Imgflip Logo Icon

Talking to wall

Talking to wall | Having a wall does not mean "keep out" it means "Use the door!" (come in legally) Borrowed from a friend.
Keep it going. | image tagged in talking to wall | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
2,495 views 110 upvotes Made by JanS1 3 years ago in politics
Talking to wall memeCaption this Meme
67 Comments
12 ups, 3y,
1 reply
BY EXECTUTIVE ORDER:  POTENTIAL DEMOCRATS CAN ENTER THIS COUNTRY ANY WAY THEY CAN.  AND U.S. TAXPAYERS WILL HOUSE, FEED, AND EDUCATE THEM BE | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Lol y’all dumb.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
That's all you have?
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
For this dumb comment, yea.
0 ups, 3y
how is it dumb lmao
6 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Joe Biden Laughing | LEGALLY, SCHMEGALLY | image tagged in joe biden laughing | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
4 ups, 3y
melania trump | LEGALLY, SZMEGALLY | image tagged in melania trump | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
6 ups, 3y,
2 replies
I love the walls dont work people. If you can go around or over it I guess it doesn't work at all.

You can break into a safe. Safes don't work.

You can drive through a red light. Traffic lights don't work.

There's a .001 percent chance your condom will fail. Condoms don't work.

Next time someone says walls don't work please show them how retarded there logic is.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Masks don't work because masks don't work. People complied and still got sick. They used the things as intended. That's not going around or over.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Right so walls don’t work either. Case closed.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
So you'll be smashing down the walls in your home, then? Why have them if they don't work, right?
0 ups, 3y
I walk around them. Duh.
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
It's like you are completely brain dead.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
So masks work?
1 up, 3y,
3 replies
N95 masks work. K94 masks work. Cotton reusable masks do not and the numbers don't lie. If any random masks worked covid would be gone.

Walls clearly work because their purpose is to impede access. If they didn't work you wouldn't have them on your house and they wouldn't have put them around castles, but they still need to be manned.
0 ups, 3y
2 things: any face covering helps. To say otherwise is simply dumb. Some help more (K95 for instance) but if not why use a tissue to blow your nose or toilet paper to wipe your ass? It’s silly to say even cloth doesn’t help.

Also of course walls work.....when manned. It’s not really the wall doing the work then though, is it? That’s way more cost too. Do the math. It’s simply not worth it. The never ending costs it would take to deter SOME people is stupid.

Again: remove the lure of coming here (jobs) and they will stop coming here. It’s that simple.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Throw the employers of illegal immigrants in jail. That would work.

No incentive to come here would equal no one coming here. No wall needed.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
How do you know who is here illegally without an intrusive government?
0 ups, 3y
I don’t get what you’re asking but if you want less “government” a wall is not the solution. Take east Germany for example.
0 ups, 3y
people that write the numbers do
0 ups, 3y
Walls are not very effective at stopping people from going over/under or simply flying in a plane. But I’m sure it’s a slight deterrent. Until the person gets a ladder or a shovel. Or a plane ticket.

It’s dumb. We need better immigration solutions than a costly and ineffective wall.

Masks help slow the spread. Not sure what your little graph is from or the context or the data behind it but they work. They don’t STOP the spread. They slow the spread. Along with social distancing and sanitation.

An actual wall on the border is simply stupid given the cost to implement vs the effectiveness. Masks cost pennies Per person. A wall would cost millions per person it *might* deter.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Voter fraud occurs at a rate of 0.00006 percent. Election results can't be trusted.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Don't lump me in with those idiots lol
0 ups, 3y
Ok, fair enough.
4 ups, 3y,
1 reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
That looks like Ron Jeremy
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Nope, it's Pablo Escobar...notorious druglord.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Wrong again.
0 ups, 3y
it's khalid sheikh mohammed. Google has betrayed me.
2 ups, 3y
2 ups, 3y
Y E S
0 ups, 3y
succinctly and eloquently done
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
Just like Berlin. Very convincing argument.
3 ups, 3y,
1 reply
USA/Mexico vs Germany/Germany not a convincing argument.
0 ups, 3y
You’re right. German wall was relatively small and able to be manned to be as effective as it was (and people still got through.) A USA Mexico wall would be huge and would also have to be manned to be effective. Huge Costs for little effect.
2 ups, 3y
???
0 ups, 3y
I think... I agree.
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Or “use a ladder” or “dig a tunnel” or “fly over it”

It’s dumb. We need better immigration solutions than a costly and ineffective wall.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
That stuff takes time and in that time our surveillance will catch them. Having no wall they can flood in with no impediment and we will have no time to organize. That's dumb. Have you ever played tower defense games? "I'm not going to do anything because they can break it". Trash logic.

What is your solution? Let them all in?
0 ups, 3y
That's pretty much it.
0 ups, 3y
My solution is take away the lure. Jail the employers giving them jobs. They’d stop coming here. The border is pretty secure as it is and has been for a while. A wall is not going to do anything but cost billions of dollars.
0 ups, 3y
You've got a point.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Yes, although there may be a slight problem... It is pretty much impossible to come here legally, though...
6 ups, 3y,
1 reply
That's pretty much pure bullshit.

The numbers below represent the total number of migrants living in the US at those times.

U.S. immigration statistics for:
- 2015 was 46,627,102, a 5.53% increase from 2010.
- 2010 was 44,183,643, a 12.55% increase from 2005.
- 2005 was 39,258,293, a 12.77% increase from 2000.
- 2000 was 34,814,053, a 22.36% increase from 1995.

Now, to be fair (something you won't hear from liberals, snowflakes, democrats, etc., or see them do in posts here on imgflip, as I'm about to do) in recent years, that trend has not been maintained. However, the recent declines are very small (less than 2% year over year) compared to the prior rates of increase reflected in the total migrant numbers. So, to say that it's impossible to get into this country, is bordering on ignorance to the degree that you probably shouldn't be commenting on this issue.

And fwiw, I do have some personal experience with this, as my wife was not born in the US. Yes, it can be difficult to come here legally, but that doesn't mean those who want to cheat their way into the country should be allowed to do so. If you want to talk immigration reform, that's another issue entirely.

The net migration rate for U.S. in:
- 2021 is 2.820 per 1000 population, a 1.3% decline from 2020.
- 2020 was 2.857 per 1000 population, a 1.24% decline from 2019.
- 2019 was 2.893 per 1000 population, a 1.23% decline from 2018.
- 2018 was 2.929 per 1000 population, a 1.48% decline from 2017.

Data Source: http://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/
0 ups, 3y
Holy f**k I think you killed him
11 ups, 3y
Because dems won't pass a law to do it.
[deleted]
6 ups, 3y,
3 replies
Expansion isn't even necessary...we need to clear the freaking bottlenecks in our system. Legal immigration is too expensive and selective. Open the process up so we can let in as many qualified folks as economically possible each year.

Lowering the monetary cost and removing red tape would do more than anything else to drive legal immigration up (and illegal immigration down).
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
Gontalknto Australia about this issue
6 ups, 3y
Left leaning, nearly socialist Australia, has about the tightest immigration system in the western world. For whatever that's worth.

I guess that when you give so much to your citizens, you don't want to be flooded with immigrants who are only coming to your country to get the free shit.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
About what? Their immigration system is managed much more heavily than ours.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
3 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Making it difficult means we will get enterprising individuals. Making it easy means we will get welfare recipients.
0 ups, 3y
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
A better way would have been to cap the number of visas while keeping costs low. Same effect, better approach.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
YES IT IS and everybody ON BOTH SIDES said so in 2015 on a bipartisan bill that was never floored for a vote. It would have passed. Enough Republicans supported it. It wasn't that long ago, everybody remembers this.

And that is how I know that this had nothing to do with what's illegal and what's not - you just don't like immigrants!
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
My entire family is composed of people who immigrated here you dolt. I have two aunts who came here from the Philippines just last year.

I have NO problems with immigrants, because we need them. I have every problem with letting in so many people that our workforce is diluted and our welfare systems overwhelmed. There is a BIG gap between that reality and reasonable restrictions on immigration levels.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
"Expansion isn't necessary" and "we need them" are in complete conflict with each other. I have seen time and again people trying to navigate the legal immigration system frustrated because it is a f**king lottery - literally a lottery - and when the chance comes to bring the legal immigration path back up to date to make the legal channels accessible, people like you just keep making excuses not to.

And then you cry crocodile tears about legality. Absolute nonsense. I'm not buying it.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
The two comments are not in conflict...we do need immigrants. We don't need unlimited immigrants. There is balance.

Yeah, it is a lottery. That's the freaking problem. The system needs reform so people aren't incentivised to break the law. That's not crying crocodile tears, that is a real problem confronting our country.
3 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Trump was almost as against legal immigration as he was against illegal immigration.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
Not completely true. He was fine with legal immigration from Norway. He said it was because Norway's not a shithole country but we all know what the criterion was really. Let's just say that tshirt doesn't come in other colors ;)
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Because *both* parties have dragged their feet on much needed immigration reform. Politics as usual in DC, thesis. Party doesn't matter when there are other priorities.

And fwiw, legal immigration was increasing prior to Trump being in office. I would imagine we'll see it jump significantly under Killer Joe's administration.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
No. It wasn't that long ago. It is not that easy to forget. It wasn't both parties. It was one man. It was John Boehner. THE REPUBLICAN VOTES WERE THERE.

Ever since then, the decision to keep it from a vote rested SOLELY with the leadership: Paul Ryan, and then Trump making immigration his signature issue. But this is not a "but it's bit parties" thing - REPUBLICANS WERE READY TO PASS IT AND YOU CAN'T TELL ME THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
I have no problem with you blaming Boehner, however imho, it would be naive to try to put the blame on him, solely. These career politicians in DC are indebted to people you and I don't even know about, and it's not party based.

So you, and everyone else who hates republicans (and believe me, I'm no fan of republicans... I just happened to like Trump, who was not really a republican anyway... but that's another discussion) can try to pin our immigration problems on them. But really thesis, wake up and realize that the power brokers in DC care about only one thing, and that's power. If they could have maintained and exercised that power by pushing through immigration reform, they'd have made Boehner do it.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
It wasn't the career politicians. The career politicians were ready to vote and pass the thing. It was HIM. Just him.

WE GET IT, YOU WANT TO HIDE YOUR CONSERVATIVISM IN A VENEER OF NEUTRALITY TO TRY TO SCAM YOUR WAY TO A CLAIM OF MODERATION. YOU DON'T HAVE TO REMIND US BY TRYING TO PUSH IT IN EVERY SINGLE SITUATION. IT DOESN'T WORK IN EVERY SITUATION. IT DOESN'T WORK HERE.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
Talking to wall memeCaption this Meme
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
Having a wall does not mean "keep out" it means "Use the door!" (come in legally) Borrowed from a friend. Keep it going.