Very sad , all these stories of struggles to seek a better life away from the gangs. We know someone in the UK whom we help who fled Colombia over 20 years ago, because of all that.
I appreciate the difficulties that Jaime and other people like him have experienced. But what is your solution? If you believe in open borders be up front about it? Most people in the world dont, including from what I know in Ecuador. The background story you describe does not fit under traditional claims for asylum but has to do with lawlessness in his own country, as well as presumably better opportunity in the US, literally hundreds of millions, or more, would qualify under this scenario. What, if any, is the limit for the US, or other magnet countries to absorb tens of millions? Do you see any ultimate endpoint? Deterrence hasnt worked under Biden because his administration's overall policy, apart from any recent asylum policy changes on paper, sent the clear message that enforcement was not a priority at the start of his term, and this was amplified by the various multinational criminal organizations that benefit from the irregular migration process, and many are coming now because they fear if Trump wins in November, it will be more difficult. That fear shows deterrence works, it just depends on what the deterrence is. The great increase in irregular migration to the US did not happen as a force of nature. Under Obama the numbers were significantly smaller than under Biden. This shows that incentives and disincentives work, are they 100% effective?, of course not, like anything else.
Thanks for reading! I appreciate it. Before I respond I'd like to just point out that I think a lot of people who haven't spent time studying migration make some of those same assumptions. I hope you don't take it as an attack if I start by explaining why they're not accurate.
Deterrence absolutely does not work. At all. It does, however, get people killed and enrich criminal groups. Numbers of migrants arriving now aren't much different than in the 70's-80's, according to Border Patrol's own data. We just put more of them in cages (i.e more "encounters"). But that just means we waste a lot more money paying people to stand around on the border not doing much except abusing people.
And they don't even come CLOSE to the days of Elis Island, which made the US what it is today.
I've lived and worked on lots of borders. When they're closed, the number of people crossing doesn't go down. People just cross outside of the domain of law, and they do so under the power of criminal groups— which, gets people killed.
"The great increase in irregular migration to the US did not happen as a force of nature"
Correct. It happened because of really stupid US policy that has effectively made formal migration impossible for 99% of the people who want to do it. Thus, their only option is the asylum system, which Biden is in the process of dismantling.
It doesn't surprise me that the fact that Biden is actually *more* draconian than Trump in regards to border policy may have escaped your attention. Both Trump and Democrats have a motive not to talk much about that. He has continued building the wall, he has dismantled core aspects of asylum law, he has massively increased deportations, he has pressured Central American countries to demand visas from countries who represent high numbers of migrants and he has announced mass expulsions into Mexico, which don't count as deportations officially.
And the result? Record numbers in the Darien Gap. And not much difference at the US border.
This sure seems like proof that "deterrence" doesn't deter.
Another factor, aside from instability in some Latin American countries, is post-COVID recession, as a lot of countries still reel economically from the devastating impacts of shutdowns two years ago.
But the only incentive system at work here is the one artificially inflating markets for the criminal groups who facilitate passage. And boy are they stoked!
As a Venezuelan told me in Cucuta in 2020 at another supposedly closed border "Hunger is stronger than border policy."
I grew up near the Texas-Mexico border. I know that what we have now isn't the only possibility because I lived it. And if you go to most border towns now and talk to people, they will tell you there *is* no crisis.
In my experience, it's always the people furthest away from borders who are the most terrified of them. As for my policy preferences? I really enjoy personal liberty. Why most of the world wants to live in a cage is beyond me.
Anyway, I love these conversations. Happy to provide receipts for the above claims, as well as data that shows, very clearly, that migration is a benefit to receiving countries by every measurable metric.
The border with Colombia is completely open. At the very few official checkpoints, you can easily just walk past the passport office. It's only there for people who really want a stamp.
Most of the border isn't even monitored. The last time I did a story there, in Ipiales, I crossed it more than a dozen times by accident and no one cared.
I dont take what you say as an attack, and I appreciate your civil reply, unlike much online discourse these days. Respectfully, I still believe in stronger border enforcement than yourself and/or going to an Ecuadorian model. I dont think a back and forth is going to change either of our minds, but one point I take issue with is your characterization of the opinion of people who live along the Border. While I didnt grow up on the Border, I have some personal familiarity with the Rio Grande Valley and I know people who live there. Anyway, you can find people with any viewpoint anywhere if that's what you're looking. However, the main take I get from the people in the Valley I know today, is that there's more sentiment than ever for tougher border enforcement. Maybe not literally a wall, but almost everyone I know (including people with family on the other side) supports the BP and wants tougher enforcement measurements. All of the Border elected officials, mainly Democrats, having been pushing the Biden admin to do more to stem the flow of migration. There has also been significant growth in GOP support among the overwhelmingly Mexican origin population in the Valley too in recent years as you are probably aware. The point is, the viewpoint you describe is less and less common in the the Border communities I know today, as opposed to 20 or more years ago, when I first started going there.
Well, it's been awhile since i spent a lot of time in those communities! I will take your word for it. But the US *has* grown increasingly xenophobic in general. Truly both a tragedy and a lost opportunity for people who live there!
Very sad , all these stories of struggles to seek a better life away from the gangs. We know someone in the UK whom we help who fled Colombia over 20 years ago, because of all that.
That's really great that you helped them. Good on you
I appreciate the difficulties that Jaime and other people like him have experienced. But what is your solution? If you believe in open borders be up front about it? Most people in the world dont, including from what I know in Ecuador. The background story you describe does not fit under traditional claims for asylum but has to do with lawlessness in his own country, as well as presumably better opportunity in the US, literally hundreds of millions, or more, would qualify under this scenario. What, if any, is the limit for the US, or other magnet countries to absorb tens of millions? Do you see any ultimate endpoint? Deterrence hasnt worked under Biden because his administration's overall policy, apart from any recent asylum policy changes on paper, sent the clear message that enforcement was not a priority at the start of his term, and this was amplified by the various multinational criminal organizations that benefit from the irregular migration process, and many are coming now because they fear if Trump wins in November, it will be more difficult. That fear shows deterrence works, it just depends on what the deterrence is. The great increase in irregular migration to the US did not happen as a force of nature. Under Obama the numbers were significantly smaller than under Biden. This shows that incentives and disincentives work, are they 100% effective?, of course not, like anything else.
Hi JD-
Thanks for reading! I appreciate it. Before I respond I'd like to just point out that I think a lot of people who haven't spent time studying migration make some of those same assumptions. I hope you don't take it as an attack if I start by explaining why they're not accurate.
Deterrence absolutely does not work. At all. It does, however, get people killed and enrich criminal groups. Numbers of migrants arriving now aren't much different than in the 70's-80's, according to Border Patrol's own data. We just put more of them in cages (i.e more "encounters"). But that just means we waste a lot more money paying people to stand around on the border not doing much except abusing people.
And they don't even come CLOSE to the days of Elis Island, which made the US what it is today.
I've lived and worked on lots of borders. When they're closed, the number of people crossing doesn't go down. People just cross outside of the domain of law, and they do so under the power of criminal groups— which, gets people killed.
"The great increase in irregular migration to the US did not happen as a force of nature"
Correct. It happened because of really stupid US policy that has effectively made formal migration impossible for 99% of the people who want to do it. Thus, their only option is the asylum system, which Biden is in the process of dismantling.
It doesn't surprise me that the fact that Biden is actually *more* draconian than Trump in regards to border policy may have escaped your attention. Both Trump and Democrats have a motive not to talk much about that. He has continued building the wall, he has dismantled core aspects of asylum law, he has massively increased deportations, he has pressured Central American countries to demand visas from countries who represent high numbers of migrants and he has announced mass expulsions into Mexico, which don't count as deportations officially.
And the result? Record numbers in the Darien Gap. And not much difference at the US border.
This sure seems like proof that "deterrence" doesn't deter.
Another factor, aside from instability in some Latin American countries, is post-COVID recession, as a lot of countries still reel economically from the devastating impacts of shutdowns two years ago.
But the only incentive system at work here is the one artificially inflating markets for the criminal groups who facilitate passage. And boy are they stoked!
As a Venezuelan told me in Cucuta in 2020 at another supposedly closed border "Hunger is stronger than border policy."
https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2021/5/27/hunger-and-COVID-19-drive-venezuelans-to-take-more-dangerous-routes-out
I grew up near the Texas-Mexico border. I know that what we have now isn't the only possibility because I lived it. And if you go to most border towns now and talk to people, they will tell you there *is* no crisis.
In my experience, it's always the people furthest away from borders who are the most terrified of them. As for my policy preferences? I really enjoy personal liberty. Why most of the world wants to live in a cage is beyond me.
Anyway, I love these conversations. Happy to provide receipts for the above claims, as well as data that shows, very clearly, that migration is a benefit to receiving countries by every measurable metric.
-J
Oh but PS: I'd be fine with an Ecuadorian system
The border with Colombia is completely open. At the very few official checkpoints, you can easily just walk past the passport office. It's only there for people who really want a stamp.
Most of the border isn't even monitored. The last time I did a story there, in Ipiales, I crossed it more than a dozen times by accident and no one cared.
:)
I dont take what you say as an attack, and I appreciate your civil reply, unlike much online discourse these days. Respectfully, I still believe in stronger border enforcement than yourself and/or going to an Ecuadorian model. I dont think a back and forth is going to change either of our minds, but one point I take issue with is your characterization of the opinion of people who live along the Border. While I didnt grow up on the Border, I have some personal familiarity with the Rio Grande Valley and I know people who live there. Anyway, you can find people with any viewpoint anywhere if that's what you're looking. However, the main take I get from the people in the Valley I know today, is that there's more sentiment than ever for tougher border enforcement. Maybe not literally a wall, but almost everyone I know (including people with family on the other side) supports the BP and wants tougher enforcement measurements. All of the Border elected officials, mainly Democrats, having been pushing the Biden admin to do more to stem the flow of migration. There has also been significant growth in GOP support among the overwhelmingly Mexican origin population in the Valley too in recent years as you are probably aware. The point is, the viewpoint you describe is less and less common in the the Border communities I know today, as opposed to 20 or more years ago, when I first started going there.
Well, it's been awhile since i spent a lot of time in those communities! I will take your word for it. But the US *has* grown increasingly xenophobic in general. Truly both a tragedy and a lost opportunity for people who live there!
Imagine if the USA became a force for good in the world. A happier world means less immigration.