$200,000,000 split 7,000 ways...

[RichardRay]

Let’s adsume for the moment that 7,000 asylum seekers reach the border. That’s NOT likely, but I like to analyze worst cases first.

If that happens, we could take the $200,000,000 it’s likely to cost to deploy troops and split it up between them, giving every man, woman, and child about &28,571.42. I’m guessing that the large majority would catch a flight back to Honduras or Guatemala and live better lives than the left behind. It would invest in the country of origins’ economies at the most useful level. And it would avoid the embarrassment of watching the mighty US military square of against refugees who just walked a couple of thousand miles.

I would, also, feel way better about the expenditure.

[zaj]

1. This feels like something Trump could get behind...

... because it would undermine their case for asylum in the US. If there is a life-threatening situation, no amount of money is likely enough.

[rurallib]

2. Then he would figure out a way to scam the fund and get half of it himself

[sandensea]

4. Sure. Except Cheeto wants blood.

Or rather, his Chumpkins do - and the fat bastard knows it.

You might recall the 'Border Patrol' game popular in right-wing blogs a few years ago:



If nothing else, it's pretty good at capturing how they feel about Latin American immigrants.

[SaschaHM]

3. I wouldn't want to spend 200 million on either tbh.

The refugees should be processed like they normally would as asylum seekers (maybe w/ some added money to increase staffers and asylum courts.) I don't think it would be wise politically or practically to start handing out 28k checks. That's just putting a target on their backs in the U.S. if they stay or at home if they return.

[unc70]

5. Million, not billion

[SaschaHM]

6. Thanks! I couldn't really sleep last night.