Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with this Vox article that who pays for the wall is secondary, the bigger issue is:
Quote:
... that building both the wall and the necessary supporting infrastructure (much of the border passes through wilderness or desert areas that currently lack the roads you would need to ship in the components) would require an enormous amount of manpower, concrete, steel, and other construction materials.
There are some idle resources currently in the United States, but the reality is that there are only so many trained construction workers and construction equipment in the United States. Consequently, work on the wall and the supporting infrastructure would necessarily come at the expensive [sic] of other large-scale civil engineering undertakings whether Mexico pays for the wall or not.
Who was that woman who seemed to be reading the speech to him? Was she actually reading the English version of the speech to him so that he wouldn't have to read it himself? Just wondering.
I agree with this Vox article that who pays for the wall is secondary, the bigger issue is:
There is a reason why the only thing being built in trump's commercial is trump tower, not highways, not bridges, not schools. Just something for trump.
We must recall that most of the border area in Texas is privately owned land (as opposed to the land in New Mexico and Arizona). Most Texas ranchers are against having their land taken to build a 'wall', which of necessity (and by treaty) must be set rather far back from the Rio Grande river (out of the flood plain).
This is just one of many articles speaking of the difficulties faced in building a fence, much less a 'wall', along the Texas-Mexico border.
You would essentially be ceding a large chunk of land and access to water (liquid gold) to Mexico if the wall were, of necessity, built away from the center of the river.
You seem to be confused on the actual facts, we import more from Mexico than we export to them.
Mexico was the United States 3rd largest supplier of goods imports in 2013. U.S. goods imports from Mexico totaled $280.5 billion in 2013, up 1.0% ($2.9 billion) from 2012, and up 103% from 2003. It is up 603% since 1993 (Pre-NAFTA). U.S. imports from Mexico accounted for 12.4% of overall U.S. imports in 2013.
Mexico is currently our 3rd largest goods trading partner with $531 billion in total (two way) goods trade during 2015. Goods exports totaled $236 billion; goods imports totaled $295 billion. The U.S. goods trade deficit with Mexico was $58 billion in 2015.
And we export, as you said 250 billion dollars of goods to Mexico. That's a lot of US jobs lost in a trade war. Mutual assured destruction. Stupid idea.
You would essentially be ceding a large chunk of land and access to water (liquid gold) to Mexico if the wall were, of necessity, built away from the center of the river.
According to a poster in another thread, the river doesn't matter and it's polluted anyways. The ranchers and farmers can just figure out another way to irrigate their fields.
Trump did what he set out to do and look very Presidential. Any serious policy issue would come when there is a Trump Administration this Fall.
Trump sure didn't look very Presidential following the President of Mexico on the stage. The President of Mexico had excellent posture and looked like he was paying attention when Trump talked.
Trump followed him on stage, all slouched over, looking like the Hunchback of Notre Dame or that "Evolution of Man" poster that shows man descending from apes. Trump looked like one of the apes. Then, Trump fiddled around while the President of Mexico spoke. Excuse me, but he's supposed to pay attention even though he doesn't understand the language.
This is the key to why Mexico will pay for the wall.
A little off topic, but...
One sort of strange thing from the link you provided.
From the article.
The top export categories (2-digit HS) in 2015 were: machinery ($42 billion), electrical machinery ($41 billion), vehicles ($22 billion), mineral fuels ($19 billion)
The top import categories (2-digit HS) in 2015 were: vehicles ($74 billion), electrical machinery ($63 billion), machinery ($49 billion), mineral fuels ($14 billion),
Seems like we are just trading the same goods back and forth.
What are we doing, sending some parts down there, and they are being assembled, and sent back?
Yeah, didn't you know that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
