Construction Of The Wall Has Started

[Benton]

(04-10-2018, 04:12 PM)treee Wrote: What kind of idiot builds an actual physical wall? If you're trying to increase border security wouldn't it be more efficient to built an HD surveillance camera on top of a 50 foot post every mile or two?

... and hire a few guys to watch the cameras? Which would make sense.

I'm not sure if it's still in the plan, but initially they were going to pay for some of this by reducing the number of agents who monitor the border. So, the exact opposite of common sense.

It's like trying to keep an eye on a house full of kids by selling your baby monitor and investing in a super expensive door that can't be locked.

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 01:08 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Mexico is an actual threat because they are so corrupt.  They could easily be smacking down the rest of Central America with our backing but yet they choose to take the corruption route.

gotcha
and meanwhile sham elections, invade nations, control media, kill opposition, and engage in digital attacks on the US = good

[Benton]

(04-10-2018, 04:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: gotcha
and meanwhile sham elections, invade nations, control media, kill opposition, and engage in digital attacks on the US = us

[StLucieBengal]

(04-10-2018, 04:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: gotcha
and meanwhile sham elections, invade nations, control media, kill opposition, and engage in digital attacks on the US = good

I see your ok with Central American invaders swamping us.

[ballsofsteel]

How much of taxpayer money being spent on that wall will see its way back to Drunph's pocket?

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 06:08 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I see your ok with Central American invaders swamping us.

Yes. I'm not ok with actual invasions. 

[BFritz21]

(04-10-2018, 12:59 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well I quoted the article:

A vehicle barrier (fences, as you say) and the wall are two very different things.

(04-10-2018, 12:59 PM)GMDino Wrote: No we are not...but rubes voted for a man who said it would happen so we get to poke fun at them while he raids our taxes to pay for it.

He's taking action to improve the security of the border and you try to poke fun at it because he's having the balls to put America first.

(04-10-2018, 12:59 PM)GMDino Wrote: None of that is provable.  It's folly to think it will "save us money" and delusional to say it will "pay for itself".  It is a waste of time and energy on a project that will do little except make scared people think they are safer when they are not.

Delusional?  How many illegal immigrants come into this country a year and how much tax payer money does each of them use for things like hospitals, prisons, etc.?  

This site says that illegal immigrants cost taxpayers 113 billion, so slowing down that number from increasing seems worth it and like the wall will end up paying for itself.

Not to mention, as I said, aren't Americans supplying the labor and the physical parts of the wall?  Keeping everything in the country seems like a good thing.

(04-10-2018, 01:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: For me the wall is irrelevant, if it gets built or who pays for it is not my concern.   I want serious restrictions on that southern border, anyone coming from the south needs to be treated as invaders.  With serious repercussions for Mexico if they reach our. Border.  Likewise serious rewards if they do their jobs and stabilize the south.

The wall will help stop invaders.

(04-10-2018, 01:39 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I figure that because Congress only appropriated money for existing fences, not constructing new fences. So we're updating and replacing what's already in place. That's nothing new and it's not following through with any campaign promises.

Also, part of the promise was this multi billion dollar waste of money would be paid for by someone else. You can't say a promise was kept when every aspect of it wasn't.

Read the link and see that more is happening.

Also, we could begin to tax Mexican imports heavier, and along with the money spent on illegal immigrants, the wall would be paid for by someone else.

(04-10-2018, 03:56 PM)Benton Wrote: $70 billion to build, $100 million per year to maintain.

Wouldn't it have been better to pay a couple guys to dig a shallow trench, fill it with $70 billion and light that **** on fire? Ok, maybe not better, but as equally ineffective and a lot more entertaining.

More entertaining than what?
Why, more entertaining than watching folks swim around a wall, go through easily dug tunnels underneath the wall or by simply climbing over the wall.

A $70 billion security blanket for people scared of immigrants is one of the reasons our deficit is increasing again. What a waste.

So you're mad that we're spending money in the country to help protect our country?

I also can't believe that people don't see the principle behind securing our borders and not allowing illegal immigrants to take advantage of us.

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Read the link and see that more is happening.

Also, we could begin to tax Mexican imports heavier, and along with the money spent on illegal immigrants, the wall would be paid for by someone else.

Like I said, fixing existing isn't creating new. 

So Mexico isn't paying for the wall and we're going to punish US consumers on top of it. 

[BFritz21]

(04-10-2018, 07:24 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Like I said, fixing existing isn't creating new. 

So Mexico isn't paying for the wall and we're going to punish US consumers on top of it. 

It's not fixing existing, it's creating better.

[*Nately120*]

(04-10-2018, 12:55 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Also, Mexico may not have paid for it yet (and may not ever), but are we supposed to expect other people to pay to protect our own people and our own borders?

Exactly . only a genuine bonehead would have believed a Trump campaign promise like this!

[BFritz21]

(04-10-2018, 07:31 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Exactly . only a genuine bonehead would have believed a Trump campaign promise like this!

Well, like I keep saying, and people with agendas keep ignoring, is that Mexico would end up paying in an indirect way by us not spending money on illegal immigrants, and there's also taxing them.

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 07:28 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's not fixing existing, it's creating better.

How many more miles of barriers across the border will we have after this?

[BFritz21]

(04-10-2018, 07:42 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: How many more miles of barriers across the border will we have after this?

It's in the article.  

Thanks for proving that you weren't basing your opinions off anything factual.  

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 07:47 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's in the article.  

Thanks for proving that you weren't basing your opinions off anything factual.  

It's not, but the answer is 0. 

[Dill]

(04-10-2018, 12:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Some 19th century foreign policy to go with our 19th century economic policy. 

If we'd only kept the oil, we could have paid for an invasion of Mexico.

[Dill]

(04-10-2018, 07:38 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Well, like I keep saying, and people with agendas keep ignoring, is that Mexico would end up paying in an indirect way by us not spending money on illegal immigrants, and there's also taxing them.

How does that sound as a forceful, authoritarian campaign promise?

"We are going to build a wall, and who's going to pay for it?" Trump puts his hand to his ear.

Crowd responds "MEXICO!! but in an indirect way by us not spending money on illegal immigrants and there's also taxing them!!"

"What??" asks Trump. "I can't hear you!!"" 

Louder now, the crowd goes "MEXICO!! but in an indirect way by us not spending money on illegal immigrants and there's also taxing them!!"

PS isn't building a wall and making Mexico pay for it an "agenda" too?

PPS illegal immigration dropped steadily under Obama. Could we say that he was already making Mexico pay?

[*bfine32*]

(04-10-2018, 07:24 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Like I said, fixing existing isn't creating new. 
 

It's not like they are going out there with bailing wire and tape and patching holes in existing walls. There are tearing down old and creating new. 

If I take my car out of the driveway and go get a knew one then: I've always had a car in my driveway, but do I know have a new one? 

So just because you keep saying it doesn't mean there is not knew construction occurring on the border. 

[GMDino]

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: A vehicle barrier (fences, as you say) and the wall are two very different things.

I quoted your article.

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: He's taking action to improve the security of the border and you try to poke fun at it because he's having the balls to put America first.

No, I'm making fun of people who believe A) He's building a wall and B) Mexico is going to pay for it.

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Delusional?  How many illegal immigrants come into this country a year and how much tax payer money does each of them use for things like hospitals, prisons, etc.?  This site says that illegal immigrants cost taxpayers 113 billion, so slowing down that number from increasing seems worth it and like the wall will end up paying for itself.

Not to mention, as I said, aren't Americans supplying the labor and the physical parts of the wall?  Keeping everything in the country seems like a good thing

Crossings are down, as has been the trend.  And this source says illegal immigrants pour millions into the economy through taxes and purchases without ever being eligible for things like welfare or assistance.

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The wall will help stop invaders.

Except for the tunnels and planes and boats...yeah.  

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Also, we could begin to tax Mexican imports heavier, and along with the money spent on illegal immigrants, the wall would be paid for by someone else.

Nope.  Still paid by you and me.  (assuming you pay taxes).

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So you're mad that we're spending money in the country to help protect our country?

Again, nope.  I'm laughing at the idea that replacing and repairing parts of existing structures is seen as building a wall to protect our country AND that the proposals to actually build segments of a an actual wall is a huge waste of money on something that will not protect our country.

(04-10-2018, 07:16 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I also can't believe that people don't see the principle behind securing our borders and not allowing illegal immigrants to take advantage of us.

Yeah, I'm kind of surprised about how people can't see things too....

[BmorePat87]

(04-10-2018, 08:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's not like they are going out there with bailing wire and tape and patching holes in existing walls. There are tearing down old and creating new. 

If I take my car out of the driveway and go get a knew one then: I've always had a car in my driveway, but do I know have a new one? 

So just because you keep saying it doesn't mean there is not knew construction occurring on the border. 

I don't deny that these are more effective walls, but the campaign promise was a wall a 2,000 mile border. It was later downgraded to 700 miles. Now we're replacing existing walls for no net gain in miles covered along the border. 

This is not a fulfillment of a campaign promise. 

[BFritz21]

(04-10-2018, 10:13 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't deny that these are more effective walls, but the campaign promise was a wall a 2,000 mile border. It was later downgraded to 700 miles. Now we're replacing existing walls for no net gain in miles covered along the border. 

This is not a fulfillment of a campaign promise. 

Except if you'd look at it, you'd realize that there's mountains, rivers, and other natural obstacles that cover a lot of the border, meaning that the wall isn't needed in those areas, and other areas (that aren't covered by the 700 to 900 miles of wall) will have tech-based solutions.

Sounds like pretty close to a fulfillment of a campaign promise (and one that will get the job done) and working to make it all happen.