As we know, it’s all about the show. USians spend $57B/year on video games, so how significant is $315B over, maybe ten years?
Putting the holding camps in Mexico or Panama, as a cost saving measure, is an interesting thought. That gives me an even better idea. Put the holding camps in Guatemala, and don’t post any guards. That way, people can “escape”, and save the US the cost of carrying out the entire process of adjudicating their cases.
/sarcasm
Put them in Florida. Let the snakes and the 'gators eat them.
Nope. When they escape from the camp, they would still be in Shiny-land.
This is a semi-serious proposal. The WSJ piece says the highest cost part of the process would be detention. Detention would be cheaper in other countries. Years ago, some luminary suggested making migrants so miserable, they would be motivated to “self deport”. Mash the two proposals together.
Pick on a country that receives US foreign aid (Mexico, and Guatemala receive about $230M/year each. El Salvadore receives about $170M), and make that aid contingent on accepting the USian detention camps. Or, in Mexico’s case, make acceptance of the camps mandatory for suspension of the threatened tariffs.
Locate the camps far enough south so that a tent would be adequate shelter. The WSJ piece talks about educating their spawn. Forget that. Food: beans and rice, three times a day. Minimal security: two guards at the gate, no guards on the rest of the perimeter. Then people have the choice to sit in that camp for years, waiting for their case to be heard, or “self deport” through the fence. If the camp is in Mexico, make “self deporting” even easier. Next to the tent with the video link to the immigration court in the US, have a tent staffed by Mexican immigration people, who will set up the migrants with work permits, direction to where they can find employment, and maybe housing assistance. Then the people are “free to choose”, to sit in the camp for years, or live and work in Mexico.
Steve
Nope. They would be in Florida.