Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JoyinMudville

Trump Threatens to Shut Government To Force Dems to Pay for Wall He Said Mexico Would Pay For

333 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

 

 

If you spend $15-20 billion and you save that much after 10 years, your wall has cost $0.  After that, you actually start getting a net surplus for taxpayers.  This isn't new math, it's old math that anyone can figure out.  And no, getting around, under or over the wall will be quite difficult.  That's why there are lots of walls in the world.  They work.

 

Hey ....Ver.... who is your dealer.... I gotta get me some of that......

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey ....Ver.... who is your dealer.... I gotta get me some of that......

If you install a solar heating system, after a certain number of years of lower energy costs, it has paid for itself, right?  Why is this complicated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Not my battle, but no, they are not.

 

Oh, and what's the fascination from righties, such as yourself, with "white flags", "wetting themselves" and "limp wrists"?

Right, because nobody has ever used the term white flag.  You have some fixation with me.  Admitting it is the first step to getting help. :)

Edited by veritas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait to see the limp wrists going crazy as the wall gets built.

I hope your grandchildren enjoy the extra debt 'cause Mexico ain't paying for **it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first paragraph is inaccurate as I nowhere attributed falling illegal immigration to Trump, although he may have expedited its existing decline.  Secondly, it will not be easy to get under, over or through the wall.  There is no basis for that claim.  Thirdly, if people crossing the border illegally only represent half, or even 40% of illegals, isn't it worth cutting that to a trickle?  Fourth, I've said before that we need to be able to track and deport people here overstaying their visas.  That's all part of the effort.  Lastly, no, Mexico isn't writing us a check for the wall.  I've never indicated that and I'm not sure too many people actually believed it.  It will be paid for in savings from keeping them out to begin with. Oh, and despite what you think, I didn't vote for Trump in the primary.  I didn't vote at all in the general election.

 

I would genually like to see the statistics and breakdown that you are using to justify building a wall vs stepped up enforcement as it stands. That is I need a figure that says X numbers of illegals come in over a year multiplied by the dollar amount spent per person on social services. And see how things balance out.

 

Don't rush.... I got all afternoon. Or month, Or year...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for the wall, it would be a gigantic useless waste of money.  The wall simply won't do a damn thing.  Why?  Because not only will those intent on coming across our southern border find a way around, over or under the wall, but they only represent a small portion of the folks in this country illegally.  

But at least it will help the Mexican economy. Especially the producers of ladders and shovels.

 

I maintain the wall would be pretty useless unless there are armed guards to prevent people from tunneling under and climbing over. If you have the armed guards, then you don't need the wall. Seems like a high school logic problem to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** the wall.

 

If donald and supporters want a wall.....start a gofundme page for your stupid wall.

Hmm, perhaps we can extend this philosophy to much government spending. 

 

We need a new F35, bridge in Atlanta, and increase spending on Head Start to cover kids up to age 35,  please contribute on http://my.cash.based.democracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's an appeal to actually enforcing the law rather than winking at it.   Reducing illegal immigration is good for ALL our citizens, white, black, brown or other.  But keep making it about racism.  It's worked so well up to now.

 

Ahhhh MMMMaaaaayyyybbbeeee. I some of you got your head out of  your you know what and actually paid attention to the news. You would know that Trump is pretty much on pace with what Obama did regarding illegals.

 

The only diff is that Obama kept it quiet and Trump announces when he takes a good poop. 

 

I thought it would be great..... but it was HHHHHUUUUGGGGHHHHHHH....no one could believe it ... what I did...totally .....GRRREATTTT.....btw did I mention it was HUUUUUGGGGGGHH......

 

Sheessssh ;):D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhhh MMMMaaaaayyyybbbeeee. I some of you got your head out of  your you know what and actually paid attention to the news. You would know that Trump is pretty much on pace with what Obama did regarding illegals.

 

The only diff is that Obama kept it quiet and Trump announces when he takes a good poop. 

 

I thought it would be great..... but it was HHHHHUUUUGGGGHHHHHHH....no one could believe it ... what I did...totally .....GRRREATTTT.....btw did I mention it was HUUUUUGGGGGGHH......

 

Sheessssh ;):D :D

Turning people back at the border is not a deportation, despite what Obama thinks.  Trump is actually attempting to track down and get rid of felons and others here illegally.  No more catch and release nonsense either.  Oh, here's a paper.  Come to court in 60 days.  Yea, sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah know, looking ahead, lets say the gov shutsdown because of Trump-wall, lets say he somehow screws us with healthcare, lets say he refuses to release his taxes, lets say in conjucntion with that he takes care of his buds in the 1%... and so on.

 

Watch out.....very much like the Japanese said after Pearl Harbor.... Trump will awaken a sleeping giant. Like this.......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would genually like to see the statistics and breakdown that you are using to justify building a wall vs stepped up enforcement as it stands. That is I need a figure that says X numbers of illegals come in over a year multiplied by the dollar amount spent per person on social services. And see how things balance out.

 

Don't rush.... I got all afternoon. Or month, Or year...........

I can give you studies but you'll whine over who is doing them.  That keeping out as many illegals as possible saves us large amounts of money is hardly arguable. That it will pay for the wall is certain.  Now, whether stepping up enforcement under the current conditions will do the same thing is another issue and one I haven't seen studied.  But what happens when the next Democrat gets in and all that enforcement vanishes?  The wall will at least be there for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does he figure this deal gets enough votes to pass even with Dems?

If Trump promises this job to union contractors, the AFL-CIO will snap their fingers and Democrats may be boxed in a corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turning people back at the border is not a deportation, despite what Obama thinks.  Trump is actually attempting to track down and get rid of felons and others here illegally.  No more catch and release nonsense either.  Oh, here's a paper.  Come to court in 60 days.  Yea, sure.

 

Stats show me stats. Who got turned back, who got shipped back and when.

Otherwise sit down and shut up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can give you studies but you'll whine over who is doing them.  That keeping out as many illegals as possible saves us large amounts of money is hardly arguable. That it will pay for the wall is certain.  Now, whether stepping up enforcement under the current conditions will do the same thing is another issue and one I haven't seen studied.  But what happens when the next Democrat gets in and all that enforcement vanishes?  The wall will at least be there for good.

 

Then present them. I don't whine I comment. Hard cold facts... put up or shut up.

 

Unfortunately, gut-runners like you on both sides of the line give debate a bad name.

 

So, your turn. Facts buddy facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump promises this job to union contractors, the AFL-CIO will snap their fingers and Democrats may be boxed in a corner.

Yes I get that he is trying to get the dems on board.  The things he has to do to get that will not engender 33 Republicans (assuming the Hassert rule is dead).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turning people back at the border is not a deportation, despite what Obama thinks.  Trump is actually attempting to track down and get rid of felons and others here illegally.  No more catch and release nonsense either.  Oh, here's a paper.  Come to court in 60 days.  Yea, sure.

 

The Obama administration deported more illegal aliens than the previous administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Obama administration deported more illegal aliens than the previous administration.

Not according to some on this thread. According to them Trump already has. ;):lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then present them. I don't whine I comment. Hard cold facts... put up or shut up.

 

Unfortunately, gut-runners like you on both sides of the line give debate a bad name.

 

So, your turn. Facts buddy facts.

I've been in here debating since long before you made an appearance.  Here's some data for you.  

 

http://cis.org/The-Cost-of-a-Border-Wall-vs-the-Cost-of-Illegal-Immigration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The Obama administration deported more illegal aliens than the previous administration.

I have no idea how many people Bush deported.  I do know that calling it a deportation when turning people back at the border is specious fudging of the numbers, regardless of who does it.

Edited by veritas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've been in here debating since long before you made an appearance. Here's some data for you.

 

http://cis.org/The-Cost-of-a-Border-Wall-vs-the-Cost-of-Illegal-Immigration

That is a biased source and is predictably innaccuate:

 

"Camarota’s Estimation Of Immigrant’s Use Of Government Benefits Is Based On A Debunked Study. The CIS report assumes that immigrants “receive far more in government benefits than they pay in taxes." That assertion comes from a Heritage Foundation study from 2013 by Robert Rector and Jason Richwine. The Cato Institute reviewed that report, concluding that it is “depressingly static, leading to a massive underestimation of the economic benefits of immigration and diminishing estimated tax revenue” because it “explicitly refuses to consider the GDP growth and economic productivity gains from immigration reform—factors that increase native-born American incomes.” It is also important to note that Richwine has a history of disseminating “fundamentally flawed” reports on immigration and has opined that Latinos may “never reach IQ parity” with white people. From the May 7, 2013, Cato Institute analysis of the Heritage Foundation report...

 

 

The Cost Of The Wall Will Be Much Higher Than The Report Estimates. CIS’ claims are based on some of the earliest estimates of the cost of the wall, creating a range based on Trump’s figure of $12 billion and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) estimate of $15 billion. A Reuters report based on a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report estimated that the border wall “would cost as much as $21.6 billion.” The report also noted that another group, Bernstein Research, has pegged the cost at about $25 billion after taking into account “uncertainties around the project that could drive its cost up.” These estimates did not take into account the ongoing cost of maintaining the wall. From the February 9 Reuters article...

 

 

The Report Places An Arbitrary And Overly Generous Number On The Wall’s Effectiveness. The CIS report discusses various figures for the number of people the wall might prevent from coming into the United States: “9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross [the border] in the next decade,” and “half of those expected to successfully enter illegally” to claim that “it would save taxpayers nearly $64 billion,” even though there is no evidence to support either level of effectiveness. There have been a number of reports explaining that building a wall would be ineffective at stopping illegal immigration. The Cato Institute’s David Bier told Wired, “At a basic level, a wall or fence can never stop illegal immigration because a wall or fence cannot apprehend anyone.” The Wired report also explained that many immigrants “do not attempt to circumvent border control, but instead go to entry points willingly and seek asylum or other protections.” BBC explained that “it’s next to impossible to construct a wall that can’t be tunnelled under,” adding, “Since 1990, federal agents have discovered more than 200 tunnels under the existing border walls.” Additionally, as Forbes pointed out, “analysts believe the majority (possibly vast majority) of illegal immigrants enter America by air” because many “arrive in America with a visa - and then simply don't leave.” The Migration Policy Institute noted that a border wall would not deter immigrants fleeing poverty and execution but rather steer them “to alternative routes,” which would undoubtedly result in “an increase in the number of deaths.” Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) own estimates confirmed that finding, concluding that while there was a drop in apprehensions where a fence existed, “the drop there was followed by a spike in apprehensions” in other areas. CBP also found that breaches to the border fence in fiscal year 2010 cost the agency “at least $7.2 million to repair.” Experts including CBP officials, law enforcement officials along the southern border, senators, and former DHS secretaries have been vocal in their opposition to the wall, saying that it would be “of little or no value” and that it’s “one of the dumbest ideas.” [Wired, 1/19/17; BBC, 1/26/17; Forbes, 1/28/17; Migration Policy Institute, 10/5/16; Bloomberg, 2/13/17; Media Matters, 12/1/17; 9/1/16, The Hill, 7/13/16]"

 

https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/02/23/nativist-group-going-all-out-sell-trumps-border-wall-proposal/215435

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've been in here debating since long before you made an appearance.  Here's some data for you.  

 

http://cis.org/The-Cost-of-a-Border-Wall-vs-the-Cost-of-Illegal-Immigration

 

Geeeeeeezzzzzz!!!!  You are using the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) as your data sources.  Fellow, you might as well wiped your rear and used that.  I can't believe you use CIS.  It's crack pipe K Street DC outfit known for things like advocating selective breeding and other far out thoughts.  Flush this BS organization and it's analysis....  

 

:D   CIS, CIS....Get Real!

Edited by BaySock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geeeeeeezzzzzz!!!!  You are using the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) as your data sources.  Fellow, you might as well wiped your rear and used that.  I can't believe you use CIS.  It's crack pipe K Street DC outfit known for things like advocating selective breeding and other far out thoughts.  Flush this BS organization and it's analysis....  

 

:D   CIS, CIS....Get Real!

Just like I said.  Complaining about the source.  Naturally, open border folks will have their own "numbers" so what's the point?  Both will think the other wrong but common sense tells you that keeping out illegals saves money.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Illegal immigration is already way down.  It could be cut to a trickle with the wall added.  Multiply the savings to taxpayers of each of those people who does not come here illegally and the wall will easily pay for itself inside of a decade.

 

I think you have fallen for the wall scam much in the way semi auto fell for the Susan Rice scam.

 

Trump shouldn't need Democrats to vote for the wall, unless Republicans refuse to vote for it. Perhaps those Republicans see the scam.

 

Look at the man you are dealing with, our president. He will support anything that he thinks will win him favor. He stands for virtually nothing.

 

True, that as a leading Obama birther, he is an incredible racist who really would like to rid the country of brown people. But the fact is, other than a lot of bitter, white nationalists, on this issue, he doesn't have many people on his side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a biased source and is predictably innaccuate:

 

"Camarota’s Estimation Of Immigrant’s Use Of Government Benefits Is Based On A Debunked Study. The CIS report assumes that immigrants “receive far more in government benefits than they pay in taxes." That assertion comes from a Heritage Foundation study from 2013 by Robert Rector and Jason Richwine. The Cato Institute reviewed that report, concluding that it is “depressingly static, leading to a massive underestimation of the economic benefits of immigration and diminishing estimated tax revenue” because it “explicitly refuses to consider the GDP growth and economic productivity gains from immigration reform—factors that increase native-born American incomes.” It is also important to note that Richwine has a history of disseminating “fundamentally flawed” reports on immigration and has opined that Latinos may “never reach IQ parity” with white people. From the May 7, 2013, Cato Institute analysis of the Heritage Foundation report...

 

 

The Cost Of The Wall Will Be Much Higher Than The Report Estimates. CIS’ claims are based on some of the earliest estimates of the cost of the wall, creating a range based on Trump’s figure of $12 billion and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) estimate of $15 billion. A Reuters report based on a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report estimated that the border wall “would cost as much as $21.6 billion.” The report also noted that another group, Bernstein Research, has pegged the cost at about $25 billion after taking into account “uncertainties around the project that could drive its cost up.” These estimates did not take into account the ongoing cost of maintaining the wall. From the February 9 Reuters article...

 

 

The Report Places An Arbitrary And Overly Generous Number On The Wall’s Effectiveness. The CIS report discusses various figures for the number of people the wall might prevent from coming into the United States: “9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross [the border] in the next decade,” and “half of those expected to successfully enter illegally” to claim that “it would save taxpayers nearly $64 billion,” even though there is no evidence to support either level of effectiveness. There have been a number of reports explaining that building a wall would be ineffective at stopping illegal immigration. The Cato Institute’s David Bier told Wired, “At a basic level, a wall or fence can never stop illegal immigration because a wall or fence cannot apprehend anyone.” The Wired report also explained that many immigrants “do not attempt to circumvent border control, but instead go to entry points willingly and seek asylum or other protections.” BBC explained that “it’s next to impossible to construct a wall that can’t be tunnelled under,” adding, “Since 1990, federal agents have discovered more than 200 tunnels under the existing border walls.” Additionally, as Forbes pointed out, “analysts believe the majority (possibly vast majority) of illegal immigrants enter America by air” because many “arrive in America with a visa - and then simply don't leave.” The Migration Policy Institute noted that a border wall would not deter immigrants fleeing poverty and execution but rather steer them “to alternative routes,” which would undoubtedly result in “an increase in the number of deaths.” Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) own estimates confirmed that finding, concluding that while there was a drop in apprehensions where a fence existed, “the drop there was followed by a spike in apprehensions” in other areas. CBP also found that breaches to the border fence in fiscal year 2010 cost the agency “at least $7.2 million to repair.” Experts including CBP officials, law enforcement officials along the southern border, senators, and former DHS secretaries have been vocal in their opposition to the wall, saying that it would be “of little or no value” and that it’s “one of the dumbest ideas.” [Wired, 1/19/17; BBC, 1/26/17; Forbes, 1/28/17; Migration Policy Institute, 10/5/16; Bloomberg, 2/13/17; Media Matters, 12/1/17; 9/1/16, The Hill, 7/13/16]"

 

https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/02/23/nativist-group-going-all-out-sell-trumps-border-wall-proposal/215435

Like I said, everyone has an opinion.  What can't happen is maintaining a leaky border and letting people overstay visas.  There is nothing wrong with immigration but it must be legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, everyone has an opinion.  What can't happen is maintaining a leaky border and letting people overstay visas.  There is nothing wrong with immigration but it must be legal.

Unless they go after the demand side with the same gusto, it is all posturing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0