Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, uhhello said:

Mexico IS paying for it bigly.  All the money we are saving thru new NAFTA is....

Even if we ignore the fact that this isn’t how trade agreements work, I just want to point out that the new NAFTA (known as the USMCA) has not been ratified and therefore isn’t currently in effect. We are not, by any stretch of the imagination, raking in billions of pesos from our friends south of the border.

Posted

Sorry bad link....just Google Countries that have some form of a physical hinderence   from illegal entry.  77 at last count according to many sources.....

Posted
6 minutes ago, mcbush said:

Even if we ignore the fact that this isn’t how trade agreements work, I just want to point out that the new NAFTA (known as the USMCA) has not been ratified and therefore isn’t currently in effect. We are not, by any stretch of the imagination, raking in billions of pesos from our friends south of the border.

I don't think ANYBODY believes him on this.  

Posted
1 hour ago, SHFP said:

Sorry bad link....just Google Countries that have some form of a physical hinderence   from illegal entry.  77 at last count according to many sources.....

But we are xenophobic for asking for one, makes sense. 

Posted
But we are xenophobic for asking for one, makes sense. 


America.... a country where an entire half of the population are “Islamaphobic racist white nationalists,” yet 1/3 of the people we resettle as refugees under Trump are scary brown people and Muslims.

I watched a movie on VICE network last night. They literally have a commercial running that is nothing but a recorded phone conversation of an illegal alien pleading how she should just be allowed in. It is entirely a point of view within the progressive Democratic Party that the mere enforcement of borders is some sort of draconian holdover and we should just allow anybody in. Those people don’t accept the idea of checked immigration much less a wall.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted
On 1/6/2019 at 7:49 PM, uhhello said:

Mexico IS paying for it bigly.  All the money we are saving thru new NAFTA is....

Great. Then we don't need to budget for  a wall. Just use that extra NAFTA cash we got coming in.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

That could be true...

From CNN:  Sell Wall Bonds

Who would set the coupon/maturity for this bond?  

We haven’t sold war bonds, significantly raised taxes, nor forced the bulk of the American people to shoulder increased cost or responsibility for the wars that we’re approaching the 17.5 year point in yet this guy somehow thinks there’s going to be an outpouring of public investment for building a wall?

  • Like 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

We haven’t sold war bonds, significantly raised taxes, nor forced the bulk of the American people to shoulder increased cost or responsibility for the wars that we’re approaching the 17.5 year point in yet this guy somehow thinks there’s going to be an outpouring of public investment for building a wall?

They did raise $14 million through a crowd funding initiative.

And bonds at least have a return.

Posted
We haven’t sold war bonds, significantly raised taxes, nor forced the bulk of the American people to shoulder increased cost or responsibility for the wars that we’re approaching the 17.5 year point in yet this guy somehow thinks there’s going to be an outpouring of public investment for building a wall?

Light a candle or curse the darkness
We should look at what has worked before if we are unable to make what we have now work
Sell the bonds, reopen the gubmint


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted
On 1/15/2019 at 6:32 AM, pawnman said:

They did raise $14 million through a crowd funding initiative.

And bonds at least have a return.

Fantastic! At that rate the wall will be fully funded in 69 years!

Posted
9 hours ago, Vertigo said:

Fantastic! At that rate the wall will be fully funded in 69 years!

I personally don't care if it ever gets funded, but bonds would at least levy the cost on the people who desperately want to build it.

  • Upvote 1
Posted (edited)

Why wasn’t the wall funded when both House and Senate were under GOP control?  If it didn’t happen then, slim chance of happening now with the new regime. 

Edited by budderbar
Posted
3 hours ago, budderbar said:

Why wasn’t the wall funded when both House and Senate were under GOP control?  If it didn’t happen then, slim chance of happening now with the new regime. 

Because Republicans seized every opportunity to not vote on it. Funding the wall became a White House priority after the Republicans lost the House.

Posted

‘Cause they don’t want to pay for it either. The President’s ego is apparently blocking his brain’s view of the bleak outlook of funding the wall. The democratic house majority was elected precisely not to give into Trump. Pro tip: They ain’t caving. If he had any advisers worth a shit left in his circle, they’d be telling him that. Instead he listens to Hannity and Limbaugh. Hamberders for all! Covfefe!

Posted
‘Cause they don’t want to pay for it either. The President’s ego is apparently blocking his brain’s view of the bleak outlook of funding the wall. The democratic house majority was elected precisely not to give into Trump. Pro tip: They ain’t caving. If he had any advisers worth a shit left in his circle, they’d be telling him that. Instead he listens to Hannity and Limbaugh. Hamberders for all! Covfefe!

5.7 billion for a wall that directly protects the security and sovereignty of ‘Merica vs 15 billion for what exactly in continuing the Syrian mission? 45 billion per year for Afghanistan? X billions per year deterring aggression for Germany with the 4th largest economy in the world?
Spending a modest amount to keep out illegal aliens (some from hostile nations and/or members of TNCOs) is well worth it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted
3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:


5.7 billion for a wall that directly protects the security and sovereignty of ‘Merica vs 15 billion for what exactly in continuing the Syrian mission? 45 billion per year for Afghanistan? X billions per year deterring aggression for Germany with the 4th largest economy in the world?
Spending a modest amount to keep out illegal aliens (some from hostile nations and/or members of TNCOs) is well worth it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

$5B isn't the total cost of the wall, that's what he's requesting to get started on the wall. Most estimates place the entire cost upwards of $50B-$100B.

Posted
4 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:


5.7 billion for a wall that directly protects the security and sovereignty of ‘Merica vs 15 billion for what exactly in continuing the Syrian mission? 45 billion per year for Afghanistan? X billions per year deterring aggression for Germany with the 4th largest economy in the world?
Spending a modest amount to keep out illegal aliens (some from hostile nations and/or members of TNCOs) is well worth it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That $5.7B, or whatever the media throws out, isn’t the total combined. It’s the start of the process to build the wall.

https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-wall-the-real-costs-of-a-barrier-between-the-united-states-and-mexico/

Posted
1 hour ago, Duck said:

What’s the yearly financial impact of illegal immigration?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

If all illegals were to suddenly disappear, the immediate impact would be a loss of $11.6B in tax revenues, roughly 8 million jobs that are dependent on the economic activity of that population would be lost, and low skilled labor costs would rise which in turn would cause in increase in the costs of goods and services to consumers.

  • Upvote 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...