Reply to Border Patrol Makes a Case for the Wall

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Border Patrol Makes a Case for the Wall"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I really feel like this is indicative of the difference between those who support Trump and progressives, not in terms of immigration necessarily, but views on solutions to other issues as well.

Trump supporters want 20th century solutions -- manufacturing and coal mining jobs, and a wall.
Progressives want high tech solutions, renewable energy.

This was also played out during the debate between Romney and Obama, when Romney said we should invest in more tanks for the military, to which Obama replied something like  "no we don't need 20th century tanks. We need high tech solutions".

I'm not opposed to a wall, theoretically, but it has a terrible ROI.  It will take longer to build a wall than it would to hire more border patrol agents and implement high tech solutions, which is also cheaper.   If the Rs and Trump hadn't cut the taxes so much for the rich, maybe we could've afforded the wall. But right now, we can't. Due to their tax cuts, the deficit has gotten out of control, and building a wall along the Rio Grande is not the best use of our tax dollars, though I realize that Trump doesn't care about deficits, and neither do Rs anymore.  Maybe if Mexico pays for the wall then more people would be ok with it.  But it's not. It's the taxpayers who will be paying for this boondogle.

Someone on this forum wrote a fairly detailed synopsis on why a wall along the Rio Grande is a boondogle.  I thought it was pretty well thought out.  It's worth a read.[/quote]

You are terribly, terribly uninformed.  Likely left-wing sources are at fault.  Or, your own refusal to look at the facts. 
The border barrier is just PART of the request for funding.

From his address this week:  
"The proposal from Homeland Security includes cutting-edge technology for detecting drugs, weapons, illegal contraband, and many other things. We have requested more agents, immigration judges, and bed space to process the sharp rise in unlawful migration fueled by our very strong economy. Our plan also contains an urgent request for humanitarian assistance and medical support.

Furthermore, we have asked Congress to close border security loopholes so that illegal immigrant children can be safely and humanely returned back home."

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683230863/transcript-trumps-address-on-border-security-and-democrats-response[/quote]
Umm no, you are cherry picking.

Trump has never asked for anything more than a wall funding before the national address the other day.  In the $25bil package for border security the Dems proposed earlier in 2018 included these things.  It was the wall they didn't want.[/quote]

Look at the Homeland Security budget proposal.  You are wrong.  [/quote]
So when Dems agreed to not $5bil but $25bil for border security, why did Trump turn it down if he wanted high tech and more border agents, and not just a wall.

This really boggles my mind.  Dems were willing to give him more for some of the things you say he was asking for, but he turned it down, and now he's coming back with 1/5 of the original budget?  Wow.. that's some negotiating skills.

So unless Trump is a complete moron to decline $25 bil over the $5bil or it was about the wall funding all along, and that's it, not about high tech solutions which you say he initially wanted.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics