• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

President Trump: Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
If he really wants to throw this much money at border security, the money would be better spent on more Border Patrol agents, surveillance equipment and aerial assets.
 
"Drain the swamp"?
Well... sorta, if you factor in an exodus/enclave in Florida.

The annual membership fee at Mar-A-Lago just doubled to $200k.
Sorry industry... if you can't afford it for your lobbyist(s), they just can't hob knob with the Prez at the "Winter Whitehouse".

So sad.

---

I think we passed the emoluments equivalent of Ludicrous Speed a ways back... we've gone to Plaid. :boggled:
 
Last edited:
This looks kind of like a blog post but the estimate does range as high as forty billion dollars. From the link:
That makes a 1,000-mile wall pencil out at $27 billion to $40 billion.
Click to expand...
 
newyorkguy said:
This looks kind of like a blog post but the estimate does range as high as forty billion dollars. From the link:
Click to expand...


I seem to recall the 25B being accepted as a good high estimate.
But we know how Teh Donald is with schedules and budgets, so... $48 Billion and completion around 2042? :D
 
Marcus said:
To take some of the financial aid money you mean? I imagine Congress could do that. It's not something I would be in favor of.
Click to expand...
I highlighted the part below I was responding to.

Trump claims he can implement a fee on all those Western Union money transfers where immigrants who work here send money home to their families in Mexico. Trump does not have the authority to do any such thing.

Marcus said:
A wire transfer fee on the money sent home, plus redacting some of the financial aide money sent to Mexico. I don't know if anyone has figured out how many centuries that would take, the cost of a wall is yuge.
Click to expand...

As for the aid money, that's your typical military aid the US gives to many countries which eventually ends up in the coffers of the US and multinational military industrial complex.

But if you believe NewsMax:
Mexico itself has an invisible wall along its southern border with Central America as migrants head north.

A Financial Times story details Mexico's role in stopping people from getting into its country from Guatemala. A reported 175,000 Central Americans were deported from Mexico in 2015 (a 68 percent jump from 2014), and so far in 2016 that number is approaching 100,000.

The Times claims the U.S. is sending Mexico $75 million in the form of equipment and training to help shore up its southern border.
Click to expand...
Note the highlighted part. This is what I mean. If you just look at the claimed number, $75 million, it looks like a cash payout. It's not. It never is. The money always ends up in the coffers of whichever company has lobbying power to get it.

We are already seeing many Central Americans as well as Mexicans coming across the border. Mexico has no interest in letting those foreign nationals stay in Mexico instead of assisting them moving on to the US.

It's a complex problem, not one that magical POTUS Trump can fix with his Mexico will pay fantasy.
 
If I were Mexico I'd smile politely, say there's no malice held, and invite the Chinese to establish some military bases in northern Mexico.
 
Emily's Cat said:
That's not what it's doing. It's codifying that a governing entity (a state) has a voice in addition to the people. Each person's vote has the same value as any other, but the state itself has a vote as well.
Click to expand...

A state has responsibilities and duties to the population of the state, but the state does not, or should not, have a separate and distinct vote on state actions.
 
If Maddow is correct...

Last year Congress forced Obama (through the Defense budget) into agreeing to replacing the bi-partisan board of directors of the Voice of America with a CEO. It commands an 800 Million dollar budget.

Trump just appointed two twenty-somethings to share the position.
One a wacky Libertarian, the other an ultra right-wing blogger.

I don't know the importance anymore of the VOA, but I hope no one around the world had any reason to rely on it... we already have FoxNews.
 
Last edited:
Marcus said:
Perhaps he has accidently done the right thing. Both pipelines are a much safer way to transport oil than by truck or rail.
Click to expand...

The safest place for coal, oil, and natural gas is deep underground in untapped, natural reservoirs.
 
Jim_MDP said:
I seem to recall the 25B being accepted as a good high estimate.
But we know how Teh Donald is with schedules and budgets, so... $48 Billion and completion around 2042? :D
Click to expand...

He'll keep it under budget. He'll just stiff the contractors, that's been a standard business practice for him.
 
newyorkguy said:
This looks kind of like a blog post but the estimate does range as high as forty billion dollars. From the link:
Click to expand...
The MIT number of 40B max has been widely quoted, as has the Bernstein number of 25B max. I tend to believe the higher estimates, you know how construction is.
 
Spindrift said:
He'll keep it under budget. He'll just stiff the contractors, that's been a standard business practice for him.
Click to expand...

Sure, just as many people will get through, thus proving that the contractors did a shoddy job and should not be paid.
 
Argumemnon said:
It's really frustrating for those of us trying to stick to the healthy middle: there's little discussion to be had beyond nay-saying, arguments from emotion and accusations and labels.
Click to expand...

I get your larger point about barriers to communication but I have my doubts about a "healthy middle". "Middle" compared to what? Given the substantial shift of the Overton window since Reagan, I'm not sure any metric of the political middle in 2017 has much value.

Is the middle on climate change a good place to be? How about torture? What is the middle on those who would privatize our national park system?

My sense is that you are a proponent of living in the reality-based community. Are you sure that that position is congruent with the "middle"?
 
Civet said:
An outright ban probably wouldn't work, but a substantial tax could be legal and viable as long as it wasn't significantly higher than the total cost of circumventing it. Presumably corporations would be exempt.
Click to expand...

If Trump does try to impose such a fee and corporations are exempt then buy Western Union stock because they'll be in fat city.

Let's be realistic. Trump HAS to build something on the border because that is what he campaigned on. And Mexico won't pay a dime because any politician who considers it will be dead in 24 hours. Thus, we, the citizen tax payers will end up footing the bill for Trump's Folly. Worse, Trump's Folly will have absolutely zero affect on net cross-border migration. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch.
 
SezMe said:
If Trump does try to impose such a fee and corporations are exempt then buy Western Union stock because they'll be in fat city.

Let's be realistic. Trump HAS to build something on the border because that is what he campaigned on. And Mexico won't pay a dime because any politician who considers it will be dead in 24 hours. Thus, we, the citizen tax payers will end up footing the bill for Trump's Folly. Worse, Trump's Folly will have absolutely zero affect on net cross-border migration. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch.
Click to expand...

Nope. Since we started building the wall illegal immigration has dropped by 2-3 million. You look at the wall and there are thousands going back. You can see em. They're going back. They're going back. They have to go back. The wall is working. It's a beautiful wall and it's going to be bigger. And Mexico is still going to pay. Believe me.

Cue the familiar news cycle in which the dishonest media presents facts in their obsession with undermining the president and negative reporting, followed by whoever Spicer's replacement is at the time citing information and reports that the president is basing his statements on. Paul Ryan states 'yes, illegal immigration is being reduced, but maybe not by the numbers being suggested'.

It's naive to think that Trump will not make this kind of statement, and the people who voted for Trump will need to either believe that what he is saying is true, rationalise it in some other way, or face the fact that things are not working as promised. For the majority of Trump voters, at no stage can it be acceptable that the opposition were right about him.
 
Civet said:
I'd suggest simply building a smaller, less expensive wall over only a small portion of the border. Then just lie and say that entire wall has been built. Denounce any attempts to expose this as politically-motivated fake news.
Click to expand...
I think this is closer to the truth than we'd like it to be. Throughout his campaign (and years before) Trump repeatedly stated something would happen, or something would be done and then that would be the last we'd hear of it. Remember this is someone who has never actually had to do any work, from his birth he has simply told people what he wants and other people have done it for him. I wouldn't be surprised if he sincerely thinks he's now fulfilled his campaign promise. That's how his life has always worked.
 
Trump said that every time the Mexican government says they won't pay for the wall, it would get 10 feet higher.

By now, it should be something like 240ft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom