Your the one that said it was bad policy from a humanitarian stand point but made economic sense in your view. I was responding to that specifically and not border policy at large. You respond with typical condescension.
Previous Message
Your "introspection" is easy when you have no cost and can point fingers at others. What are Texas and NYC and others supposed to do exactly? Eat the cost of a failed federal policy? Compare your unsophisticated answer to DT's, for example.
Previous Message
One party and most of their supporters can't tell you often enough how their Christian values give them moral superiority over the rest of the country yet time and again make/support policy that is admittedly of questionable morality but economically rational in their view. You'd think this would lead to some introspection at some point.
Previous Message
It might be terrible policy, politically or by some other metric, perhaps humanitarian. As pure state economics, it's right. Spread the cost to others who aren't helping. NPR wouldn't get into that, or how much the feds also spent busing migrants elsewhere.