Why it’s Better to Dig a Hole than Build a Wall
On Wednesday, President Trump issued an executive order to build a wall along the southern US border. Although Trump is adamant that building a wall along the US-Mexico border would benefit the US, many political analysts believe that building a large border wall would be an ineffective use of money. I actually think that building a huge border wall would be such a large waste of money that it would be a better idea to just dig a huge meaningless hole in a deserted area in the Midwest.
It is estimated that building a wall along the US’ southern border could cost around $20 billion. In comparison, the cost of digging a large hole in the Midwest would be a lot less. Of course, this cost is dependent upon the width and depth of the hole. In addition to the cost being cheaper, digging a hole in the Midwest would create many employment opportunities for Americans.
Additionally, when it is taken into consideration that many people and goods come into the US illegally by way of underground tunnels and overstayed visas, I’m sure many Americans would agree that digging a hole in the Midwest would be nearly as effective at protecting the American border as a wall along the US-Mexico border. However, if Trump is interested in actually decreasing illegal immigration and not just throwing away money, then maybe he should consider digging a big hole along the US-Mexico border instead of in the Midwest, since a big hole at the border could at least decrease the use of underground tunnels at the US-Mexico border.
Digging a big hole in the Midwest may seem like a waste of money and resources because it is a waste of money and resources. However, building a multi-billion dollar wall that will not even decrease illegal immigration is an even more ridiculous way to waste money.
Featured Image Source: AP/Press Association Images