So in other words, you said what literally everybody in the country already knows, for reasons known only to yourself. Since you're not denying that illegal immigration would go down drastically as a result of building a barrier along the border like the one that already exists in the San Diego sector, and since doing so would involve a rather small cost, that part of problem isn't quite so "complicated" after all.
[[So in other words, you said what literally everybody in the country already knows, for reasons known only to yourself. Since you're not denying that illegal immigration would go down drastically as a result of building a barrier along the border like the one that already exists in the San Diego sector, and since doing so would involve a rather small cost, that part of problem isn't quite so "complicated" after all.]]
Your first sentence is a non sequitur and adds nothing to your point. At least, now you have gotten down to presenting an idea, but your idea is still based on assumptions, comparing a small segment of wall in a heavily populated and patrolled area to the many miles of sparsely populated and not as heavily patrolled areas is a making a great leap of faith. You assume the cost is minimal, what is minimal (small cost) ? What are the geopolitical ramifications ? Certainly Mexico and other Latin American countries would oppose it and Mexico sells us a lot of oil. What are the economic ramifications ? How much more will things cost due to higher labor costs ? That is provided this wall would make a severe inroad into illegal immigration. Do we then build a wall along the northern border, too ?
You open a whole new industry, shipping illegals to Canada so they can enter from the north. Where there is a will, there is a way, where there is a demand, there is a market. Rope ladders to get over the wall in the dead of night in sparsely populated areas. Tunnels under the wall with a fee for access. More boats seeking to bypass the border for illegals. What percentage that walk across the border do so only to work and return to their families versus those that come in smuggled in semis, boats or get through border crossings ? The wall would also certainly provide an impediment to return to Mexico once across. Sounds like a Berlin Wall isolationist concept, minus the guns to prevent people from escaping out of the country.
Don't get me wrong, it is a start for dealing with the issue, but I don't think it is the end all and be all that you seem to think it is. The only real solution, barring a cooperative agreement with Mexico, has to include significantly more border patrols, but that is not cheap.