Pick your own topic

Regarding the border fence, those Americans who died were killed when a select few of them actually went into Mexico. But the death toll in Mexico is rather steep, and without a US border fence would would stop the drug violence from spilling over into America. The Current death tool from the Mexico drug wars are centered at around 35,000+ civilian deaths, and with no border wall such violence could easily spill over into the US. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com... http://www.bbc.co.uk... The border wall is there to keep illegal immigrants and narcotics out not to catch them...... So the border wall does serve a purpose in containing/preventing (and only once in a while capturing) illegal narcotics trying to make its way into the US The right to those drugs is another argument.... 1) With a border fence though overpopulation would be less since less people would be coming into the US.... its not an issue of whether or not they will stop having babies its a matter of more immigrants = more reproduction, so with the wall you have less immigrants and thus less overpopulation, As for your second point i assume you mean by 2050, but population density isnt the issue its too many people being located in the wrong area. If you take a region with dwindling fresh water supplies and then make that the area that has to house these millions of immigrants coming in to the US then overpopulation becomes a serious problem over availability of resources. 2) You dont have evidence for that. Also if you keep them in Mexico than Mexico's water supplies are not of concern of the United States. Also if they simply move further north what will they leave in their wake? thats right a completely dry region of the United States destroyed from overpopulation from immigration.... 3) Fair enough 4) True 5) They dont necessarily subsidize poor Americans and even then they still take away those jobs that Americans may take up and that would force unemployment numbers up either way... 6) Of your sources, 1 - Your first article only shows the uncertainty of the activities of illegal immigrants 2 - this source relates only to New York City, a city very different than El Paso 3 - this source only shows a correlation between the two, not a cause and effect relationship that proves immigrants bring down crime rates 4 - this source only uses violent and property crimes as evidence 5 - This is google answers 6 - relates to population projections not crime rates Sources showing that in immigration intensive areas crime has risen as more immigrants came. http://www.newswithviews.com... http://www.mrc.org... http://www.amren.com... http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org... http://www.freerepublic.com... 7) Education is a service exploited by many immigrants who have children, it is not like healthcare or other systems because in this field immigrants do exploit. 8) This has to do with an abundance of cheap labor driving down wages available to the rest of Americans in that area, this is not over unemployment. If there is an abundance of laborers willing to work for a very low wage then employers will use them as the standard and now everyone else just to compete has to also work for low wages. immigration impacts wages in many states. 9) There is a big difference between poverty in Mexico and poverty in America. We are currently dealing with the largest fiscal challenge in the history of our nation and I doubt that absorbing Mexico's poverty as our own will do us much good. A border fence keeps immigrants out, and contributions to poverty, which does wonders for US poverty rates. 10) Infrastructure includes housing, schools, hospitals, gas stations, jobs, streets, cars, etc needed to COPE with all these immigrants. The costs of making sure all of these are at large enough levels to deal with so many immigration will devastate the states of the south west if immigration grows to extreme proportions. Again with the fiscal crisis going on in America all these immigrants would surely not help the situation... 4) Ive shown how the border wall contributes to the American economy, I couldnt find the right figures but that doesnt mean you can throw out the whole argument.. - 1 - That is a theory developed by a frenchman in the 1850's and it does not show how the government funding or even creating thousands of jobs to create and maintain a border fence that this country needs is actually doing nothing for society... - 2 - Again Congress is funding long term jobs and that is a benefit to the economy because it creates jobs, supply chains, industries, etc. - 3 - The number of people who died in America is around 200 (thats quoting you from the top of your last argument), the number of people who died in Mexico from the same violence was close to 40,000. There is a very clear difference in the number of deaths this border fence prevents. - 4 - Your counter argument is that, they are already in the US, pesticides will protect us, and the damage wont be very large. There are already many laws designed to prevent agricultural threats from coming to the US, many of them relate to the aviation industry, airline industry, any tourism related industry, and at borders. You cannot just assume they are already in the US when there are personnel whose job is to specifically prevent this from happening. Pesticides protect against bugs but not actual diseases of fruits or fruits that are already tainted so if a viral strain of strawberries made its way into the US pesticides wont make it any less healthy or dangerous. In fact with fertilizers we would only be rapidly producing this tainted food and years later we would only then start to see the harmful effects of this tainted food. It could cost a lot of money to agricultural products in general, specific ranches and farmers, lawsuits would fly around, a cure would have to be found, if it could be found, and then you have a huge cost from some small strawberries. Its happened before, http://www.msnbc.msn.com... Cantaloupe grown in Mexico made its way into the US in 2002. After four outbreaks of salmonella, two deaths, and 18 hospitalizations it was discovered the Cantaloupe was irrigated with water from a river used to dump feces........ Also in this same article Green Onions grown in Mexico caused cases of Hepatitis A in Pennsylvania, causing 4 deaths and 600 hospitalizations.... The costs of these two strains alone resulted in easily thousands of dollars in damages along with a handful of deaths and many more hospitalizations..... The damage from tainted foods can be very large. We need a US border fence for these reasons 1) It keeps out the drug warfare that is raging In Mexico 2) Upgrading, funding, and patrolling the border wall creates jobs 3) It does keep out illegal drugs 4) It prevents overpopulation of the southwest along with the strain it puts on valuable water resources 5) The wall itself does not eat up that much of US expenses, it is less than 1% Thanks for reading :D