Question about walls and fences

[Mycroft]

That is a good effort, however it just happened and the monies haven't even moved. It is our policy up until today that has caused this grief for Central America and still causes. The link is an after the fact product. I notice you did not provide any links where the monies were already issued in the past and not for all things military.
/

Don't try to move the goalposts. Your contention isn't about "up until today".

"Show us where he is helping, feeding, providing shelter, educating, medicating, or somehow helping Central America."

My comment and my link shows you.

 

[Bullseye]

Since insurance companies typically require a fence or wall around a pool, should we extend that requirement to all structures, lakes, forests, and any parcel of land?

Using border wall supporter logic here.

No, you're not. But, you accidentally illustrated the benefit of a border fence. Just as a fence around a swimming pool helps prevent deadly accidents and allows the owner to control who is allowed to use the pool a border fence would help prevent some of the deaths suffered by illegals attempting border crossings; somewhere around 3500 illegals died this year attempting to cross. AND it would allow the US to more carefully screen those entering the country.


And, of course, just as a swimming pool fence doesn't completely stop drowning and illegal entries - neither will a border fence.

 

[trixare4kids]

No, you're not. But, you accidentally illustrated the benefit of a border fence. Just as a fence around a swimming pool helps prevent deadly accidents and allows the owner to control who is allowed to use the pool a border fence would help prevent some of the deaths suffered by illegals attempting border crossings; somewhere around 3500 illegals died this year attempting to cross. AND it would allow the US to more carefully screen those entering the country.


And, of course, just as a swimming pool fence doesn't completely stop drowning and illegal entries - neither will a border fence.

Think of the suffering from human trafficking that could be prevented. Think of the young women and children this could help!
Amazing how the anti-border wall advocates continue to prove that they don't really care about any of them who are put in harm's way. They care more about not giving Trump the win. Damn politicians never disappoint me. :roll:

 

[ALiberalModerate]

No, you're not. But, you accidentally illustrated the benefit of a border fence. Just as a fence around a swimming pool helps prevent deadly accidents and allows the owner to control who is allowed to use the pool a border fence would help prevent some of the deaths suffered by illegals attempting border crossings; somewhere around 3500 illegals died this year attempting to cross. AND it would allow the US to more carefully screen those entering the country.


And, of course, just as a swimming pool fence doesn't completely stop drowning and illegal entries - neither will a border fence.

There is this thing called a ladder you know.

That said, if Trump can keep his promise he made hundreds of times that Mexico will pay for his wall, by all means build it as soon as we get the money for it from Mexico.

 

[Bullseye]

There is this thing called a ladder you know.

Which part of ". . . doesn't completely stop . . ." do you not understand?
]

Yaaawwwwnnnnnn. You guys never get tired of throwing out the clichés, do you?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Which part of ". . . doesn't completely stop . . ." do you not understand?
]
Yaaawwwwnnnnnn. You guys never get tired of throwing out the clichés, do you?

How is that a cliche? Are you denying that Trump literally promised hundreds of times that Mexico would pay for his wall?

Let me ask you this. How much do you figure it will cost the government to build a wall on the entire border between us and Mexico, a wall sufficient to thwart most would be illegal immigrants from crossing it? Let me remind you, we are talking about the federal government. Today's federal government. A government that sub-contracts, and sub-contracts, and sub-contracts out - often to companies that contribute the most to a politician, not to the best company for the job and certainly not to the cheapest. A government that somehow managed to spend 2000 dollars on toilet seats for the pentagon before. A government that has spent over a thousand dollars on hammers before. A government that cannot even account for trillions of dollars of past spending on defense contracts. How much do you think it would cost for them to build Trump's wall?

I am going to conservatively estimate at least half a trillion by the time it was all said and done. Initial estimates of course would be a fraction of that, but we have to remember we are talking about the federal government here. And what would be the point of it. Do you honestly think it would stop drug smugglers? Think about all the money in drug trafficking. I assure you there is more than enough money there for drug lords to take on the cost of tunneling under or blowing up remote sections of the wall periodically. The same is true of those that engage in human trafficking. So what is this wall of Trump's actually going to accomplish even if it was built? Especially considering that illegal immigration has been flat for years anyway.

 

[Fledermaus]

Typing really slow here, just for you. Walls and fences are about Central America. There's a nice 40 pound book called Walls and Fences for Dummies. Perhaps I could have one air dropped on you. Just to hep' out, don't ya' know?
/

Our wall is in Central America?

Please consult a world map as you are SERIOUSLY confused.

 

[Bullseye]

How is that a cliche? Are you denying that Trump literally promised hundreds of times that Mexico would pay for his wall?

Let me ask you this. How much do you figure it will cost the government to build a wall on the entire border between us and Mexico, a wall sufficient to thwart most would be illegal immigrants from crossing it? Let me remind you, we are talking about the federal government. Today's federal government. A government that sub-contracts, and sub-contracts, and sub-contracts out - often to companies that contribute the most to a politician, not to the best company for the job and certainly not to the cheapest. A government that somehow managed to spend 2000 dollars on toilet seats for the pentagon before. A government that has spent over a thousand dollars on hammers before. A government that cannot even account for trillions of dollars of past spending on defense contracts. How much do you think it would cost for them to build Trump's wall?

I am going to conservatively estimate at least half a trillion by the time it was all said and done. Initial estimates of course would be a fraction of that, but we have to remember we are talking about the federal government here. And what would be the point of it. Do you honestly think it would stop drug smugglers? Think about all the money in drug trafficking. I assure you there is more than enough money there for drug lords to take on the cost of tunneling under or blowing up remote sections of the wall periodically. The same is true of those that engage in human trafficking. So what is this wall of Trump's actually going to accomplish even if it was built? Especially considering that illegal immigration has been flat for years anyway.

LOL, fine, just keep babbling away. You have all the loony left mantras down pat.

 

[zimmer]

Since insurance companies typically require a fence or wall around a pool, should we extend that requirement to all structures, lakes, forests, and any parcel of land?

Using border wall supporter logic here.

I missed the logic.

Can you go a bit deeper.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

LOL, fine, just keep babbling away. You have all the loony left mantras down pat.

My argument is hardly a liberal one. Liberals don't typically point out how inefficient the federal government is at large projects.

Of course, you don't want to actually argue what I brought up, so call it what you want.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Which part of ". . . doesn't completely stop . . ." do you not understand?
]
Yaaawwwwnnnnnn. You guys never get tired of throwing out the clichés, do you?

The illegal immigration problem is not based on how easy (or hard) it is to enter the US. It is based on how easy (or hard) it is to remain inside the US once foreign nationals (legally or illegally) get inside it. What, exactly, would the Great Wall Of Trump do for the 12M (to 20M?) illegal immigrants already here? Until it is much harder for foreign nationals to remain "illegally" inside the US, largely by getting fake IDs and jobs, then all else is basically symbolism.

 

[Bullseye]

The illegal immigration problem is not based on how easy (or hard) it is to enter the US. It is based on how easy (or hard) it is to remain inside the US once foreign nationals (legally or illegally) get inside it. What, exactly, would the Great Wall Of Trump do for the 12M (to 20M?) illegal immigrants already here? Until it is much harder for foreign nationals to remain "illegally" inside the US, largely by getting fake IDs and jobs, then all else is basically symbolism.

It's easier to empty a bucket than a sieve. Simple as that.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's easier to empty a bucket than a sieve. Simple as that.

Bad analogy - since a sieve empties itself. A change in the federal income tax code to disallow the deduction of direct labor costs for any worker without a current eVerify certification would go a long way towards making the employment of illegal immigrants very unprofitable. Since direct labor costs are now 100% tax deductible that would amount to a huge tax increase for "job creators" who now easily get away with using illegal immigrant labor.

 

[Bullseye]

Bad analogy - since a sieve empties itself.

Not when it's floating in water.

A change in the federal income tax code to disallow the deduction of direct labor costs for any worker without a current eVerify certification would go a long way towards making the employment of illegal immigrants very unprofitable. Since direct labor costs are now 100% tax deductible that would amount to a huge tax increase for "job creators" who now easily get away with using illegal immigrant labor.

Isn't it already against the law to employee illegals? I doubt employers would declare illegal employees on their tax filings.

 

[apdst]

Since insurance companies typically require a fence or wall around a pool, should we extend that requirement to all structures, lakes, forests, and any parcel of land?

Using border wall supporter logic here.

Do you lock your doors? Have a security system?

 

[Waddy]

The point of the poll is to show the absurdity of the premise that just because a fence or wall makes sense in one area does not mean it makes sense everywhere. Example, just because you might want a wall at a border crossing where there is a dense urban area on both sides of a national border, does not mean it makes sense to build a wall across thousands of miles of border those countries might share, much of which is wilderness.

I call a foul on this one. Trump isn't proposing a wall across the ENTIRE southern border. He is calling for a series of walls in areas that could be well served by walls. The Border Patrol supports his plan. There are areas where walls would be VERY effective.

Nancy Pelosi has a nice wall around her compound in Napa Valley....Bill Clinton has a nice wall....even Barack has a wall....... apparently your liberal masters all favor walls around everything.... well, NOT EVERYTHING... just their properties.

https://www.facebook.com/dummycrats...ound-nancy-pelosis-vineyard/2104060443257077/

Just like they employ armed security to protect them while opposing law abiding citizens owning handguns for their own personal protection....... Hypocrites.

 

[Moderate Right]

Since insurance companies typically require a fence or wall around a pool, should we extend that requirement to all structures, lakes, forests, and any parcel of land?

Using border wall supporter logic here.

LOL. Why don't you just ask if we should put up walls around craters on the moon to protect from aliens?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

LOL. Why don't you just ask if we should put up walls around craters on the moon to protect from aliens?

It is a poll to show the absurdity of an argument being used in favor of the border wall. It is not an actual question about walls and fences.

 

[Oborosen]

Personally, I've never encountered a wall that is impermeable. To imagine that a wall assures national security is absurd.

That $5 billion would be much better spent addressing core problems in Central America than treating the symptom on the border.

Treating said symptom would require everyone be on board as well.

 

[Xelor]

Since insurance companies typically require a fence or wall around a pool, should we extend that requirement to all structures, lakes, forests, and any parcel of land?

Using border wall supporter logic here.

Red:
It's a good thing you wrote the "red" passage because upon reading the poll question/answer options and the first sentence in the OP, I had, by that point, twice thought "Yes, Mathilda, there is such a thing as a stupid question." LOL

 

[Bodi]

The point of the poll is to show the absurdity of the premise that just because a fence or wall makes sense in one area does not mean it makes sense everywhere. Example, just because you might want a wall at a border crossing where there is a dense urban area on both sides of a national border, does not mean it makes sense to build a wall across thousands of miles of border those countries might share, much of which is wilderness.

That is why any person that is serious about protecting the border would endorse certain things like bungy traps and pit falls...

Keeping things unexpected is the best way to discourage illegal immigrants from invading that USA.

 

[Moderate Right]

It is a poll to show the absurdity of an argument being used in favor of the border wall. It is not an actual question about walls and fences.

Your posts are the absurdity. Schumer and Pelosi have both shown that they do not want border security of any kind. They could give Trump the full 5 billion for border security but then stipulate that it is not to be used for Trump's wall. Do they do that? No, because they don't want border security of any kind.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Your posts are the absurdity. Schumer and Pelosi have both shown that they do not want border security of any kind. They could give Trump the full 5 billion for border security but then stipulate that it is not to be used for Trump's wall. Do they do that? No, because they don't want border security of any kind.

They can't do anything because they don't currently control either house of congress. If they made that offer, the Republicans in the House and the Senate would reject it because it didn't contain funding for the wall.

BTW, Trump promised hundreds of times Mexico would pay for his wall so why did he shut down our government?

 

[Moderate Right]

They can't do anything because they don't currently control either house of congress. If they made that offer, the Republicans in the House and the Senate would reject it because it didn't contain funding for the wall.

BTW, Trump promised hundreds of times Mexico would pay for his wall so why did he shut down our government?

Those who want the wall don't give a damn who pays for it and those who don't want the wall still wouldn't want the wall even if Mexico paid for it.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Those who want the wall don't give a damn who pays for it and those who don't want the wall still wouldn't want the wall even if Mexico paid for it.

So you are saying you are fine with Trump lying to you hundreds of times - well that is on this alone. He has lied to you thousands of times.

Just the same, if he actually keeps his promise and Mexico pays for his stupid wall, he can build it a hundred feet high for all I care.