Editor,
I appreciate Mark Eastburn’s response to my letter last week detailing additional factors that I believe prove the need for a southern border barrier. The greatest benefit of that structure is to stop relatively easy access – the means of entry by individuals (some constituting mass wave migrations) that threaten the stability and economic survival of our southern neighbors.
I would have the US – individually and collectively – help shelter our neighbors; catastrophic effects associated with proved climate change and a state of global warfare by multiple means (military, economic, social and political) requires a vast public and social conceptual change, which your remark cogently reflects; “I wonder if your neighbors would shelter you?”
That answer is “conditionally,” yes. State and local laws make being homeless a crime, as is vagrancy, loitering or occupied vehicular parking that arouses suspicion with complaint. Law enforcement then decides on the liberty and disposition of that offender.
This community, filled with persons of goodwill and high talents, has some benefactors who help a selected few, but having basic survival contingent on popularity or “favor,” suggests why “Family Reunification” as US policy should be continued.
The internal US population displacements from catastrophic weather events, social and technological shifts, economic restructuring and the great recessions have created a vast population of relative transients. 57% of the US public cannot raise $500 for a crisis need.
Fortunately, my neighbors will gladly shelter me; I live by the cemetery where we exercise mutual respect, and I can check in at any time. My $225 Federal death benefit should cover my addition to the Potters Field. I am already a member of invisible Eureka, so an unmarked grave simply maintains that social status.
Laura L. Coker