Just a laymans social science prediction

So it goes something like this: According to the social science, 2% was the defining number. This would include a student or two, a qualified worker or two, and the odd errant auntie what liked exotic men (she could not be helped because there was always one of those in every family).

The problem was, in one particuliar environment their number had increased to 12%. This was a number that was 10% too high. The talk was that the 12% had built all 100% of the country and therefore deserving of it. Not true, 12% would deserve 12% of the land.

It was suggested that the southern most tip nearest to their brethren islands was the most suitable location, and that the then leader of the country at the time could afford a wall or fence to then truncate that geographical region from the top of it. If word proved true for the time, infact two walls or fences would be required.

This then would in turn relieve the pressure of the 10% and restore things to a more manageable balance, allowing the remaining 2% to stay as workers, students and errant aunties.

It needn't have been the whole 12%, only 10% thereof.

The place of which I speak is Florida.

If this did not occur, the misplaced 12% would become a catalyst for a civil war, between the bleeding heart liberal left and the right.

Would this prediction ever prove true?

Just a laymans social science prediction

So it goes something like this: According to the social science, 2% was the defining number. This would include a student or two, a qualified worker or two, and the odd errant auntie what liked exotic men (she could not be helped because there was always one of those in every family).

The problem was, in one particuliar environment their number had increased to 12%. This was a number that was 10% too high. The talk was that the 12% had built all 100% of the country and therefore deserving of it. Not true, 12% would deserve 12% of the land.

It was suggested that the southern most tip nearest to their brethren islands was the most suitable location, and that the then leader of the country at the time could afford a wall or fence to then truncate that geographical region from the top of it. If word proved true for the time, infact two walls or fences would be required.

This then would in turn relieve the pressure of the 10% and restore things to a more manageable balance, allowing the remaining 2% to stay as workers, students and errant aunties.

It needn't have been the whole 12%, only 10% thereof.

The place of which I speak is Florida.

If this did not occur, the misplaced 12% would become a catalyst for a civil war, between the bleeding heart liberal left and the right.

Would this prediction ever prove true?

But Trumps argument isn't as simple as it might seem, If he gets rid of the Mexicans, does it stop with Mexicans? Because I my self have relatives from the Caribbean, their immigrants, do they all have to go as well for instance.

Can he get rid of all the dissident and separatist racial groups who have been bemoaning the US all this time, why not get rid of all them too.

Why stop there, why not exile criminal blacks south of a Trump wall, because when you open this Pandora's box, where will it end.