How much wall for $5.6B...? - Page 7
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 205
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sydney Au
    Posts
    393
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    32
    Likes (Received)
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big B View Post
    Anybody heard anything about Stormy Daniels lately? Probably not with all the talk of the wall and shutdown going on. So trump's diversions are working for him. For now.
    Saw this the other day in an unrelated arena stormydaniels on Instagram: “Dakar Rally 219 in Peru! #TeamStormy #dakarrally #penthouseclub #penthousemagazine”. Your bloke will probably try to sell the idea to the nitwits to build that wall up to the stratopause to stop her coming back anytime soon.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,671
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    656
    Likes (Received)
    2077

    Default

    many poor choices are offered in life.

    Some take them.

  3. Likes Spinit liked this post
  4. #123
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    Peter

    Can you provide a wild ass guess as to the number of illegal crossings we tax payers are processing each year? And how many a "wall" would prevent?

    Exactly, How do those other nations do it? And the US Border can not? EXACTLY?

    I have read that each illegal costs US ( You and I) $82K (Border Patrol don't work for nothing you know.
    I could give two shits about what each "migrant" contributes to the "economy". Kids don't!
    Finally.
    Honest xenophobia and hatred of “the other”.
    Own it baby.

  5. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,699
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    414
    Likes (Received)
    4588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    . . .How do those other nations do it? And the US Border can not? EXACTLY? . . .
    My take is that those other countries have a national consensus on immigration -- how many they want in and who. Generally, on a per capita basis they take in a few more; but also make sure they're fit to contribute. The process is known, generally considered fair, and widely agreed. Thus, it's rarely circumvented. They just don't go about creating spectacles to make the next news cycle.

    Here in the US we have people like Trump calling all Mexicans rapists and murders on one hand -- and then hiring them to clean your hotel room, carry your bags, pick and cook your food, tend the lawns and walkways, and cut costs on building projects. There's a huge amount of hypocrisy involved.

    People try to come here to work -- because they can so easily get work. That's the main attraction. As noted earlier in this thread, Trump's own businesses don't use the single best tool we have to assure workers have legal status. You'd think Trump would mandate it?

    The way we might emulate these less-fuss countries is to have a sensible immigration policy. We came close when politicians like Jeb Bush and John McCain had a voice. We'd balance the needs of the economy (guest workers as a legal status?), humanitarian concerns to the extent they didn't detract from our own quality of life (letting in those able to commit and enhance our way of life), and protect our native born entry level workers (not trashing wages and opportunity for those entering the workforce).

    Then, we'd enforce that law. Would there be some right or left wing fraction still wanting to kill immigrants -- or wanting completely open borders? Sure. But if the national consensus was that we're a nation of laws, with sensible laws, we'd follow them in employment. And all the rest (fences, courts, wall, border patrols, etc.) would then get far easier and less contentious. Least that's my opinion.

    Sad thing is that we don't have a leader capable of forging a national consensus. Instead, he's lived his life, won his party's primary, then the election, and now governs through lies -- and denigrating and dividing people.

  6. Likes Spinit, mmcgrew10l liked this post
  7. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    My take is that those other countries have a national consensus on immigration -- how many they want in and who. Generally, on a per capita basis they take in a few more; but also make sure they're fit to contribute. The process is know, fair, agreed, and not circumvented. They just don't go about creating spectacles to make the next news cycle.

    Here in the US we people like Trump calling all Mexicans rapists and murders on one hand -- and then hiring them to clean hotel rooms, carry your bags, provision and man casino kitchens, and cut costs on building projects. There's a huge amount of hypocrisy involved.

    People come here to work -- because they can so easily get work. That's the main attraction. As noted earlier in this thread, Trump's own businesses don't use the single best tool we have to assure workers have legal status.

    The way we might emulate these less-fuss countries is to have a sensible immigration policy. Came close when politicians like Jeb Bush and John McCain had a voice. We'd balance the needs of the economy (guest workers as a legal status?), humanitarian concerns to the extent they didn't detract from our own quality of life (letting in those able to commit and enhance our way of life), and especially our native born entry level workers (not trashing wages and opportunity for those entering the workforce). Then, enforce it.
    It’s also worth noting that most nations have an historical basis in nativist and particularly white supremacy as a basis for their immigration policy.

  8. #126
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vt USA
    Posts
    6,671
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    656
    Likes (Received)
    2077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    My take is that those other countries have a national consensus on immigration -- how many they want in and who. Generally, on a per capita basis they take in a few more; but also make sure they're fit to contribute. The process is known, generally considered fair, and widely agreed. Thus, it's rarely circumvented. They just don't go about creating spectacles to make the next news cycle.


    Here in the US we have people like Trump calling all Mexicans rapists and murders on one hand -- and then hiring them to clean your hotel room, carry your bags, pick and cook your food, tend the lawns and walkways, and cut costs on building projects. There's a huge amount of hypocrisy involved.

    People try to come here to work -- because they can so easily get work. That's the main attraction. As noted earlier in this thread, Trump's own businesses don't use the single best tool we have to assure workers have legal status. You'd think Trump would mandate it?

    The way we might emulate these less-fuss countries is to have a sensible immigration policy. We came close when politicians like Jeb Bush and John McCain had a voice. We'd balance the needs of the economy (guest workers as a legal status?), humanitarian concerns to the extent they didn't detract from our own quality of life (letting in those able to commit and enhance our way of life), and protect our native born entry level workers (not trashing wages and opportunity for those entering the workforce).

    Then, we'd enforce that law. Would there be some fraction still wanting to kill immigrants -- or wanting completely open borders? Sure. But if the national consensus was that we're a nation of laws, with sensible laws, we'd follow them in employment. And all the rest (fences, courts, wall, border patrols, etc.) would then get far easier and less contentious. Least that's my opinion.

    Sad thing is that we don't have a leader capable of forging a national consensus. Instead, he's lived his life, won his party's primary, then the election, and now governs through lies and dividing and denigrating people.
    So you choose to blame this head of state for the weakness that has been patterned by those who came before.

    I find that weak

    But, If the solution were to refuse welfare assistance and employment permissiveness, that would reduce the value of any wall. Can we get there?

    there was/ is a reason why "dissidents" that threatened to move to Canada over many issues since the 60's DID NOT! The Canadians did not have their arms open with welcome.

  9. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,699
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    414
    Likes (Received)
    4588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    So you choose to blame this head of state for the weakness that has been patterned by those who came before.

    I find that weak

    But, If the solution were to refuse welfare assistance and employment permissiveness, that would reduce the value of any wall. Can we get there . . ..
    Cal, three points:

    First, while the immigration question has been kicked around for decades (who gets green cards, what about illegal immigrants, etc.) -- it wasn't the HUGE EMERGENCY THREATENING US WITH RAPE AND MURDER until Trump made it so. It should be a priority, but compared to half a dozen other things, it's nowhere near Job One. Even our Demagogue-in-Chief didn't consider it a priority in the two years Republicans controlled the House and Senate.

    Second, illegal immigrants aren't entitled to welfare. You find it weak that we haven't dealt with this before. What I find weak is that your news sources apparently haven't bothered to mention that back in 1996 Bill Clinton signed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. It has prohibited giving illegal immigrants welfare etc. for over twenty years. Guess we forgot to piss off enough people, shut down the government, mess up families etc. for this bit of legislation to be memorable?

    Third, yes, the main attraction is people happy to look the other way in hiring undocumented workers for their personal gain. Businesses, like Trump's do it. Homeowners and small contractors do it. A better approach might be guest worker status? Amazingly some both hire illegals and complain about them. The US drug market is another "attraction" -- and one I've covered before. The wall won't fix either the employment or the drug problems. Or, for that matter, the conditions people are fleeing from.

    I do think we "can get there." But it will take a consensus builder rather than a fear monger to get us there.

  10. Likes mmcgrew10l liked this post
  11. #128
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    We can’t jail and fine the employers...trumps organization and bed are part of it.

  12. #129
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    Ohhhh...due to the shutdown.
    E Verify is shut down so employers can’t check.

  13. #130
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    100
    Likes (Received)
    1590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CalG View Post
    Peter

    Can you provide a wild ass guess as to the number of illegal crossings we tax payers are processing each year? And how many a "wall" would prevent?

    Exactly, How do those other nations do it? And the US Border can not? EXACTLY?

    I have read that each illegal costs US ( You and I) $82K (Border Patrol don't work for nothing you know.
    I could give two shits about what each "migrant" contributes to the "economy". Kids don't!
    Cal, please look at this, just look at the pictures, you don't have to actually read:

    Trump Claims There Is a Crisis at the Border. What’s the Reality? - The New York Times

    Answers most of your questions

    I don't know where your 82k number comes from


    We need immigrants, without immigrants, our population will be shrinking, and with a shrinking population there will be no one left to pay your social security.

    And there are mnore of you, our population is increasing because people are not dying, not because people are immigrating or being born

    the reason there is 'illegal' immigration is we have failed to adequately update immigration policies

    we need the people, it would be wise to create a system whereby we know who those people are.

  14. Likes Ries, mmcgrew10l liked this post
  15. #131
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    100
    Likes (Received)
    1590

    Default

    OK, so the 82k number is a lie



    right wing think tank
    >>>
    The new figure by the CIS estimates what it takes to protect the border, educate, house and feed illegal immigrants and makes the assumption they will spend a lifetime on various welfare programs.
    <<

    from fox news

  16. #132
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,110
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2679
    Likes (Received)
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteM View Post
    My take is that those other countries have a national consensus on immigration -- how many they want in and who. Generally, on a per capita basis they take in a few more; but also make sure they're fit to contribute. The process is known, generally considered fair, and widely agreed. Thus, it's rarely circumvented. They just don't go about creating spectacles to make the next news cycle.

    Here in the US we have people like Trump calling all Mexicans rapists and murders on one hand -- and then hiring them to clean your hotel room, carry your bags, pick and cook your food, tend the lawns and walkways, and cut costs on building projects. There's a huge amount of hypocrisy involved.

    People try to come here to work -- because they can so easily get work. That's the main attraction. As noted earlier in this thread, Trump's own businesses don't use the single best tool we have to assure workers have legal status. You'd think Trump would mandate it?

    The way we might emulate these less-fuss countries is to have a sensible immigration policy. We came close when politicians like Jeb Bush and John McCain had a voice. We'd balance the needs of the economy (guest workers as a legal status?), humanitarian concerns to the extent they didn't detract from our own quality of life (letting in those able to commit and enhance our way of life), and protect our native born entry level workers (not trashing wages and opportunity for those entering the workforce).

    Then, we'd enforce that law. Would there be some right or left wing fraction still wanting to kill immigrants -- or wanting completely open borders? Sure. But if the national consensus was that we're a nation of laws, with sensible laws, we'd follow them in employment. And all the rest (fences, courts, wall, border patrols, etc.) would then get far easier and less contentious. Least that's my opinion.

    Sad thing is that we don't have a leader capable of forging a national consensus. Instead, he's lived his life, won his party's primary, then the election, and now governs through lies -- and denigrating and dividing people.
    I whole heartedly agree . I know there are real problems yet I see these people and most all are stellar people. I also know it is wrong to come illegally. I can not separate the two and be hard core. I just have got a nature in myself that prevents that.

    Having said that I do believe in better measures of control and we do not need to just open the doors and let in economic illegal intranets. It is too extreme to allow only mostly those kinds of entrants. The flow has been other kinds of immigrants who do it the right way for whom there is much better motives and respect for our law. That really means something in sight of the magnitude of the problem it keeps things controlled avoiding a very negative tipping point being reached. This disaster must be checked and Trump is right that solutions (whatever agreed upon) are many administrations past due.

  17. #133
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Posts
    6,392
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    227
    Likes (Received)
    1370

    Default

    For two years there was complete control of the house, the senate and executive branch by the republicans. At the end of the their term, with full control and thus, the ability to push through any legislation they want, they leave the government shut down and it's somehow the incoming democrats fault for not instantly conceding.

    And you people are making "do you sleep with your doors open" arguments. I'm surprised nobody's been called a snowflake.

  18. Likes mmcgrew10l liked this post
  19. #134
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    PITTSBURGH, PA.
    Posts
    1,092
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    358
    Likes (Received)
    75

    Default

    Funny, the wall around Israel seems to work.... Why not here????

  20. #135
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    100
    Likes (Received)
    1590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MICK 1958 View Post
    Funny, the wall around Israel seems to work.... Why not here????
    Even Israel doesn't have a complete border wall

    they have a wall where they think they need it


    And even then it is not non controversial

    much private property taken etc

  21. #136
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spinit View Post
    I whole heartedly agree . I know there are real problems yet I see these people and most all are stellar people. I also know it is wrong to come illegally. I can not separate the two and be hard core. I just have got a nature in myself that prevents that.

    Having said that I do believe in better measures of control and we do not need to just open the doors and let in economic illegal intranets. It is too extreme to allow only mostly those kinds of entrants. The flow has been other kinds of immigrants who do it the right way for whom there is much better motives and respect for our law. That really means something in sight of the magnitude of the problem it keeps things controlled avoiding a very negative tipping point being reached. This disaster must be checked and Trump is right that solutions (whatever agreed upon) are many administrations past due.
    The only people talking about open borders are the right wing fear mongers.

  22. #137
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,465
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    50
    Likes (Received)
    5508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Even Israel doesn't have a complete border wall

    they have a wall where they think they need it


    And even then it is not non controversial

    much private property taken etc
    In all fairness they are only taking land from indigenous Palestinian people.

  23. #138
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northern Il
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    626
    Likes (Received)
    1087

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    For two years there was complete control of the house, the senate and executive branch by the republicans. At the end of the their term, with full control and thus, the ability to push through any legislation they want, they leave the government shut down and it's somehow the incoming democrats fault for not instantly conceding.

    And you people are making "do you sleep with your doors open" arguments. I'm surprised nobody's been called a snowflake.
    That is not quite accurate.

    There is the cloture rule which requires 60 votes in the Senate to end a filibuster so that a vote can be taken to pass a bill.

    There is also the 2/3 majority rule for changing Senate rules.

    So for a party to actually control the House and Senate they need at least 60 votes in the Senate and a majority in the House and then if a bill does get passed and receives a Presidential veto, the House must have a 2/3 majority vote to override the veto.

    Last time this happened was under Obama in 2009-2011. Before then it was in 1977-1979. It does not happen very often.

    As you can see, unless both parties can at least agree on some things, it is very difficult to get anything to pass. This is also what leads to all of the pork barrel deals.

  24. #139
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Posts
    6,392
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    227
    Likes (Received)
    1370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy2 View Post
    That is not quite accurate.

    There is the cloture rule which requires 60 votes in the Senate to end a filibuster so that a vote can be taken to pass a bill.

    There is also the 2/3 majority rule for changing Senate rules.

    So for a party to actually control the House and Senate they need at least 60 votes in the Senate and a majority in the House and then if a bill does get passed and receives a Presidential veto, the House must have a 2/3 majority vote to override the veto.

    Last time this happened was under Obama in 2009-2011. Before then it was in 1977-1979. It does not happen very often.

    As you can see, unless both parties can at least agree on some things, it is very difficult to get anything to pass. This is also what leads to all of the pork barrel deals.
    If the GOP wanted the wall, they could have gotten it passed prior to the new year. This is all a distraction.

  25. #140
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northern Il
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    626
    Likes (Received)
    1087

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    If the GOP wanted the wall, they could have gotten it passed prior to the new year. This is all a distraction.
    They did not have the 60 votes in the Senate for cloture to end debate and call a vote. So the House Bill would have not been able to be voted on and is why McConnell never brought it up for debate.

    There was the re-conciliation strategy that McConnell could have used but I'm not sure if that would have worked either.

    The fact remains that seldom does either party ever actually have full control of the House and Senate.

    This is very fortunate for us as it prevents simple majority mob rule. Both sides must at least muster partial support to pass anything.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
2