Bigdog (01-11-2019), cancel2 2022 (01-11-2019), Irish (01-11-2019), TOP (01-11-2019)
$5 billion is a drop in the federal "bucket", and if the Democrats really gave a shit about the DACA kids and the DREAMers, they'd be willing to negotiate some sort of legal protection in exchange for wall funding. The fact that they won't compromise at all illustrates how they'd rather play politics than find solutions to problems. Denying Trump a "win" is far more important to Chuck and Nancy than protecting the kids they claim to care so much about. What a bunch of phonies!
Bigdog (01-11-2019), cancel2 2022 (01-11-2019), Irish (01-11-2019), TOP (01-11-2019)
The Dems and Repubs had a deal with Daca. The reds were getting 20 billion to waste on a pretend wall. Guess who stopped it? It was Trump. Bad try.
cancel2 2022 (01-11-2019)
CharacterAssassin (01-11-2019), evince (01-11-2019), Frank Apisa (01-11-2019), Guno צְבִי (01-11-2019), reagansghost (01-11-2019)
Bigdog (01-11-2019), CFM (01-11-2019), Sirthinksalot (01-11-2019)
Bigdog (01-11-2019), Sirthinksalot (01-11-2019)
It would take 20 years to build a border wall. $5B over 20 years is nothing to the federal budget. $250M/year is like twice the pentegon's toilet paper budget. The dems are just being silly in refusing to compromise at all. They could counter with an agreement to do it in phases and then just kill the damn project when they have control back. They are just so thirsty they are refusing to give the Trump even the appearance of an illusion of a win.
Sirthinksalot (01-11-2019)
You're NOT Getting that Wall
ONE-N-DONE, YOU GOT PLAYED; Time To Play-On
Remember ... ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES ... So STFU Bitch
Frank Apisa (01-11-2019)
The wall comes with many costs, some obvious though hard to estimate, some unforeseen. The most obvious is the large financial outlay required to build it, in whatever form it eventually takes. Although during the election campaign candidate Trump claimed that the wall would cost only $12 billion, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) internal report in February put the cost at $21.6 billion, but that may be a major underestimate.
The estimates vary so widely because of the lack of clarity about what the wall will actually consist of beyond the first meager Homeland Security specifications that it be either a solid concrete wall or a see–through structure, “physically imposing in height,” ideally 30 feet high but no less than 18 feet, sunk at least six feet into the ground to prevent tunneling under it; that it should not be scalable with even sophisticated climbing aids; and that it should withstand prolonged attacks with impact tools, cutting tools, and torches. But that description doesn’t begin to cover questions about the details of its physical structure. Then there are the legal fees required to seize land on which to build the wall. The Trump administration can use eminent domain to acquire the land but will still have to negotiate compensation and often face lawsuits. More than 90 such lawsuits in southern Texas alone are still open from the 2008 effort to build a fence there.
https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-...es-and-mexico/
Schumer was for the wall until Trump was for it. Then he flipped. Complete shill!
Keep changing the names. It doesn't change the meaning.
Abortion
Pro-Choice
Women's rights
Women's Health
Sirthinksalot (01-11-2019)
Oh, it was so much more fun when Trump was saying, "What are we gonna build?"
And the puppets would cheer and yell back, "A wall!"
And then Trump would say, "And who is gonna pay for it?"
And the chumps would cheer and yell back, "Mexico."
And everyone would laugh and dance and cheer.
That was so much more fun for Trump's chump puppets.
What a goofball!
Will President Trump’s proposed wall make the United States safer? Why or why not?
Setting aside the question of whether there really is a national security crisis on the southern border, it is unlikely that the president’s proposal would make us safer. To be clear, the psychological and rhetorical appeal of a border wall is obvious: a wall offers a powerful and visible symbol that purportedly will provide a simple and straightforward solution to a knotty and complicated set of issues.
The problem is that such a solution is far too simple for at least three reasons. First, it relies on a misdiagnosis of the roots of many of the problems it seeks to solve, such as human and drug trafficking. Second, it ignores the physical diversity and logistical complexities of the 2,000 miles of southern border and what it actually takes to secure them. Third, building the proposed barrier would be very costly—anywhere from five to more than seventy billion dollars, the estimates vary widely—expenditures that appear especially foolhardy when what is instead required is a sophisticated mix of infrastructure, human beings, and technology, much of which is already in place.
https://now.tufts.edu/articles/true-costs-border-wall
Bookmarks