Is A Wall On The U.S. Southern Border A Good Idea?

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

Can I just say in honest truth this is a Drug War issue, build the canal.

WordsMatter

@Applesauce classic deflection. BuT oBaMa!!!! You like that Obama Care got passed when you didn't know what it was? I never said I spotted how Obama Care was passed that's irrelevant here. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 So you suggest he take on 100 immigrants and do what exactly? They weren't going to run they were trying to turn themselves in. The second their feet touched US soil it was over, they accomplished their goal and were ready to be apprehended. 

The steel fence design was cut through with a household saw... Each design had it's strengths and weaknesses, none are perfect. Give me the specific design that will be built and then we can talk about it's specific effectiveness.

Seeing as how the goal of the illegals is to get apprehended so that they can stay in the US longer, imagine if instead of spending billions of dollars on a wall that will take a decade to complete Congress changes the laws of how we handle detained illegals so that they can't stay and this could all be done within the year for no more cost than Congress' salaries.

Applesauce

MayCaesar said:

@Applesauce

I do not think Trump even remotely realizes what a wall he actually wants would cost. In human history before, walls have never been used to prevent a physical entry into a country; not a single time. Even Berlin Wall worked in conjunction with multiple layers of protection, the most essential ones being a line of sniper outposts.
The purpose of most walls in human history was to make the location more defensible in case of a military conflict. They had nothing to do with stopping random people from coming in.

Walls have been used to discourage less intent trespassers, but you can bet that people that abandon everything they own and walk towards another country with a sack on their back are intent enough to get some basic equipment in order to pass this pitiful obstacle.

A wall that would stop everyone who wants to cross it across the entire border... Why, I am not sure if this engineering challenge is even solvable with our current level of technology, in a way that will make the wall affordable to even the wealthiest nation in the world.

The wall Trump is trying to fund now is laughable. I passed harder obstacles when I was a naughty 8 years old kid, constantly getting in trouble.

Which wall has Trump chosen?
cost compared to how much the current criminal aliens cost tax payers is pretty small in comparison.
hmm don't prisons have walls?
it doesn't have to "stop everyone who wants to cross" that's an "all or nothing" fallacy
you passed over concertina wire at 8 years old?  that is impressive.

Applesauce

WordsMatter said:

@Applesauce classic deflection. BuT oBaMa!!!! You like that Obama Care got passed when you didn't know what it was? I never said I spotted how Obama Care was passed that's irrelevant here. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 So you suggest he take on 100 immigrants and do what exactly? They weren't going to run they were trying to turn themselves in. The second their feet touched US soil it was over, they accomplished their goal and were ready to be apprehended. 

The steel fence design was cut through with a household saw... Each design had it's strengths and weaknesses, none are perfect. Give me the specific design that will be built and then we can talk about it's specific effectiveness.

Seeing as how the goal of the illegals is to get apprehended so that they can stay in the US longer, imagine if instead of spending billions of dollars on a wall that will take a decade to complete Congress changes the laws of how we handle detained illegals so that they can't stay and this could all be done within the year for no more cost than Congress' salaries.

It's not up to me to suggest what he should or should not do, i said he was bad and explained why, you didn't have a counter to that, keep fishing, herring are good for you.
every thing has it's strengths and weaknesses, you stilling clinging to the "all or nothing" fallacy?
You said it won't work, so I ask you again, which one did he pick that you know won't work?  talk about deflection LOL

sure changing laws makes a lot of sense, who's proposing that? (insert cricket noise here)
so what are the choices put forth?
Trump----wall
Democrats---nothing
you are wanting things you can't have as no one is offering them, nor did they in the previous many many presidents before.  they could have, but they all have been do nothing (or not much) presidents and now there's one willing and wanting to do something.  Who has put out better (or any) proposals/solutions with any real honest sincerity? (insert cricket noise here)

TKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Haven't some of the illegal immigrants killed US citizens?

Do you maybe view those US citizens murders as (irrelevant) as well?

@Zombieguy1987

Why do you view the below as irrelevant? 

Where are your counter arguments at? 

The real issue isn't with the border wall, or the border security.

The issue is with those immigrants who decide to come into the United States of America.

The other issues, are the 300 sanctuary cities, thar give sanctuary to those illegal immigrants, along with the various businesses that utilize those illegal immigrants to do work for them.

How do those 300 sanctuary cities get to legally give the 11-22 illegal immigrants sanctuary in the very face of the a country based on laws? 

So what does the rest of the country do to react to those two situations?

Trying to get funding for the border wall, and to better the security for the border wall?

So in a sense, the entire country is dealing with a second "Cold War" starring, the 11-22 illegal immigrants already in tne United States, those 300 sanctuary cities, the business utilizing those illegal immigrants, the Border wall, border wall security, ICE, and the continuing influx of the illegal immigrants who came into the United States yesterday, and today, and the crimes that have been committed by the illegal immigrants, and the families who deal with those tragedies? 

Why are some in country purposefully hurting the rest of the country, by apparently placing those millions of illegal immigrants above the rest of the country? 

Hence the (second Cold War) reference?

We are a country of immigrants, but immigrants who all went through the proper legal channels to become citizens of the United States.

And to disregard that process is the flaw that has and is being exposed by those 11-22 illegal immigrants who are already in the country illegally, and who continue to come into the United States illegally. 

The laws in our country are in trouble, and I dont get why some are harassing those laws, for the sake of the illegal immigrants, at a cost to the rest of the citizens themselves, day in, and day out, crime after crime?

The crimes that have been committed by those illegal immigrants, their committed crimes, are worth it, to they, being in, the United States illegally? 

Because if some want to protest the Border Wall, why then, aren't the sanctuary city creators, taking to the streets, and protesting the crimes committed by the illegal immigrants, that have been given sanctuary within the very cities that they are living in themselves? 

A guess, that's not how it works? The sanctuary city creators aren't maybe going to protest the crimes committed by those illegal immigrants, right?

Giving sanctuary to an illegal immigrant, is maybe or apparently, more important than the crimes, that they have maybe committed, right?   

WordsMatter

@Applesauce I've voiced my opinion on changing the laws to my Representatives. If more people takes about changing the laws and less about a wall lot not, then it could happen. Just because no politician is saying in the conversation not doesn't mean it can't be brought up.

Prison walls keep inmates in, not people out. Inmates have extremely limited resources. They are armed installations where guards are allowed to use much more force. Berlin and Israel walls are military installations.

Concertina wire is very easy to get over. Throw a carpet over top and it's neutralized. The people crossing into the US don't even need any tools, they can go through smugglers who hone their skill in getting people across the border illegally. They have all the tools they need, keep them nearby, and can never be apprehended or pursued by US law enforcement as they never enter the US. It's a great business.

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

Haven't some of the illegal immigrants killed US citizens?

Do you maybe view those US citizens murders as (irrelevant) as well?

@Zombieguy1987

Why do you view the below as irrelevant? 

Where are your counter arguments at? If you actually keep being on topic, I would continue doing this. But like @Applesauce says. This is cringy

The real issue isn't with the border wall, or the border security.

The issue is with those immigrants who decide to come into the United States of America.

The other issues, are the 300 sanctuary cities, thar give sanctuary to those illegal immigrants, along with the various businesses that utilize those illegal immigrants to do work for them.

How do those 300 sanctuary cities get to legally give the 11-22 illegal immigrants sanctuary in the very face of the a country based on laws? 

So what does the rest of the country do to react to those two situations?

Trying to get funding for the border wall, and to better the security for the border wall?

So in a sense, the entire country is dealing with a second "Cold War" starring, the 11-22 illegal immigrants already in tne United States, those 300 sanctuary cities, the business utilizing those illegal immigrants, the Border wall, border wall security, ICE, and the continuing influx of the illegal immigrants who came into the United States yesterday, and today, and the crimes that have been committed by the illegal immigrants, and the families who deal with those tragedies? 

Why are some in country purposefully hurting the rest of the country, by apparently placing those millions of illegal immigrants above the rest of the country? 

Hence the (second Cold War) reference?

We are a country of immigrants, but immigrants who all went through the proper legal channels to become citizens of the United States.

And to disregard that process is the flaw that has and is being exposed by those 11-22 illegal immigrants who are already in the country illegally, and who continue to come into the United States illegally. 

The laws in our country are in trouble, and I dont get why some are harassing those laws, for the sake of the illegal immigrants, at a cost to the rest of the citizens themselves, day in, and day out, crime after crime?

The crimes that have been committed by those illegal immigrants, their committed crimes, are worth it, to they, being in, the United States illegally? 

Because if some want to protest the Border Wall, why then, aren't the sanctuary city creators, taking to the streets, and protesting the crimes committed by the illegal immigrants, that have been given sanctuary within the very cities that they are living in themselves? 

A guess, that's not how it works? The sanctuary city creators aren't maybe going to protest the crimes committed by those illegal immigrants, right?

Giving sanctuary to an illegal immigrant, is maybe or apparently, more important than the crimes, that they have maybe committed, right?   

Applesauce

@WordsMatter

prison walls keep people out too, search it up, military bases as well, but we'll set that aside
yes things can be done, but we seemed to have reached a point of the nothing that has happened that the wall is now the issue and many people want it (it's always refereed to a wall but it's border security which does include some physical barriers)
from what I have read smugglers are charging about 5k per person or more, where are these destitute people getting that kind of money?  makes one wonder doesn't it?  it should
if you increase the difficultly and risk the price also increases doesn't it?
how big of a carpet would you need?  I didn't see anyone in these caravans carrying much of anything.  I would imagine trying to carry a big enough carpet that distance would be an extreme feat, they are pretty heavy.
again you seem to be falling into the all or nothing trap, unless we use sensor aiming machine guns and land mines people are going to get through.  Though I do like John_C_87 canal idea, that's pretty creative and would be the end all be all of security, more or less.

I hope you understand passing the buck for so long has brought us to this point.  Trump is acknowledging and trying to solve people's frustration, with many things, this is what the Dummycrats don't understand, this is why he got elected.  For me I wanted someone like him, but not him and Hillary was nothing like him same could be said about almost everyone else who ran.  So rather than learning from that, taking up the torch to fix the problems look at what they are doing.
people are tired and have been, waiting for someone to do something, anything, to acknowledge their wants and fears.  Trump knows this and is why he won.  Until the other politicians grasp that reality and give a sh1t about the rest of us, Trump will move forward and do what he said he would, or try anyway.
I would love a cheaper and more effective solution, most people probably would, but one hasn't been presented, has it?
so getting back to the o.t.

Is A Wall On The U.S. Southern Border A Good Idea?

it's the best idea that has been seriously present thus far (assuming the reader wants border security that is)

piloteer

@TKDB

TKDB said:

@WordsMatter

And stating this again, put a guard detail, or a guard force along the border wall, pulling guard duty along the very perimeter of that wall, along with gound penetrating radar as an anti tunnel device.

This way, the border wall, and the grounds below the border wall, and the perimeter along the border wall, are being secured by the border wall security, guard duty detail? 

The above, could be a whole new job market?

A guard duty detail made up of say, 10,000-12,000 people? I wonder how many ex- military citizens, or US citizens in general, wouldn't go for that new job market? 

Non of this is anything that I wanna pay for. People who are willing to hand out blank checks to the government should go back to Russia!

TKDB

@piloteer

"Non of this is anything that I wanna pay for."

You dont have to.

There are 200 GoFundMe pages, that thousands of US citizens are, and have donating their own funds to.

https://taskandpurpose-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/taskandpurpose.com/air-force-vet-behind-20-million-border-wall-gofundme-changes-campaigns-focus-2626750685.amp.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://taskandpurpose.com/air-force-vet-behind-20-million-border-wall-gofundme-changes-campaigns-focus

"Air Force Vet Behind $20 Million Border Wall GoFundMe Changes Campaign's Focus"

piloteer

@TKDB

Did you read any of it? That's a campaign to  raise money to build a section of the border wall, it won't cover 10 to 20 thousand border patrol agents with ground penetrating radar and whatever other gadgets you can come up with. 

MayCaesar

@TKDB

Great! Let them pay for the wall from their own pocket; I have nothing at all against it. It is a weird way to spend one's money, and probably one of the least sensible ones - but it is their money, their choice.

Of course, Trump's "Mexico will pay for it" now looks even funnier than before, because now literally Americans are putting their own money for the construction of the wall. But whatever, I do not mind, let people have their fun. At the very least, private enterprises tend to be much more efficient than public ones.

Just leave the taxpayers out of it. I do not care about fortifying the Texan border; I live 1.5k miles of driving away from the border, I do not remember the last time I heard anyone speaking Spanish in this area, and I have thousands better ideas on how to spend my money, than wash it down the governmental sink for the project that will not affect my life in any way.

---

Someone above said that $15b is negligible compared to the overall governmental budget? Great, feel free to put that negligible amount on my bank account! Will not make any difference for anyone, will it?

What are you saying now? "No, we need this money for the wall?" But I thought the amount was negligible... Can you not take another negligible amount for the wall, and give this one to me?

Hypocrites everywhere.

piloteer

@MayCaesar

Whoa. That was a seething argument, chock full of hyperbole. I don't think I've ever seen you like this. Just so you know, when I marked it as funny, it was because I genuinely found it to be funny, but I also agreed with it. I think that's the lowest "considerate" score I've ever seen you get!

CYDdharta

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/3258/is-a-wall-on-the-u-s-southern-border-a-good-idea/p2

MayCaesar said:

@TKDB

Great! Let them pay for the wall from their own pocket; I have nothing at all against it. It is a weird way to spend one's money, and probably one of the least sensible ones - but it is their money, their choice.

Of course, Trump's "Mexico will pay for it" now looks even funnier than before, because now literally Americans are putting their own money for the construction of the wall. But whatever, I do not mind, let people have their fun. At the very least, private enterprises tend to be much more efficient than public ones.

Just leave the taxpayers out of it. I do not care about fortifying the Texan border; I live 1.5k miles of driving away from the border, I do not remember the last time I heard anyone speaking Spanish in this area, and I have thousands better ideas on how to spend my money, than wash it down the governmental sink for the project that will not affect my life in any way.

---

Someone above said that $15b is negligible compared to the overall governmental budget? Great, feel free to put that negligible amount on my bank account! Will not make any difference for anyone, will it?

What are you saying now? "No, we need this money for the wall?" But I thought the amount was negligible... Can you not take another negligible amount for the wall, and give this one to me?

Hypocrites everywhere.

Well, you're right.  You don't say anything about the US spending millions to help students from Indonesia get master’s degrees, or federal government spending millions of dollars to help Pakistani farmers produce more mangos, or the $ billions spent annually by the federal government to farmers to not farm their land, but you'll whine about this!?  As you say, hypocrites everywhere.

TRUMP NEVER SAID MEXICO WOULD PAY FOR THE WALL UPFRONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said they would pay for it one way or another.  But you already know that, you're just being disingenuous.  The wall will benefit EVERYONE, whether they're willing to admit it or not, so it's only fitting that EVERYONE helps to fund it. 

If you actually lived close to the border; either you KNOW we need a border wall, or you're making money off the current open borders.

CYDdharta

piloteer said:

@TKDB

Non of this is anything that I wanna pay for. People who are willing to hand out blank checks to the government should go back to Russia!

I didn't want to pay for the Celebrity Chef Fruit Promotion Road Show in Indonesia, but you know what?  You and I did.  What's your point?

MayCaesar

@CYDdharta

I am a hypocrite because I talk about the wall and not Indonesia/Pakistan in a thread about the wall? Nice.

Trump said that "We're going to build the wall, and Mexico's going to pay for the wall, believe me — 100 percent.". Literal quote. That in the eyes of Trump supporters words do not mean what they mean is well known to me, but it is not so in the real world.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

It's curious, how the illegal immigrants have illegally been coming into the US since 1987, a year after the IRCA law was signed into law, in 1986?

Trump said Mexico will pay for the wall, and the Mexican President said no?

I wonder, what that same President, thinks about the millions of citizens coming into the United States illegally since 1987, via an exodus that is three plus decades old now?  

And about the border being used for drug trafficking, and human trafficking? 

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

@CYDdharta

I am a hypocrite because I talk about the wall and not Indonesia/Pakistan in a thread about the wall? Nice.

Trump said that "We're going to build the wall, and Mexico's going to pay for the wall, believe me — 100 percent.". Literal quote. That in the eyes of Trump supporters words do not mean what they mean is well known to me, but it is not so in the real world.

Trump said "“Ultimately Mexico will pay for the wall”.  Trump said. “It may be through reimbursement but one way or another, Mexico will pay for the wall.”  Literal quote, but you already know that, you're still being disingenuous.  Unfortunately for you, some of us pay attention and will call you on your lies.

MayCaesar

@CYDdharta

One literal quote does not cancel out another literal quote. It is not my fault that your guru has made multiple contradicting statements and now cannot satisfy them all no matter what he does.

This is how a personality cult works. Defending the person is a bigger deal to you, than facts and logic.

When I mentioned Trump's claim on Mexico, it was not even an important point in my post, it was just a random side notion - yet this was the main thing you lashed at with Caps Lock on and countless exclamation marks.

Send a marriage contract already! Donald switches his partners just as fast as he switches his statements, so it will work out, I think. 

piloteer

@CYDdharta

Was that supposed to be a legitimate argument? We do have the power to oppose things that we consider to be wasteful spending! People who think that we should give the government a blank check, should go back to Russia.

John_C_87

@Applesauce ;

The fence/wall was an application started by Border States as a move of independence towards their own security. It was not the best plan, or idea, it is/was an act of desperation that could take place as an act of independence by the state under Eminent Domain.

The understanding with Eminent Domain is the bigger the domain the larger the burden of public service becomes. States are already offering legal shelter to the accused of federal crime. In doing so they are now burdened with the cost of all medical care in relationship to the violations of international travel.

 A fence has no security on keeping people out only in keeping people inside the border as the control of people inside a fence can be regulated, a canal like a river is a use of a law of nature which uses bodies of water as a limit to slow and restrict movement. We already know a boat is needed, and the size of the boat dictates the number of people who can cross, this places a united state by navigation of a canal in line with ocean entries an all attention can be turned to regulation in that regard. Efficiency a key in success. While the canal is not a burden of the tax payer it is a man made resource of water, energy as accumulator, desalination for minerals, transportation hub, and finally water management. A canal is not a project built to be an obstacle to people it is that by law of nature. It is built by people to be a public service to a community, state, and country.

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

Yes, but what Executive Officer Trump does not explain is Mexico and other Nations are going to pay for the built with U.S. Dollar. The money from imports of goods, which cost other jobs somewhere, the import tariffs then look much like kickback money to the public adding to conflicts of interest. This along with the fact American Federal Reserve Notes are being used either in a registered secure manure as a receipt with serial number, or consolidated as credit transfer without the impartial protection in the registration process as legal tender on all debt. The United States still carries this burden of added cost on the registered Note as Mexico and many nation are not yet part of this state of the Union in republic democracy.

TKDB

American Lives matter.

But when illegal immigrants come into the United States illegally, apparently they maybe matter more?

And the sanctuary cities, and the various businesses that utilize the illegal immigrants to do work for them, maybe matter more as well? 

American lives have been lost via the illegal immigrants and their crimes being committed against some of the US citizens, yet some continue to protest the Border wall?

Does this maybe mean, that the illegal immigrants matter more than the rest of the US citizens do? 

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

@CYDdharta

One literal quote does not cancel out another literal quote. It is not my fault that your guru has made multiple contradicting statements and now cannot satisfy them all no matter what he does.

This is how a personality cult works. Defending the person is a bigger deal to you, than facts and logic.

When I mentioned Trump's claim on Mexico, it was not even an important point in my post, it was just a random side notion - yet this was the main thing you lashed at with Caps Lock on and countless exclamation marks.

Send a marriage contract already! Donald switches his partners just as fast as he switches his statements, so it will work out, I think. 

You seem to have reading comprehension issues.  Go back and reread the quote you posted and point out where Trump said Mexico was going to pay for the wall UPFRONT.  100 percent ≠ UPFRONT.  The two term are NOT synonymous, not by a long shot.  You're blinded by hatred for the man, which must be why you keep trying to make this same failed argument.  But Establishment shills have their talking points, so I guess you'll keep trying, and failing, to make this argument.

Applesauce

@John_C_87

I think the canal idea is a great one, so long as we don't give it away like the one in Panama lol

States are already offering legal shelter to the accused of federal crime. In doing so they are now burdened with the cost of all medical care in relationship to the violations of international travel.

that's sort of true, increasing costs in health care affects every state eventually as does the use of federal funds, infrastructure etc.

CYDdharta

piloteer said:

@CYDdharta

Was that supposed to be a legitimate argument? We do have the power to oppose things that we consider to be wasteful spending! People who think that we should give the government a blank check, should go back to Russia.

Oh, did you oppose the federal government paying for the Celebrity Chef Fruit Promotion Road Show in Indonesia?  I'm pretty sure I've read all of your posts in anything that would be relevant on the site, I don't recall you stating your opposition before.

MayCaesar

@CYDdharta

My-my. It takes a special effort at being slimy to interpret the demand that the Congress pays for the wall as "Mexico is going to pay for the wall, just not upfront".

Very well, when is it going to pay for it, my little dove? I assume the $15b Trump asks of the Congress is actually indirectly the Mexican money? Interesting how Mexico turns out to own a fraction of our budget.

Did Mexico get a very special financing offer, where the first payment is due a few years after the purchase, and the US government plays the role of the lender? I would like to read the terms; that would be something very novel in the world of business.

But what am I laughing at... Let the man speak for himself:

"I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!"

So, Mexico is going to pay for the wall by not spending a dime and by letting the US save the money. This is a very interesting interpretation of the word "pay". You agree with it, dove?

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

@CYDdharta

My-my. It takes a special effort at being slimy to interpret the demand that the Congress pays for the wall as "Mexico is going to pay for the wall, just not upfront".

Very well, when is it going to pay for it, my little dove? I assume the $15b Trump asks of the Congress is actually indirectly the Mexican money? Interesting how Mexico turns out to own a fraction of our budget.

Did Mexico get a very special financing offer, where the first payment is due a few years after the purchase, and the US government plays the role of the lender? I would like to read the terms; that would be something very novel in the world of business.

But what am I laughing at... Let the man speak for himself:

"I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!"

So, Mexico is going to pay for the wall by not spending a dime and by letting the US save the money. This is a very interesting interpretation of the word "pay". You agree with it, dove?

So this is how you admit you were wrong, cheddar-puff!?

WordsMatter

@CYDdharta so if I use a coupon at a store and then go spend then go buy a drink at the bar then the grocery store paid for my drink? I didn't pay for it by earning the money that was used on it?

CYDdharta

WordsMatter said:

@CYDdharta so if I use a coupon at a store and then go spend then go buy a drink at the bar then the grocery store paid for my drink? I didn't pay for it by earning the money that was used on it?

Sure, that's a way to look at it.  It's certainly more accurate than viewing a reduction in a increase in funding as being a drastic budget cut, as we hear every time there's a budget battle.

MayCaesar

The quote above begs for a different example.

I sell my bicycle on eBay for $200. The buyer is found, and I ship my bicycle to him, paying the shipping fee of $50. Instead of paying me $250, the buyer says, "Oh, just do not eat out at restaurants in the next few months, and your savings will pay for the bicycle!"

In the world of business, such an action is considered a fraud, and is severely punishable by law. Yet in the world of politics the standards are much lower, and the victims of the fraud themselves will often defend the scammer with passion.

piloteer

CYDdharta said:

Oh, did you oppose the federal government paying for the Celebrity Chef Fruit Promotion Road Show in Indonesia?  I'm pretty sure I've read all of your posts in anything that would be relevant on the site, I don't recall you stating your opposition before.

Well, now that I'm aware of it, I HEREBY DECLARE MY OPPOSITION TO THE CELEBRITY CHEF FRUIT AND PROMOTION ROAD SHOW IN INDONESIA. Sorry for my tardiness in expressing my discontent for it. So now that's all cleared up, I get to say that I don't want to pay for the wall. Also, I'm touched to know that you've read all my posts. Now I feel bad that I don't read all yours. And now I feel even worse because I won't read all yours. 

whiteflame

CYDdharta said:

TRUMP NEVER SAID MEXICO WOULD PAY FOR THE WALL UPFRONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said they would pay for it one way or another.  But you already know that, you're just being disingenuous.  The wall will benefit EVERYONE, whether they're willing to admit it or not, so it's only fitting that EVERYONE helps to fund it.  

Hate to belabor a point that isn't relevant to the question of whether the border wall is net beneficial (I'm not revisiting an argument we've had elsewhere on this same site), but I take issue with your point.

Trump has actually given multiple different explanations regarding how Mexico would pay for the wall. If your goal is to say that he's somehow been consistent on this, I think you're pretty thoroughly mistaken. But let's set aside inconsistency and just focus on what you're arguing: that at some future point, Trump will somehow get Mexico to pay for the wall.

First off, I don't know why you're so upset at the responses you're getting to this claim. Despite efforts by Trump to get Mexico to cover the costs, he's clearly failed in doing so up front. Does that mean he will forever fail to find some way for Mexico to repay us for the wall? Maybe not, but you seem to put a lot of stake in the view that he will. How do you know? It doesn't seem obvious to me. Maybe it's your point that we shouldn't view Trump as failing in this pledge yet, but given the fact that he's done absolutely nothing to show that Mexico is willing to pay anything for the wall, why do you feel we're jumping the gun? What do you think will change? 

Second, how will he do this?

He can't do it through a trade deal because the money that is accrued through a trade deal doesn't all go to the federal government. If Mexico is paying for the wall, then the money has to be reimbursed to the federal government, not just going to the economy at large (especially when certain portions of the population gain a lot more benefit, while others may experience little or none). Even if we did assume that the destination of the money doesn't matter, a trade deal isn't reimbursement for any specific venture. Perhaps most importantly, we do not yet know the effects that a wall will have on said trade deal, so even if we can somehow make projections now regarding how those deals will work in today's world, we can't know just how those will be altered by either the construction or existence of the wall. And all this still assumes that the trade deal will be a net positive over what we had before, which from what I've seen hasn't been validated by any economic sources. Trump has asserted that it's true, but he has yet to furnish evidence.

He can't do it through simply keeping more immigrants on the other side of the border. Even if we assume that a) the wall is very effective and b) that every single one of those immigrants would have cost the US boatloads of money, that still isn't Mexico paying for the wall. That's the wall functioning towards its stated purpose; Mexico isn't footing any portion of that bill.

Beyond that, I don't think it's quite clear what Mexico will be covering. Are they going to just get the bill for this $5.7 billion portion, or the entirety? What if the project goes over budget? Can Mexico interrogate the contractors to ensure that they aren't overpaying? How about long-term enhancements/repairs to the wall? Trump has been unequivocal about Mexico's role in paying for the wall, so is he planning on giving them an itemized receipt? 

Applesauce

the money seized from the Mexican cartels is and has been more than enough to pay for the whole thing

U.S. authorities are seeking the "forfeiture of more than $14 billion in cash proceeds from narcotic sales" that Mexican drug lord Joaquín El Chapo Guzmán Loera, the leader of the world’s biggest narcotics cartel, has allegedly earned over a 30 year-long criminal career
now if you look at where and what his money is in......can you guess?  Add in the multitude of other cartels who has stuff seized and there's money left over.  That money comes out of Mexico and the real estate and business which it is laundered.

John_C_87

Ah! The point finally arrived to.

The legal tender of all debts both foreign and domestic is up for re-investment. Applesauce the real reason behind pointless spending?  The Federal Reserve Note is payable for all debt meaning legal, or not. The debt created by the people who made pursuit of happiness is against all held in the United States.

Like I said, if it’s not make it true. America first. We are the generation that lost the towers, we build a mote. The world’s largest and greatest accumulator of power, wind, water, sun, and gravitation the short cut to the world’s trade center. Two of the next Seven Wonders of the World and the greatest test to human engineering since the space race.

CYDdharta

WordsMatter said:

@CYDdharta ;https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/border-issues/2019/01/23/us-mexico-border-migrants-use-ladder-scale-wall-near-yuma-san-luis-cbp-asylum-seekers/2659930002/ yes very effective

Which explains why we need the new border wall, thanx for proving the president's point.

whiteflame

Applesauce said:

the money seized from the Mexican cartels is and has been more than enough to pay for the whole thing

U.S. authorities are seeking the "forfeiture of more than $14 billion in cash proceeds from narcotic sales" that Mexican drug lord Joaquín El Chapo Guzmán Loera, the leader of the world’s biggest narcotics cartel, has allegedly earned over a 30 year-long criminal career
now if you look at where and what his money is in......can you guess?  Add in the multitude of other cartels who has stuff seized and there's money left over.  That money comes out of Mexico and the real estate and business which it is laundered.

So, because we're seizing money from Mexican cartels, we are, effectively, requiring Mexico to pay for the wall by taking money out of their pockets... Alright, let's talk about that.

First, all of what you've presented here is in status quo. We already do this. You've provided no reason to believe the funds generated by seizing this money will increase after the wall is built. If anything, it's likely to decrease, largely because cartels are likely to either a) stay in Mexico and continue their business there and further south, or b) switch to different methods that we may not be aware of in order to continue doing their business. In either case, we're probably netting far less in terms of overall cash from this.

Second, the idea that we're somehow forcing Mexico to pay for the wall by taking it from their black market is absurd on its face. Laundered money through real estate and businesses isn't bolstering the Mexican economy. It isn't providing them with some massive watershed that we're pulling away to build the wall. If anything, this is largely money already taken from either the Mexican or US economies that we are, in effect, taking back. That seems like a poor way to get Mexico to pay for the wall - it's like saying that, after we've arrested a bank robber and confiscated the money they took from the bank, we will use it to improve the police station. It might help the police station, but it doesn't help anyone who had that money taken from them.

Third, I don't really get how this money is funneling into the government or the US economy. Best case scenario, we're finding vast stores of money socked away somewhere (though from the article, it's not at all clear that that's what is happening - it sounds like they want to get him to forfeit a great deal of this money, but it's unclear that he has $14 billion in cash). What happens to that money? Is it just delivered out into the US economy? Does it get invested somewhere? Does it go to pay down the debt? The deficit? Do we use it to generate a 1-time tax cut? Even if this money is all coming from Mexico, it's hard to say that it's being used to pay for the wall, or for that matter, doing anything of substantive benefit to the US because it's entirely unclear how it will be used.

MayCaesar

@Applesauce

The money the US government has seized from Mexican cartels is the money belonging to the US, not Mexico. It is not Mexico paying for the wall, it is the US paying for the wall.

You cannot just take money that you already have, spend it on something, then trace the past history of that money and say that its previous owner paid for it. My Samsung S9 was designed in Korea and assembled in China - but if I exchange it for, say, an iPhone, you bet it will be me paying for that iPhone, and not China or Korea.

That is not even mentioning that, as @whiteflame said, drug cartel money did not belong to the Mexican economy to begin with. It was the money cartels assembled via violence and corruption within the Mexican government; it was money taken away from Mexico by criminal circles long before the US law enforcement officers put their hands on it.

---

I fail to see what is wrong with just admitting that the US is going to finance the wall from its own wallet. Trump is directly asking the US Congress for money. There is no legitimate way to interpret is as Mexico paying for the wall - unless you assume that the US federal fund is a sector of the Mexican economy, which would be a bizarre claim.

WordsMatter

Well you see, when Texas was first acquired and then expanded, the people living on that land were Mexicans but they got to stay and were integrated into America. After almost 180 years we have gathered a lot of federal taxes from those people and their descendants. This is the money that will be spent on the border wall so now you can see how Mexico is paying for it.

midopreal

Ladders, Tunnels, commercial airliners, boats, small planes/ helicopters landing on backroad, and good passport forgeries are all very simple ways to avoid this. Even if there were the best sensors in the world at the border the worst criminals would still get in either through bribes or just the ways that I stated above because they have the cash to. All that the wall would do is make the cartels more rich because the largest ones would be the only ones who could smuggle people and then for even more money because of that wall. So we would be keeping out the people who actually economically benefit this country. As well as the smaller cartels would dissolve because they would have a harder time selling there products here. So the other factor is the prices of drugs would probably increase because few groups are bringing it in. That would increase violence because there are no drug rehab possibilities for anyone who is poor so the drug epidemic will get worse not better (Although 95% of drugs come in form normal ports of entry and cargo ships not across the border). The fact that the Great Wall of China bankrupted a few dynasties might be something to consider. The brazen lying from trump about how it was going to be built and by who’s money. The fact that Latin and South America countries are the only ones who we have a positive trade where we export more than we import and China will take care of that soon thanks to trump. Another thing to consider that if these people don’t flee there countries there daughters will be sex slave and there sons be forced into gang life. 
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-economy-farm-workers-taxes/ 
benefits that illegal immigrants receive http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/federal-benefits-to-unauthorized-immigrants.aspx 
A statistician looks at the border wall construction with Fox News somehow https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trumps-border-wall-how-much-it-will-actually-cost-according-to-a-statistician
How many planes actually get through? https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/mark-browne/us-radar-has-detected-hundreds-illegal-low-flying-aircraft-attempting-cross
Crime rates of legal and illegal immigrants and the fact of the most populated areas of the country having the lowest crime rate http://oxfordre.com/criminology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-93

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

Did I say a canal has two new walls on each side of a body of water ? A fence really is one little wall with no water. Unless they throw in a sprinkler. Working a plan to change to the proportional cost on receipts issued by Federal Reserve Note on impartial legal tender to manage all debt foreign and domestic, this proportional to global and National debt, the principle is managed by balanced the barrowing on long term stable income form self-supporting review as Eminent domain projects ranging from things like energy/ water/transpiration. Are set in motion by priority of use and practicality. Private investment should be constitutionally aloud fully regulated, and investment offers from Mexico reviewed as part of canal expansion package with leasing options. The plus is offering clear energy to our national neighbors to the South.  


I understand it is not as shrewd as some zoning tactics. By the way North America and Canada really are not suited for a canal type accumulator. However this does not leave them out in the cold so to say. 

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

American Lives matter.

They do matter. But when Trump wants to crash the economy over a damn wall, he doesn’t care.

But when illegal immigrants come into the United States illegally, apparently they maybe matter more?

No. The reason people are against the wall is because it’s ineffective and way too expensive and would lead to economic trouble, and with the 2008 recession not fully recovered the last thing we need is to repeat history 

And the sanctuary cities, and the various businesses that utilize the illegal immigrants to do work for them, maybe matter more as well? 

Irrelevant 

American lives have been lost via the illegal immigrants and their crimes being committed against some of the US citizens, yet some continue to protest the Border wall?

More American lives have been lost diabetes and I no one protesting the fast food market 

Does this maybe mean, that the illegal immigrants matter more than the rest of the US citizens do? 

No.

John_C_87

I wonder how many miles of Water Pipeline we can make out of the surpluses of the military and congressional armed forces vehicles decommissioned. Crash the economy will happen because people drive the economy like a drone. I say put drone pilots to work building a canal. Residence form out of states where the canal is being placed have opportunity for employment as well.

Change the past stop reaching for the stars. Let’s do the impossible instead. Any-up.

Applesauce

I've fought sex trafficking as a DHS special agent – We need to build the wall for the children

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/ive-fought-sex-trafficking-as-a-dhs-special-agent-we-need-to-build-the-wall-for-the-children.amp

John_C_87

if building a wall is a good idea building a canal is a great idea. It's two walls plus water.