You wanna pay for the wall?

If the wall is built, the US taxpayer and/or the US consumer will wind up paying for it, Trump's bluster aside. So we have about 320 million people, and the wall will cost 20 billion (at least). 20,000/320 = $62.50 for each man, woman, and child. So your basic nuclear family of four will wind up paying $250 to keep Americans from sneaking into Mexico (that's what it's for, right?).

Worth it to you? Or do you have something else you'd rather spend that money on?

Quote: stinkingliberal

Worth it to you? Or do you have something else you'd rather spend that money on?

Just about any project has its detractors and proponents. Some people really do want the wall and think it will be effective. Bridges, health campaigns, airports... they are often wastes of money. Vietnam? A was in every country ending in 'stan' ... and still no victory anywhere.

Jefferson would have us pay down the national debt. Jefferson is dead.

Detractors say we cannot pay for it or it will cost whatever. Intelligent people look and see that we are currently having costs for welfare, schooling, prison, etc for illegal aliens. Not to mention drug crime.

Before anyone starts saying how good it is to have the illegals here, note that Mexico is worried about the cost of them being sent back. If they were so much a net contribution, Mexico would be begging to get them back as well as helping enforce the border.

So to me the wall is a good idea. Borders need to be protected.

Quote: AZDuffman

So to me the wall is a good idea. Borders need to be protected.

Well, I assume you'll be sending in your check pronto, then.

What about all the private land the government will need to seize to build the wall on?

Why don't righties ever talk about that?

Quote: ams288

What about all the private land the government will need to seize to build the wall on?

Why don't righties ever talk about that?

Trump would need to enforce some kind of federal eminent domain clause, and the only precedent for that would be in times of national emergency. Otherwise, seizure and forfeiture without due process would be violated.

But we already know Trump is an ignorant asshole who wants to rule by decree and doesn't have even a basic grasp of how government works. The reasons righties don't talk about that is that they are already ashamed for having voted for that incompetent jerkwad.

The question I was more interested in, though, is just how enthusiastic Joe Sixpack would be about peeling off $250 from his bankroll and handing it to Donald so he could make him feel safer (OOOOO! MESSKINS!). Does Joe realize how many cans of Bud that would buy?

Quote: ams288

What about all the private land the government will need to seize to build the wall on?

Why don't righties ever talk about that?

Not much should need to be seized as it is already government owned. Most owners would probably gladly lose a small amount of acreage for no longer having to be armed to go on their property.

Simple solution is just to take some Mexican land.

Quote: AZDuffman

Not much should need to be seized as it is already government owned. Most owners would probably gladly lose a small amount of acreage for no longer having to be armed to go on their property.

Simple solution is just to take some Mexican land.

Let's see:

1) Access to the Rio Grande would be blocked for those ranchers who need it for irrigation and livestock. They would not all be enthusiastic about that.
2) Private landholdings along the border are extensive and constitute the majority of such land. Most of it is NOT, in fact, federal land.
3) Regardless of the percentages, ALL of it would have to be seized. Thousands of court cases, as many would object.
4) Any rancher who feels he has to carry a gun while walking near the border is paranoid. Of course, we have all those terrible stories of masses of Messkins descending on border ranches and raping and looting.
5) "Not much" matters a great deal when it is YOUR land.

That "simple solution" would be foolhardy in the extreme. It would be an act of war. And yeah, we could whup their beaner asses (I am quoting directly from the Breakfast Bloviator here). But do we really want to invade and annex the territory of a sovereign nation? I know that's what Russia does, but...

Quote: stinkingliberal

If the wall is built, the US taxpayer and/or the US consumer will wind up paying for it, Trump's bluster aside. So we have about 320 million people, and the wall will cost 20 billion (at least). 20,000/320 = $62.50 for each man, woman, and child.

That's completely wrong, you know.

For starters everything takes longer and costs more, and this is particularly true of big government projects. So let's say a minimum of $25 billion. or $78.13 per capita.

Next, Mexico has to be made to pay for the wall somehow (you know, because Golden Boy is a thief on an international scale). The simplest solution would be to slap a tariff on all Mexican imports. This would be paid by Mexico through the money spent by US companies, who'd then make Mexico pay it through the money spent by US consumers. This brings the total to at least $156.26 per person.

But wait, there's more!

Another solution would be to put an excise fee on wire transfers. Good thing there is no such thing as bitcoin and other crypto-currencies, or, thank Jove!, a network of money laundering smugglers who might charge a much lower fee for transferring money. This would raise little money, of course, and put some people in places like Western Union out of work.

Back to the tariff: Mexico would retaliate by placing tariffs on US-made goods. But that's ok. it's not as though them Mexicans can buy steel or gadgets from China or cars from Japan or textiles from Europe, right? And it's not as though their collectively lower purchasing power would lead them to buy fewer US-made goods, so no American worker currently involved in export trade to Mexico will lose their job.

Of course, Golden Boy could send in troops and seize assets like silver mines, oil wells, and even Japanese and German car plants! That would not be barbaric at all, and surely the whole world would Hail Trump as a great pacemaker.

I'm a bit surprised by this article, but apparently there are plenty of Republicans in Texas who don't want a wall.

The Texas-Mexico border makes up 1,254 miles of the 1,900-mile-long U.S.-Mexico border, so Texas has more at stake than any other state. Maybe the federal government ought to let Texas Republicans sort out this issue on their own rather than forcing it upon them against their will.