(06-07-2019, 11:05 AM)mikesez Wrote:

(06-07-2019, 11:04 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: You want to pay them to induce them to do what they should be doing in the first place?  So if a kid refuses to do his chores, his parents should double his allowance?

Mexico is our neighbor, not our kid.

But you want to pay them to do something they should be doing in the first place.  What if every country acted that way?  What if every country just stuck out their hand and said, we're not going to do anything until you pay us?

Besides, your distinction between "actively doing something" and "not doing something" is bogus because can't you say they are actively allowing these people to walk on up to the US border?  What's the difference between active and passive here?  It's a decision they made to do nothing about it.  But your solution is to bribe them to do what they should be doing in the first place.  What if they were allowing air or water pollution to flow into our country?  Should we pay them off to induce them to stop?  Where does it all end, if you pay people off to do what they should be doing in the first place?

---