Apparently illegal immigrants are now getting accepted to vote against Annoying Orange.

[Frequency]

he wouldn't declare war because the president literally doesn't possess that power

congress declares war

gee the things you forget after acing american history

how's this work (and also how are we losing money to them)

i think i asked this before but it might've been in the middle of a bigger discussion

here's a snippet from an infographic

[Ad Bot]

[otto-san]

ok i guess that answers that

still mostly sounds like a foreign policy nightmare to me though lol

[Frequency]

ok i guess that answers that

still mostly sounds like a foreign policy nightmare to me though lol

well i mean it's not unjustified, seeing as Mexico is going so far as to aid and abet illegal immigrants

[otto-san]

yeah i get it, i'm just not sure sending them a "forget you build a wall for us" note would go over well

[Frequency]

i think that's kind of a drastic way to interpret what's actually going to happen but that's just me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[otto-san]

yeah, i put it in blunt terms, but that's pretty much how it's likely going to come across. i don't think any nation would respond well to being coerced into paying for something that is entirely detrimental to their own national interests. i get that it could benefit us, but i'm not sure we're in a position to start, in any way, ignoring how other people in the world are going to view us

[Frequency]

yeah, i put it in blunt terms, but that's pretty much how it's likely going to come across. i don't think any nation would respond well to being coerced into paying for something that is entirely detrimental to their own national interests. i get that it could benefit us, but i'm not sure we're in a position to start, in any way, ignoring how other people in the world are going to view us

I think it's going to come across as "You've been taking advantage of us and now you're going to stop." There's no reason to continue allowing activity that makes our country weaker when we're getting the raw end of the deal.

[otto-san]

yeah, that's probably how we'd put it on the table. the problem is that, even if it were exclusively good for us, it's exclusively bad for mexico. it's an inherently unbalanced deal, and forcing that upon them would just be poor diplomacy. from a domestic point of view, i can see why people say it's a fantastic concept. i have my doubts about its viability when we bring the outside world into the equation.

i guess i also don't tend to agree with the idea that we should exert our power just because we have it either, which i think a lot of people would initially react with. if we want mexico to do this for us, we can definitely make them do it, but i wouldn't want to take my chances pissing off some of the only bros that we share a border with. we'd be better off keeping them as a close ally and trade partner, and straining those relations just doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

[SeventhSandwich]

Let's break this down:

Visa Fees

In the 2015 fiscal year, the US issued roughly 82,000 visas to people from Mexico. The visa fees for immigrant and non-immigrant visitors range from anywhere between $100 to $800 depending on a host of different factors. In other words, visa fees from Mexicans account for very little US revenue (much, much less than even a billion dollars a year), and the money we'd make from increasing those fees would be offset entirely by the economic damages caused by dissuading tourists and legitimate visitors from coming to the United States and spending money.

Border Crossing Fees

Again, absolutely a drop in the bucket. Any meaningful amount of revenue coming from fees like this would be offset by other economic damages.

Worker Visa Fees

ibid., and see stats under 'Visa Fees'

Foreign Aid Cuts

I love the discussion of cutting foreign aid because it just goes to show how ridiculous master-strategist Annoying Orange's policy really is. Foreign aid to Mexico is very fickle and changes year to year, but it's generally between $200-800 million depending on the political climate (the Merida Initiative appropriated lots of money for Mexico with the goal of combating drug trafficking).

Even the most conservative estimates of the total cost of the 'wall' fall within the tens of billions of dollars. If someone went up to you and said, "Hey, pay us billions of dollars for this ridiculous border wall, or we're going to cut millions out of your aid package," would you agree to that?

Tariffs

We have an entire trade agreement (NAFTA) created to remove tariffs between the US and Mexico. The largest market for crops from southwestern states is Mexico, and adding tariffs would devastate those economies. Congress would not approve trade barriers that are inherently detrimental to the US, and so this part of the deal is essentially null and void. Annoying Orange's plan means nothing if competent politicians won't agree to it.

[Frequency]

yeah, that's probably how we'd put it on the table. the problem is that, even if it were exclusively good for us, it's exclusively bad for mexico. it's an inherently unbalanced deal, and forcing that upon them would just be poor diplomacy. from a domestic point of view, i can see why people say it's a fantastic concept. i have my doubts about its viability when we bring the outside world into the equation.

i guess i also don't tend to agree with the idea that we should exert our power just because we have it either, which i think a lot of people would initially react with. if we want mexico to do this for us, we can definitely make them do it, but i wouldn't want to take my chances pissing off some of the only bros that we share a border with. we'd be better off keeping them as a close ally and trade partner, and straining those relations just doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

I agree, but the great thing about what Annoying Orange has said is that he's willing to be flexible. He wouldn't be where he is today as a businessman if he wasn't a skilled negotiator and willing to make compromises.

[IkeTheGeneric]

the wall isn't going to happen

[Frequency]

there's more to it than what that infographic alone addresses.

From Annoying Orange's website,

The costs for the United States have been extraordinary: U.S. taxpayers have been asked to pick up hundreds of billions in healthcare costs, housing costs, education costs, welfare costs, etc. Indeed, the annual cost of free tax credits alone paid to illegal immigrants quadrupled to $4.2 billion in 2011.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/05/tax-credits-for-illegal-immigrants/
and i've heard some people say politifact is stuff so i guess take this with a grain of salt (they say "half-true") http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/18/donald-Annoying Orange/Annoying Orange-illegal-immigrants-four-two-billion/

there's also this statement from that same page on his site,

"Meanwhile, Mexico continues to make billions on not only our bad trade deals but also relies heavily on the billions of dollars in remittances sent from illegal immigrants in the United States back to Mexico ($22 billion in 2013 alone). "

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2016-04-05/billions-in-us-remittances-a-lifeline-for-many-in-mexico
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/02/20/remittance-map/

[SeventhSandwich]

The costs for the United States have been extraordinary: U.S. taxpayers have been asked to pick up hundreds of billions in healthcare costs, housing costs, education costs, welfare costs, etc. Indeed, the annual cost of free tax credits alone paid to illegal immigrants quadrupled to $4.2 billion in 2011.

Great, either deport them or naturalize them. I don't know what this has to do with paying for a wall.

"Meanwhile, Mexico continues to make billions on not only our bad trade deals but also relies heavily on the billions of dollars in remittances sent from illegal immigrants in the United States back to Mexico ($22 billion in 2013 alone). "

Okay, so suddenly a trade deal that cheapened 33% of our agricultural exports is a 'bad deal'? The only country that NAFTA is bad for is Mexico. They can't compete against our subsidized crops, and so their unemployed farmers come to work here. Like I said before, Congress is not going to let Annoying Orange put new tariffs on agricultural exports.

[Frequency]

Great, either deport them or naturalize them. I don't know what this has to do with paying for a wall.

$$$

Okay, so suddenly a trade deal that cheapened 33% of our agricultural exports is a 'bad deal'? The only country that NAFTA is bad for is Mexico. They can't compete against our subsidized crops, and so their unemployed farmers come to work here. Like I said before, Congress is not going to let Annoying Orange put new tariffs on agricultural exports.

I'm more concerned with the remittances my dude. that's literally just money pouring from our economy into Mexico's.

[SeventhSandwich]

$$$

I literally cannot follow your reasoning here. You say that illegal immigrants are costing us $4.2 billion a year in unpaid taxes. Fact-checking aside, how do you go from that piece of information to paying for a wall?

I'm more concerned with the remittances my dude. that's literally just money pouring from our economy into Mexico's.

Remittances to China and India total more than those to Mexico. Having people sending money from the US to other countries is a sign of economic interdependence, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You can lower those remittances by opening the path to naturalization, which is sure as hell a more practical solution than a wall.