Why Is Trump's Wall A Bad Thing?

[Dill]

(01-31-2019, 01:03 AM)Benton Wrote: Well laid out. And to the bold, that's what I've been preaching for ever. The problem for politicians is, a lot of their donors don't really want reforms. Obama moved toward targeting employers (which was good) but didn't arrest illegal employees during raids (which was bad).

(01-30-2019, 01:01 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: 4. 5 Billion dollars is not how much the Wall will cost. Non-partisan estimates have ranged anywhere from 22 billion to 31 billion dollars for the entire length of the border. Even Fox News has reported their estimate as 25 billion dollars. 5 billion dollars is a drop in the bucket for what will end up being needed for this wall. And that's before you even account for the maintenance required, which could be anywhere from 150 million per year to 750 million per year, depending on the style of wall, the weather the wall encounters and any possible damage done to the wall from people trying to cross it. And that's all assuming the construction of this wall goes smoothly. If problems are encountered, who knows how much that cost could balloon to.

You guyz both make good points, but your focus on rational, fact-based policy has led you to overlook the most important aspect of the wall--its psychological effect on the Trump base.  Where the drugs and illegals REALLY come in matters much less than the IDEA, the psychological comfort, of a barrier keeping "them" out, like garlic and crosses hung in every window of your home.

21+ billion is not too small a price to pay for the psychic security of some 40 million American voters.  

[BFritz21]

The wall isn't going to cover the entire border, so whoever is claiming the 20 billion price range is wrong.

Also, people don't look at it as good business for the country: don't hire just one company to build it, hire multiple; use workers that are citizens to build it, and use citizens for the upkeep.

You're keeping money in the county and putting citizens to work.

[CJD]

(01-31-2019, 01:42 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: The wall isn't going to cover the entire border, so whoever is claiming the 20 billion price range is wrong.

Also, people don't look at it as good business for the country:  don't hire just one company to build it, hire multiple; use workers that are citizens to build it, and use citizens for the upkeep.

You're keeping money in the county and putting citizens to work.

If you're referring to natural barriers, the $25 billion dollar figure (given by Fox News, Trump's people) already accounted for that.

Quote:In 1993, President Bill Clinton mandated the construction of a 14 miles-long wall between San Diego, California and Tijuana, Mexico to stem the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs across our border. Then, in 2006, the Secure Fence Act under President George W. Bush authorized the construction of physical barriers (a wall and fences) along another 654 miles. About 130 miles of the border without a physical barrier has natural barriers.

So really we are talking about roughly 1,150 miles. If you drive at 60 miles per hour, that would take you about 19 hours as the eagle flies.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trumps-border-wall-how-much-it-will-actually-cost-according-to-a-statistician

And while the money would go to American companies (Ideally. With Trump you never know. He may just hire illegal Mexicans to build it, just for the irony factor), you could say that about literally any structural project done in America.

For that same money, you could begin projects on fixing the infrastructure of this country which Engineers estimate is approximately 4.5 trillion dollars over the next 6 to 7 years.

https://www.businessinsider.com/asce-gives-us-infrastructure-a-d-2017-3

Trump has proposed an Infrastructure plan that would cover 1.5 trillion dollars, 200 billion of which will be directly funded by the U.S. Government. Where the rest of the money is coming from is based a lot on the assumptive responsibilities of local and state governments.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-infrastructure-plan-details-bill-2018-2

The 25 billion dollars that would theoretically go to this Wall would instead be the first 8th of that infrastructure plan.

Of course, as far as I know, Trump  hasn't even put this Infrastructure plan through Congress yet, so who knows how much of it will ever materialize. But the fact is America has bigger bills. Bills in the trillions of dollars. Just to repair what we already have.

https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/388071-trumps-infrastructure-plan-hits-a-dead-end

Adding a Wall and then the maintenance of that wall to the already strained budget of the Federal Government will only cause damage to the ambitions of repairing the infrastructure that Americans actually need, which is bridges, roads, highways and water systems.

[Hoofhearted]

If a wall was meant to keep drugs out, why do prisons have drugs smuggled in quite often? It's a silly waste of resources.

[BmorePat87]

(01-31-2019, 01:42 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: The wall isn't going to cover the entire border, so whoever is claiming the 20 billion price range is wrong.

Also, people don't look at it as good business for the country:  don't hire just one company to build it, hire multiple; use workers that are citizens to build it, and use citizens for the upkeep.

You're keeping money in the county and putting citizens to work.

It will cost that and it won't work efficiently enough to pay for itself.

We could hire a ton of American companies to build new roads and bridges, though. 

[Belsnickel]

(01-31-2019, 09:55 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It will cost that and it won't work efficiently enough to pay for itself.

We could hire a ton of American companies to build new roads and bridges, though. 

Now the CBA on that sort of program would be a net positive for the economy.

[BmorePat87]

(01-31-2019, 10:15 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Now the CBA on that sort of program would be a net positive for the economy.

I assume that someone with small hands desires a huge piece of infrastructure to be remembered for, but we could build a new bridge and he can name it after himself. 

[Dill]

(01-31-2019, 01:42 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: The wall isn't going to cover the entire border, so whoever is claiming the 20 billion price range is wrong.

Also, people don't look at it as good business for the country:  don't hire just one company to build it, hire multiple; use workers that are citizens to build it, and use citizens for the upkeep.

You're keeping money in the county and putting citizens to work.

Sounds very Keynsian.

Repairing and expanding our highway system would be good business for the country too--and we could then really use what we built.

By the way, if the wall has steel components, where would those come from?  Any Trump friends ready to help out there?

[*Nately120*]

(01-31-2019, 01:42 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You're keeping money in the county and putting citizens to work.

What responsible citizen is going to quit his/her regular job to move down to the border and start work on a wall?

[BFritz21]

(01-31-2019, 11:50 AM)Nately120 Wrote: What responsible citizen is going to quit his/her regular job to move down to the border and start work on a wall?

They're obviously not going to move down to the border to build the wall, but companies will need to hire more workers to build the wall.

[*Nately120*]

(01-31-2019, 01:20 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:

They're obviously not going to move down to the border to build the wall, but companies will need to hire more workers to build the wall.

Why are you rolling your eyes?  Is there some sort of standard protocol for building 2000 mile walls that I'm not up on?  Are there enough actual trained contractors who can pass a background check on the border to build this thing in an expedient and cost-effective manner? You seem pretty confident it will be a money maker, it will be effective, and so on and so forth.  I'm just not as versed on the standards and procedures of building this sort of thing as other people are, apparently.

As far as I can see, the only other structure in the same league as the Trump wall is the Great Wall of China.  It just seems like this is a pretty extraordinary undertaking in the history of mankind, so I don't see where all this confidence that it's going to be smooth sailing comes from.  If I'm missing something, let me know.

We're going to build the tallest, and second longest wall in the history of earth....but don't worry, it'll be easy and awesome.

Also, before it's finished we could have democrats promising to destroy it. They'll promise to repeal Trump Wall like republicans all promised to repeal Obama Care.

[BFritz21]

(01-31-2019, 01:28 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Why are you rolling your eyes?  Is there some sort of standard protocol for building 2000 mile walls that I'm not up on?  Are there enough actual trained contractors who can pass a background check on the border to build this thing in an expedient and cost-effective manner?  You seem pretty confident it will be a money maker, it will be effective, and so on and so forth.  I'm just not as versed on the standards and procedures of building this sort of thing as other people are, apparently.

As far as I can see, the only other structure in the same league as the Trump wall is the Great Wall of China.  It just seems like this is a pretty extraordinary undertaking in the history of mankind, so I don't see where all this confidence that it's going to be smooth sailing comes from.  If I'm missing something, let me know.

We're going to build the tallest, and second longest wall in the history of earth....but don't worry, it'll be easy and awesome.

Also, before it's finished we could have democrats promising to destroy it.  They'll promise to repeal Trump Wall like republicans all promised to repeal Obama Care.

Rolling my eyes at your claim that people would need to quit their jobs and move to the border to build the wall.

The Great Wall of China was built over 200 years ago and still stands strong, but we can't build one with modern technology?

I feel pretty confident that there's enough qualified people to get the job done.

[*Nately120*]

(01-31-2019, 01:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Rolling my eyes at your claim that people would need to quit their jobs and move to the border to build the wall.

The Great Wall of China was built over 200 years ago and still stands strong, but we can't build one with modern technology?

I feel pretty confident that there's enough qualified people to get the job done.

So who builds this wall?  I still don't get it.  We need a 2000 mile long wall and apparently we have enough not-that-busy-but-still-competent people who are going to build it?

Again, help me out here, because I don't see how the Great Wall of China existing proves this project is going to get done while Trump is even still in office.  The Great Wall took what, 2000 years to build?  I guess Trump could have had it done in 2.  Call me skeptical.

Also, China is practically a 3rd world country. Let's stop looking to them for innovative ideas.

[BFritz21]

(01-31-2019, 01:56 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So who builds this wall?  I still don't get it.  We need a 2000 mile long wall and apparently we have enough not-that-busy-but-still-competent people who are going to build it?

Again, help me out here, because I don't see how the Great Wall of China existing proves this project is going to get done while Trump is even still in office.

Citizens and employees of companies hired to construct the wall will build the wall.  They don't need to "quit their jobs and move to the border to build it."  Some people might be temporarily relocated with their companies, but not like they'll have to quit their jobs because it will be their job.

We also don't need a 2,000 mile wall since natural barriers protect most of it.  We only need 500 to a thousand miles of wall, so either you're very misinformed on something that you're arguing against or you're intentionally posting false information to build your case.

The Great Wall is just proof that this type of structure can be built and withstand the test of time, and over 2000 years of technological advancements proves that it can get done while he's still in office.

[*Nately120*]

(01-31-2019, 02:09 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:

Citizens and employees of companies hired to construct the wall will build the wall.  They don't need to "quit their jobs and move to the border to build it."  Some people might be temporarily relocated with their companies, but not like they'll have to quit their jobs because it will be their job.

We also don't need a 2,000 mile wall since natural barriers protect most of it.  We only need 500 to a thousand miles of wall, so either you're very misinformed on something that you're arguing against or you're intentionally posting false information to build your case.

The Great Wall is just proof that this type of structure can be built and withstand the test of time, and over 2000 years of technological advancements proves that it can get done while he's still in office.

All I'm saying is that details seem pretty hazy seeing as American taxpayers are going to be the ones forced to pay for this thing.  So 500 miles, all security-cleared citizens building it, no bloated no-bid contracts ala Haliburton, and it'll get done fast enough to stop the latest wave of evil. 

It's just all so quick n easy and it'll make money AND it's also going to be one of the most glorious walls built in the history of mankind.  Well, I guess I have to pay for it since I have a job, so put my name on it and call it glorious. I haven't seen a positive ROI analysis on the thing, but I'm not particularly in the know of this stuff and I'll admit I'm more skeptical of the government's ability to actually create useful things than most.

Short version - I don't trust the government nor someone like Trump to take my money and create something useful with it. The fact that Trump IS the government now has me super skeptical. Is that so crazy?

[BmorePat87]

(01-31-2019, 02:09 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:

Citizens and employees of companies hired to construct the wall will build the wall.  They don't need to "quit their jobs and move to the border to build it."  Some people might be temporarily relocated with their companies, but not like they'll have to quit their jobs because it will be their job.

We also don't need a 2,000 mile wall since natural barriers protect most of it.  We only need 500 to a thousand miles of wall, so either you're very misinformed on something that you're arguing against or you're intentionally posting false information to build your case.

The Great Wall is just proof that this type of structure can be built and withstand the test of time, and over 2000 years of technological advancements proves that it can get done while he's still in office.

It's unlikely that they can finish the project in a year and a half. That timeline is pretty generous assuming they pass it tomorrow and it only takes 6 months to get the project started. It'll likely take longer to just get it started. 

Alternatively, investing the same money in local, state, and interstate infrastructure would create jobs across the country and improve the economies of many states. 

[Belsnickel]

(01-31-2019, 02:38 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's unlikely that they can finish the project in a year and a half. That timeline is pretty generous assuming they pass it tomorrow and it only takes 6 months to get the project started. It'll likely take longer to just get it started. 

Alternatively, investing the same money in local, state, and interstate infrastructure would create jobs across the country and improve the economies of many states. 

Shoot, Virginia alone is about to drop a little over $2B on one interstate: https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/roanoke/the-future-of-i-81-everything-thats-wrong-with-our-biggest-highway-and-how-to-fix-it

We still have the bills working their way through on how to pay for it. While I-81 is an interstate in rougher shape than most, it isn't even the most critical infrastructure project in the country, I guarantee. We really should be spending that money on our infrastructure rather than a worthless symbol.

[CJD]

(01-31-2019, 02:09 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:

Citizens and employees of companies hired to construct the wall will build the wall.  They don't need to "quit their jobs and move to the border to build it."  Some people might be temporarily relocated with their companies, but not like they'll have to quit their jobs because it will be their job.

We also don't need a 2,000 mile wall since natural barriers protect most of it.  We only need 500 to a thousand miles of wall, so either you're very misinformed on something that you're arguing against or you're intentionally posting false information to build your case.

The Great Wall is just proof that this type of structure can be built and withstand the test of time, and over 2000 years of technological advancements proves that it can get done while he's still in office.

The border is, by several accounts, about 1950 miles long. There is 650 miles of existing "wall". 

So that leaves 1300 miles with no man made wall.

According to the Washington Times and Fox News, there are 130 miles of natural barriers (an estimate).
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/27/ronald-vitiello-130-miles-of-border-wont-need-wall/
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trumps-border-wall-how-much-it-will-actually-cost-according-to-a-statistician

That still leaves about 1150 miles to cover.

By several accounts, the border is a little under 7% covered by natural barriers (130/1950). 33% of the border has walls already (650/1950). So that leaves about 60% of the border to cover (1170/1950).

So how do "natural barriers protect most of it?"

It's hard to take anything you say seriously when you're purporting that 7% = most of the border.

[Dill]

(01-31-2019, 02:09 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:

Citizens and employees of companies hired to construct the wall will build the wall.  They don't need to "quit their jobs and move to the border to build it."  Some people might be temporarily relocated with their companies, but not like they'll have to quit their jobs because it will be their job.

We also don't need a 2,000 mile wall since natural barriers protect most of it.  We only need 500 to a thousand miles of wall, so either you're very misinformed on something that you're arguing against or you're intentionally posting false information to build your case.

The Great Wall is just proof that this type of structure can be built and withstand the test of time, and over 2000 years of technological advancements proves that it can get done while he's still in office.

Well it hasn't wholly withstood the test of time. According to their tourist bureau over 1,000 miles of it have collapsed or disappeared.

Sure, with a plentiful supply of Russian steel, Trump could build the wall in two or three years maybe, finish it during his second term.

By the way, hundreds of illegals now come into the US through the Vermont border, which is only 90 miles in length. 

Once the southern border is controlled and drugs and illegals are only coming in through the usual checkpoints, we could turn our attention to the crisis in the north, stop any caravans making their way through Canada to Vermont. Build a wall there to protect Americans. It would create jobs there too.

[*michaelsean*]

(01-31-2019, 01:56 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So who builds this wall?  I still don't get it.  We need a 2000 mile long wall and apparently we have enough not-that-busy-but-still-competent people who are going to build it?

Again, help me out here, because I don't see how the Great Wall of China existing proves this project is going to get done while Trump is even still in office.  The Great Wall took what, 2000 years to build?  I guess Trump could have had it done in 2.  Call me skeptical.

Also, China is practically a 3rd world country.  Let's stop looking to them for innovative ideas.

The Chinese and the Romans built some pretty impressive walls a couple thousand years ago.  We can see if they want to do it again.  We may have to tweak the 13th amendment to allow for the "workers" they bring in.  I think the exclusion for convicts would only apply to people convicted here.