Building a Wall is a Giant Waste of Money

[Fast Eddy]

I don't know if you know this but in Mexico they have 2 state-of-the-art technologies that can defeat walls.
1. Ladders
2. Shovels

The fence slows them down allowing the border guards to catch them. Its just to easy to get in if you don't slow them down. I personally would top it with razor wire and high voltage, but I;m sure the bleeding hearts will have a problem with it.
A double fence makes getting in much harder and there is ground penetrating radar that will allow tunnels coming in to be detected.

 

[ObamacareForever]

The fence slows them down allowing the border guards to catch them. Its just to easy to get in if you don't slow them down. I personally would top it with razor wire and high voltage, but I;m sure the bleeding hearts will have a problem with it.
A double fence makes getting in much harder and there is ground penetrating radar that will allow tunnels coming in to be detected.

Can't go over it, can't go around it, gotta go under it.

 

[Max R.]

The fence slows them down allowing the border guards to catch them. Its just to easy to get in if you don't slow them down. I personally would top it with razor wire and high voltage, but I;m sure the bleeding hearts will have a problem with it.
A double fence makes getting in much harder and there is ground penetrating radar that will allow tunnels coming in to be detected.

Again, the easier solution is to remove the incentive for them to illegally cross the border in the first place.

Spending billions of American tax dollars to build a wall which won't stop illegal immigration is stupid versus passing and enforcing laws which will stop illegal immigration.

 

[Max R.]

Can't go over it, can't go around it, gotta go under it.

Around is easier. If Cubans can cross 90 miles of ocean to get to America, Mexicans can certainly float a few miles to do the same.

 

[TheResister]

The fence slows them down allowing the border guards to catch them. Its just to easy to get in if you don't slow them down. I personally would top it with razor wire and high voltage, but I;m sure the bleeding hearts will have a problem with it.
A double fence makes getting in much harder and there is ground penetrating radar that will allow tunnels coming in to be detected.

I'm going to change the tone a bit here. With respect to this wall idea, the Founding Fathers signed a document and our nation was built upon a premise:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." (Declaration of Independence)

Clearly the Founding Fathers did not intend to build a country to keep people out. While they allowed only white Christians to be citizens and hold elective office, we had an open door policy that allowed employers to hire whomever they wanted. As a matter of fact, our forefathers saw America as being the New Jerusalem of the Bible. You know... the land without walls (Zechariah 2:4)

Make no mistake. I'm no bleeding heart liberal (sic), but I'm wondering what some of you think changed. Liberty is a Right not given by government. We can regulate who comes here, but an absolute POLICE STATE to keep people out?

 

[reason10]

People crossing the southern border illegally, have to cross hundreds of miles of desert where they face a lack of food, water, first aid. Their lives are threatened by snakes, scorpions, and coyotes(both wild dogs and human traffickers). You think the are going to come all that way to see a 10 ft wall and turn around? No, they are going to go find the nearest Casa Depot, buy a 12 ft ladder and scale the wall, no problem. A wall wouldn't be a barrier to entering the country. Republicans want to spend billions of dollars on what will effectively be a minor nuisance to entering the U.S.
Legal Immigration is what needs to be reformed. It needs to be easier/cheaper/safer to enter the country legally than to cross illegally. Then we can at least see who is immigrating.

First of all, it'll be a FORTY FOOT tall structure. And it'll be guarded.
Secondly, it isn't going to cost America a penny. Mexico is paying for it.
Third, why don't you have a nice little chat with the father of Kate Steinle and tell him how wonderful those illegal aliens are.
Fourth, there's NOTHING wrong with our immigration laws. There's a LOT wrong with the [Unwelcome language removed] Democrat politicians who won't enforce those laws.

Trump is going to be elected in a landslide and he's going to kick the illegals OUT. That wall will keep the drug dealers, illegal weapons and future welfare bums/Democrat voters OUT.

 

[reason10]

For the life of me, I cannot understand this fear of Mexicans. Tell me again why we should spend countless billions to keep those good people out. What is it about Mexicans that drives the right wing nuts?

Talk to the parents of Kate Steinle.

 

[reason10]

What good is a wall when the President is bringing illegals in?

and doing nothing for Americans

Absolutely.

Folks, it matters who is president.
Make it Trump. The wall goes up. Drugs go down. Crime goes down. Illegals are GONE.

 

[Max R.]

First of all, it'll be a FORTY FOOT tall structure. And it'll be guarded.
Secondly, it isn't going to cost America a penny. Mexico is paying for it.
Third, why don't you have a nice little chat with the father of Kate Steinle and tell him how wonderful those illegal aliens are.
Fourth, there's NOTHING wrong with our immigration laws. There's a LOT wrong with the [Unwelcome language removed] Democrat politicians who won't enforce those laws.

Trump is going to be elected in a landslide and he's going to kick the illegals OUT. That wall will keep the drug dealers, illegal weapons and future welfare bums/Democrat voters OUT.

$1000 says that's pure, unmitigated bullshit. Only [Unwelcome language removed] morons believe Mexico will pay 10-15 BILLION dollars every [Unwelcome language removed] year for decades.

 

[reason10]

$1000 says that's pure, unmitigated bullshit. Only [Unwelcome language removed] morons believe Mexico will pay 10-15 BILLION dollars every [Unwelcome language removed] year for decades.

Anyone else but Trump make a statement like that and I'd be with you. Everyone else running this year is a political HACK who can only waste money.

THE DONALD will do it. And here's how.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/pay-for-the-wall


Introduction: The provision of the Patriot Act, Section 326 - the "know your customer" provision, compelling financial institutions to demand identity documents before opening accounts or conducting financial transactions is a fundamental element of the outline below. That section authorized the executive branch to issue detailed regulations on the subject, found at 31 CFR 130.120-121. It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year. There are several ways to compel Mexico to pay for the wall including the following:

• On day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31 CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to include wire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.
• On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
• On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
• Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States, in addition to revenue from any tariffs themselves. Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation. By definition, if you have a large trade deficit with a nation, it means they are selling far more to you than the reverse - thus they, not you, stand to lose from enforcing trade rules through tariffs (as has been done to save many U.S. industries in the past).
• Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points. We also have leverage through business and tourist visas for important people in the Mexican economy. Keep in mind, the United States has already taken in 4X more migrants than any other country on planet earth, producing lower wages and higher unemployment for our own citizens and recent migrants.
• Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year. The border-crossing card is also one of the greatest sources of illegal immigration into the United States, via overstays. Mexico is also the single largest recipient of U.S. green cards, which confer a path to U.S. citizenship. Again, we have the leverage so Mexico will back down.

Conclusion: Mexico has taken advantage of us in another way as well: gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States. The United States has borne the extraordinary daily cost of this criminal activity, including the cost of trials and incarcerations. Not to mention the even greater human cost. We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage. It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again.

How to get this through Congress?

Do you know a SINGLE Republican who wouldn't want to appeal to the party's base by building a wall and getting Mexico to pay for it?

Do you know a SINGLE Democrat who would not jump at the chance to remove the single greatest threat to union jobs: competition from illegal aliens?

Both parties will support this. It'll work.

Only THE DONALD could pull it off.

 

[Max R.]

Anyone else but Trump make a statement like that and I'd be with you. Everyone else running this year is a political HACK who can only waste money.

THE DONALD will do it. ........Only THE DONALD could pull it off.

So you are taking the $1000 bet?

 

[Max R.]

So you are taking the $1000 bet?

@reason10?

 

[Caroljo]

It's THIS easy to walk into America from Mexico.................

 

[TheResister]

It's THIS easy to walk into America from Mexico.................

Don't believe that. The reality is, many people die trying to come here just to work at Mickey Ds or cut your grass to feed their family.

Trump is playing a LOT of people. I keep quoting what Trump has said and what's he done in spite of his words. Who is backing him? My view is this:

Donald Trump has gotten a lot of support from RINOs, racists, the left, the right and down the middle (at least according to the MSM.) Well, I'd like to say something relative to the Donald Trump I see and then allow you to give me your take on my observations.

When Trump began touting his major political agenda, building a wall around the U.S. and the resulting rhetoric (mainly in style and phraseology) I was telling people that Trump was rehashing David Duke's rhetoric from the 1970s. Of course, that led to the charge that I was a lefty and a Marxist, etc. but, when Duke endorsed Trump, it put my critics on the spot.

Trump supporters will tell you how they chased white supremacists out of their rallies and so on and so forth, but that failed to impress me. While they were doing all of that, I remembered how Trump initially denied knowing David Duke. I knew the opposite to be true:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/02/donald-trump/trumps-absurd-claim-he-knows-nothing-about-former-/

So, what is the real end game? While Trump is supposedly disavowing Duke, poor ol' David Duke is strategizing to help Trump:

http://davidduke.com/want-vote-trump-pennsylvania-must-information/

Now, here is where the water gets murky for me. When Chris Christie was getting out of the presidential race, he took Marco Rubio down and then endorsed Trump. Christie is even on Trump's short list for VP:

http://politickernj.com/2016/04/trumpchristie-2016-the-viability-of-vice-president-chris-christie/

What was Trump's initial campaign platform? Wasn't it about building a wall around the U.S. and coming down on so-called "illegal aliens?" So, Trump attracts Christie and now let me quote Christie for you on the subject:

"U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie surprised many at a Dover church public forum when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act.

"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."

Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said.

"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04/immigrants_and_their_advocates.html
Now, this comes from the man that might be Trump's second in command if he isn't stopped soon. But, wait... there is more. I'd like to quote ANOTHER former U.S. Attorney that worked immigration cases. He endorsed Trump. Here are his words on the same subject regarding immigration:

"Being an illegal immigrant "is not a crime" and shouldn't be, Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani said ...

"It's not a crime," Giuliani said Friday. "I know that's very hard for people to understand, but it's not a federal crime."

Giuliani's comments came in an interview with CNN Headline News and radio talk-show host Glenn Beck.

"I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York," he said. "So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it's not a criminal proceeding. It's a civil proceeding."

Illegal immigration shouldn't be a crime, either, Giuliani said..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702066.html

So, there are the facts. I don't know what it all adds up to except for one thing:

You and I will never see a wall around the U.S. The politicians can talk smack all day long, but at the end of the day, you have a very liberal U.S. Supreme Court and they absolutely will not let that happen. That would be even more assured if the Christie / Giuliani types were serving in a Trump administration. Yet Duke is working on the Trump team. So, you tell me what it all means.

 

[PhilFish]

People crossing the southern border illegally, have to cross hundreds of miles of desert where they face a lack of food, water, first aid. Their lives are threatened by snakes, scorpions, and coyotes(both wild dogs and human traffickers). You think the are going to come all that way to see a 10 ft wall and turn around? No, they are going to go find the nearest Casa Depot, buy a 12 ft ladder and scale the wall, no problem. A wall wouldn't be a barrier to entering the country. Republicans want to spend billions of dollars on what will effectively be a minor nuisance to entering the U.S.
Legal Immigration is what needs to be reformed. It needs to be easier/cheaper/safer to enter the country legally than to cross illegally. Then we can at least see who is immigrating.

given all that you describe... it seems to me a cake walk, relatively speaking, to fill out the necessary paperwork and chillax until the legalities are processed..

sheeze..talkk about minor nuisances..

like the process is somehow HARDER than "crossing hundreds of miles of desert where they face a lack of food, water, first aid. Their lives are threatened by snakes, scorpions, and coyotes(both wild dogs and human traffickers"...and some nuisance wall, and having to buy a 12 foot ladder to scale it, yet..

 

[Woolleybugger]

Talk to the parents of Kate Steinle.

Really? Is that all you got? You people are deranged.

 

[Caroljo]

Don't believe that. The reality is, many people die trying to come here just to work at Mickey Ds or cut your grass to feed their family.

Trump is playing a LOT of people. I keep quoting what Trump has said and what's he done in spite of his words. Who is backing him? My view is this:

Donald Trump has gotten a lot of support from RINOs, racists, the left, the right and down the middle (at least according to the MSM.) Well, I'd like to say something relative to the Donald Trump I see and then allow you to give me your take on my observations.

When Trump began touting his major political agenda, building a wall around the U.S. and the resulting rhetoric (mainly in style and phraseology) I was telling people that Trump was rehashing David Duke's rhetoric from the 1970s. Of course, that led to the charge that I was a lefty and a Marxist, etc. but, when Duke endorsed Trump, it put my critics on the spot.

Trump supporters will tell you how they chased white supremacists out of their rallies and so on and so forth, but that failed to impress me. While they were doing all of that, I remembered how Trump initially denied knowing David Duke. I knew the opposite to be true:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/02/donald-trump/trumps-absurd-claim-he-knows-nothing-about-former-/

So, what is the real end game? While Trump is supposedly disavowing Duke, poor ol' David Duke is strategizing to help Trump:

http://davidduke.com/want-vote-trump-pennsylvania-must-information/

Now, here is where the water gets murky for me. When Chris Christie was getting out of the presidential race, he took Marco Rubio down and then endorsed Trump. Christie is even on Trump's short list for VP:

http://politickernj.com/2016/04/trumpchristie-2016-the-viability-of-vice-president-chris-christie/

What was Trump's initial campaign platform? Wasn't it about building a wall around the U.S. and coming down on so-called "illegal aliens?" So, Trump attracts Christie and now let me quote Christie for you on the subject:

"U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie surprised many at a Dover church public forum when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act.

"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."

Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said.

"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04/immigrants_and_their_advocates.html
Now, this comes from the man that might be Trump's second in command if he isn't stopped soon. But, wait... there is more. I'd like to quote ANOTHER former U.S. Attorney that worked immigration cases. He endorsed Trump. Here are his words on the same subject regarding immigration:

"Being an illegal immigrant "is not a crime" and shouldn't be, Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani said ...

"It's not a crime," Giuliani said Friday. "I know that's very hard for people to understand, but it's not a federal crime."

Giuliani's comments came in an interview with CNN Headline News and radio talk-show host Glenn Beck.

"I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York," he said. "So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it's not a criminal proceeding. It's a civil proceeding."

Illegal immigration shouldn't be a crime, either, Giuliani said..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702066.html

So, there are the facts. I don't know what it all adds up to except for one thing:

You and I will never see a wall around the U.S. The politicians can talk smack all day long, but at the end of the day, you have a very liberal U.S. Supreme Court and they absolutely will not let that happen. That would be even more assured if the Christie / Giuliani types were serving in a Trump administration. Yet Duke is working on the Trump team. So, you tell me what it all means.

I'm not that involved that I've really looked into Trump's retoric. He wasn't my first choice (or really a choice at all)....but if he chooses Christie as his VP he wouldn't get my vote for sure. I've said I may not vote at all....for the first time. I don't see a lesser of 2 evils this time around.

 

[reason10]

Really? Is that all you got? You people are deranged.

What the [Unwelcome language removed] do you mean is that all I got? The man's daughter was MURDERED.
What if it had been YOUR goddam daughter.

Talk about deranged!

 

[reason10]

Don't believe that. The reality is, many people die trying to come here just to work at Mickey Ds or cut your grass to feed their family.

Trump is playing a LOT of people. I keep quoting what Trump has said and what's he done in spite of his words. Who is backing him? My view is this:

Donald Trump has gotten a lot of support from RINOs, racists, the left, the right and down the middle (at least according to the MSM.) Well, I'd like to say something relative to the Donald Trump I see and then allow you to give me your take on my observations.

When Trump began touting his major political agenda, building a wall around the U.S. and the resulting rhetoric (mainly in style and phraseology) I was telling people that Trump was rehashing David Duke's rhetoric from the 1970s. Of course, that led to the charge that I was a lefty and a Marxist, etc. but, when Duke endorsed Trump, it put my critics on the spot.

Trump supporters will tell you how they chased white supremacists out of their rallies and so on and so forth, but that failed to impress me. While they were doing all of that, I remembered how Trump initially denied knowing David Duke. I knew the opposite to be true:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/02/donald-trump/trumps-absurd-claim-he-knows-nothing-about-former-/

So, what is the real end game? While Trump is supposedly disavowing Duke, poor ol' David Duke is strategizing to help Trump:

http://davidduke.com/want-vote-trump-pennsylvania-must-information/

Now, here is where the water gets murky for me. When Chris Christie was getting out of the presidential race, he took Marco Rubio down and then endorsed Trump. Christie is even on Trump's short list for VP:

http://politickernj.com/2016/04/trumpchristie-2016-the-viability-of-vice-president-chris-christie/

What was Trump's initial campaign platform? Wasn't it about building a wall around the U.S. and coming down on so-called "illegal aliens?" So, Trump attracts Christie and now let me quote Christie for you on the subject:

"U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie surprised many at a Dover church public forum when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act.

"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."

Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said.

"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04/immigrants_and_their_advocates.html
Now, this comes from the man that might be Trump's second in command if he isn't stopped soon. But, wait... there is more. I'd like to quote ANOTHER former U.S. Attorney that worked immigration cases. He endorsed Trump. Here are his words on the same subject regarding immigration:

"Being an illegal immigrant "is not a crime" and shouldn't be, Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani said ...

"It's not a crime," Giuliani said Friday. "I know that's very hard for people to understand, but it's not a federal crime."

Giuliani's comments came in an interview with CNN Headline News and radio talk-show host Glenn Beck.

"I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York," he said. "So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it's not a criminal proceeding. It's a civil proceeding."

Illegal immigration shouldn't be a crime, either, Giuliani said..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702066.html

So, there are the facts. I don't know what it all adds up to except for one thing:

You and I will never see a wall around the U.S. The politicians can talk smack all day long, but at the end of the day, you have a very liberal U.S. Supreme Court and they absolutely will not let that happen. That would be even more assured if the Christie / Giuliani types were serving in a Trump administration. Yet Duke is working on the Trump team. So, you tell me what it all means.

TOTALLY FULL OF SHIT.

No wonder everyone says you liberals are idiots.

 

[reason10]

So you are taking the $1000 bet?

I don't gamble. You're not that important to me. And the fact that I'm not going to irresponsibly throw away or risk that much money in no [Unwelcome language removed] way gives you any kind of moral or intellectual upper hand. In all truth, it makes you out to be a total IDIOT for actually think you could make a safe bet with someone on the internet at a crummy political message board.

I don't care if you agree or not. I don't care if intelligent people agree or disagree, so I damn sure don't care if you do or not. Your way has failed. It's time for new and novel thinking.

And right now, you represent the failed past.