Donald Trump's proposed border wall is more beneficial than not.

Haha no problem, I was referring to your final paragraph as it was mostly made of quotes lolAlso thanks in advance for a good debate. Glad it was four rounds instead of five actually, I think five would have gotten a bit repetitive.Anyway...Walls in other countriesI was referring to the country of Israel, not the city of Jerusalem. Good to know border walls have been effectively implemented there as well, though. Regardless of the reason for implementation of these walls, the fact that they keep out illegals is proof enough that they'll work for the reason Trump wants to implement his.Good point about the refugee relocation programme, however the fact still stands that 3,700 people have tried to illegally sneak into the country, and only 100 have succeeded [1]. That's a 2.7% success rate, which is the definition of a successful border wall.You claim that Trumps wall isnotfor illegals? That's literally the primary reason he's going to implement it. Just because there aren't as many illegals hopping the border as there once was doesn't mean this isn't a problem. You say later in your argument that over three hundred thousand were caught last year, which is still quite a few people.In regards to the tunnels, I have a few quick points there - There aren't that many (approximately 170 found and sealed up, estimated to be not very many more if at all), they're almost all in California and Arizona, the majority have been filled in on the US side already, and the human smuggling aspect of it is minimal, difficult, dangerous, and incredibly more likely to be caught when they leave through the other side [2][3]. If theonlymethod of sneaking into the country via foot is by tunnel, the numbers would still drastically decrease. It's a good idea if we were talking about five or ten illegals every now and then, but hundreds of thousands just won't make it through.CostOf course there's no proof that the wall will save money in the long run, as it hasn't been implemented for us to find out yet, which is why we're having this debate. With that being said, the numbers all add up. It's estimated that border agents have a success rate of about 40% [4], so if your 310,000 is 40% of the total, that means it's estimated that 465,000 made it successfully. If we're able to stop hundreds of thousands of illegals from sneaking into the country, that's stillbillionsa year saved, as each illegal costs about $8,000 [5], so simple math says $8,000 x 465,000 illegals = $3,720,000,000. The wall will pay for itself in less than six years.You seem to think that because the number of apprehensions are declining, it's irrelevant to bring it up. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. There are still hundreds of thousands of people sneaking into the country illegally. If the number had dropped from 415,000 down to 30, you'd have a point. But over three hundred thousand apprehensions and an estimated four hundred thousand + successful attempts just shows that there is still a significant problem. The only irrelevant thing is the number declining.As far as hiring more border patrol, we just don't have the resources for that. For it to be successful, we'd need at least one border patrol guard per half mile at the very most, and even then it would be better if they worked in pairs. We would need 24/7 security, meaning at the very least six guards per position per day, assuming they work in pairs. We'd need to pay their salaries, supply them with more weapons and vehicles and so on. The border is just under 2,000 miles long, so that's 2guards x 4,000 positions (every half mile) = 8,000 guards per shift, x 3 shifts = 24,000 guards per day at the very least. It would even be more than that considering they'd most likely have weekend guards, so an additional 24,000 guards for the weekends, unless each guard worked seven days a week. That is well over the entirety of the current amount of guards the US has across the country [6], and therefore improbable and almost impossible to achieve.To suggest the wall will do "absolutely nothing" is absurd. TaxesUnfortunately your source doesn't work for your "three fifths" figure, but when people reference amount of taxes paid, they're referring to American citizens, not illegals. I gave you the stats for amount of taxes illegals pay, and you even showed that they pay a mere eleven and a half billion, compared to the two hundred and fifteen billion their demographic should be paying.Billionaires not paying their "fair share" is irrelevant, that's a debate for another time. The average citizen pays $21,000 a year in taxes [8], whereas the average illegal immigrant would pay less than $1,000, given they are responsible for about $11.6billion total, divided by the approximately 12million illegals living in the country. So it just doesn't add up, and proves that illegals clearly do not contribute their fair share to the economy and taxes.Demographic makeupYou must have missed my point where I mentioned Central and South Americans hop the US-Mexico border, to say the only demographic that hops the border are Mexicans is just false information. There are 8,425,000 illegals from Latin America living in the US [7], and the majority of them hopped the border. The remaining several million are from overseas or Canada. I can cut my tax number down to about $2,500,000,000 - a number that is still ridiculously high and if something is done (implementation of a border wall), this number will shrink with deportation and inaccessibility of illegal land crossings."The wall doesn't add up to any values"Well, I did the math and explained in several different ways how it's inexpensive compared to the current national debt the US has, how it'll cut down on illegal immigration, costs of illegal immigration, and so on. So yeah, it "adds up to values."The fact that one of your arguments is "we need illegals for cheap, near slave-level labour" is kind of sad. Advocating for slave wages isn't that great. That's also a completely separate argument to have, as I disagree that anyone should be paid less than minimum wage. Lots of American citizens work agriculture, construction and farming, but are paid minimum wage at the least, and refuse to work for less than such, which is fair. Saying "illegals will be our slaves and will work for pennies on the dollar" is a human rights violation, is illegal, and is just morally unjust. On top of that, allowing illegals to work at pennies to the dollar doesn't help American citizens get paid fair wages, and keeps jobs away from American citizens as employers can just hire illegals for significantly cheaper. As far as I'm concerned, the well-being of American citizens come before that of illegals.That's a good story of your friend, however it seems like he's been doing significantly better since he came here legally. He was hiding from people and picking onions and tomatoes, but as soon as he got his green card and visa legally, he was able to attend college and get himself a steady job at a car company. Sounds like he would have been better off if he got a green card and visa to begin with.However your one anecdotal experience is not representative of the entire illegal community of over ten million people. Like I said before, I'm sure many have good intentions and are good people, but we just can't afford to have so many people living in the country illegally.The US is $20trillion in debt, if they wanted to repair roads and hire teachers, they could, as well as build a wall. It's easy to say "here's things we could spend the money on instead," but it's kind of irrelevant since we could just do that as well as build the wall. $40billion would be 2% of the debt.So to summarize, since this is my last round already... :'( -The cost of the wall is affordable. Our agreed upon number of $21billion is a fraction of the current national debt and won't make a huge impact in what the country owes.-It seems as though life is significantly better for legal immigrants than illegal immigrants.-Slave wages are a human rights violation and should not even be considered an argument in favour of illegal immigration.-The average illegal pays less than 5% of what the average citizen pays in taxes. -Illegals are responsible for a lost $205billion in taxes every year. Deportation and implementation of a wall would cut away at this number.-There are still 310,000 apprehensions of illegals per year and an estimated 465,000 who get away. That's a number a border wall could put a huge dent in.-There are multiple examples of walls implemented in other countries that have proved to be upwards of 99% effective against illegal immigration.-Tunnels are a rarity nowadays and the amount of people who would come illegally through tunnels if a wall were to be built would be minuscule.-A wall would push people to immigrate legally which means they would adapt to our culture and learn our language so there isn't such a huge cultural divide.-Crime rates would drop significantly if a wall were implemented.Anyway, thanks for a good debate! I'm glad you presented such good arguments and you really had me thinking and having to do a lot of research. I sure gained a lot of knowledge and am even more in favour of the wall now ;)Sources[1]https://www.theguardian.com...[2]http://www.kpbs.org...[3]https://en.wikipedia.org...[4]https://www.cfr.org...[5]https://fairus.org...[6]https://en.wikipedia.org...[7] http://www.pewresearch.org...[8] https://www.fool.com...;