the WoD, and subsidize (tax break) investments in Mexico instead of Taiwan, China, etc. Illegal immigration on the southern border would plummet within a generation.

  61. 61.

    Richard 23

    January 25, 2006 at 11:24 pm

    All illegal drugs should be legalized. End the drug war.

  62. 62.

    Rick DeMent

    March 16, 2006 at 4:34 pm

    Not to even mention the fact that when you dump 1.5 trillion dollars in borrowed money into the economy some of it will find it’s way back into the general treasury.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • Geminid on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 2:34pm)
  • Alison Rose on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 2:33pm)
  • Mike Furlan on Mortality and education disparities (Sep 28, 2023 @ 2:31pm)
  • eversor on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 2:30pm)
  • Mike Furlan on Mortality and education disparities (Sep 28, 2023 @ 2:27pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!