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.
But is it only an abundance of concern for the budget deficit / national debt / growth in government that has then-Senators Biden, Obama, Clinton, and Schumer now opposed to something ostensibly more effective that serves a similar purpose?
They got the 600 mile partial fence they voted for, built mostly under Bush. Should that mean they must support spending money on a much bigger and more expensive wall?
If the wall had worked we would not be having this discussion.
They can build the wall as long as Mexico pays for it. I don't care. I don't think it would work, so I am not willing to pay for it.
No one forced Trump to promise Mexico would pay for it, he came up with it all by himself. Why is he asking us to pay for it now, especially when he has no clue what it would cost.
Anyone else watch Spicer flee the news conference today after mulvaney turned it into a circus?
They announced the price on the wall...whcih looks to be over a trillion bucks if my math is right. 340 million per mile.
And bragged about already starting it...with pictures of a wall.....small detail? Said picture is from Obama's administration. Sheesh, these guys are so incompetent. No wonder Spicer fled..
Why worry? Mexico was gonna pay for it anyway.
Bigger the number, better for us. More high paying labor jobs, you know.
Anyone else watch Spicer flee the news conference today after mulvaney turned it into a circus?
They announced the price on the wall...whcih looks to be over a trillion bucks if my math is right. 340 million per mile.
And bragged about already starting it...with pictures of a wall.....small detail? Said picture is from Obama's administration. Sheesh, these guys are so incompetent. No wonder Spicer fled..
What is funny pathetic, is the announcement of the cost and time to complete any infrastructure project by local, state of federal government.
The under estimates must be intended to make the project palatable to voters.
From the Boston tunnel, to obamacare to the nj/ny tunnel and everyproject in between, the cost estimate was exponentially under estimated.
If we could go back and look at a project's intitial projected cost and compare to the final cost, would that project ever be approved by voters?
What happens to the guy or committe who provided the bad estimate....nothing, he gets promoted!
It would be worth it to see if Trump could complete the wall under time and budget. Maybe the cost was overestimated in this case so he could claim he did it under budget.
The mexican governmet such as it is, is never mentioned when discussing illegal entry or multiple entry of felons. I do hope the MX will pay one way or another. the damage the shameless mexican government has done to the US is worth any cost.
Hope would be we annex Mexico or Mexico undergoes a revolution and a responsible government take hold of the reins.
No, the wall isn't going to be $340 million per mile. That's insanity.
Was reading comments of people ahead of me in the stream. 347 million is being spent on replacing old walls with new ones. Not per mile. I was mistaken
They got the 600 mile partial wall they voted for.
That appears debatable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
If the wall had worked we would not be having this discussion.
It appears to me that the listed Senators have changed their minds on border defense and illegal immigration. Now we can say "well we tried a wall and it didn't work." But it's debatable that we really tried. We can say "well it would be too expensive." But when there's talk of a new $1,000B infrastructure spending package, the prospect of a $20B or $30B structure to curtail illegal immigration seems paltry by comparison, and I've never really known these types to be overly concerned with price tags.
I think they've changed because in the mid 90s and the mid 00s, it was fashionable to talk of protecting our borders from illegal immigration, and in 2017 it's instead fashionable to paint those who talk of protecting our borders from illegal immigration as racist xenophobic bigots. I think by doing so and pushing for amnesty they can ensure millions of future voters will side with them.
Politicians pander. It's what they do. Wet finger to the wind.
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.
