Would A Wall Be Needed?

This topic has 15 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by Newbomb Turk.

Viewing 5 reply threads

Author

Posts
- 03/20/2017 at 9:18 AM #31187
  1
  
  UtahFanSir
  Participant
  
  If We Did This…
- 03/20/2017 at 9:53 AM #31191
  1
  
  Utahute72
  Participant
  
  Border security is about more than just undocumented workers. It’s about drug trafficking, the potential for terrorist entry and even gun running in the other direction. One of Trump’s continual problems is he tends to oversimplify the issues. The second issue is that as Patton pointed out in the second world war, “static fortifications are monuments to man’s stupidity”. This is the same with border security. It is clear in operations that defense in depth is much more important that merely making a line in the sand. We need a flexible mutually supportive approach to securing the border and limiting attractiveness of skiting the law to make illegal entry is one leg and this would help there, but we also need to upgrade the immigration system to supply alternatives and improve the intelligence we have about those coming in.
  - 03/20/2017 at 10:18 AM #31193
    2
    
    UtahFanSir
    Participant
    
    Your second point is why I think the Trump Wall a colossal waste of my tax payments to the USG. I’ve made the same point several times in these very pages, as I am sure you have read. Even Rommel knew the futility of the Atlantic wall. As for Trump, while the guy may be smart, he’s not. He’s too obsessed with himself to do research and learn and make an informed decision. He has demonstrated this enough in what 50 some odd days to prove this to anyone listening. And in that one regard he is a lot like the Supreme Commander Rommel enjoyed. As for the NYT article, I think it is spot on.
    
    I agree that protecting borders is more than just illegal immigrants. The war on drugs, however, needs a complete revamp. As for the potential of a terrorist entry, yes, but honestly, I think the issue that has Americans up in arms, is illegal immigrants and the jobs they supposedly take. I don’t want illegal immigrants in this country. I want this country to select who comes in and when. In fact, I would support an amendment to the US Constitution that removes the provision that birth on American soil constitutes citizenship if both parents are in the US illegally.
    
    Broadly, the business community benefits from illegal immigration. That is a fact. This immigration swells the ranks of laborers and via simple supply and demand that depresses wages. Arguably, the jobs taken by these immigrants no one else will do. I think more folks would do them if the pay was higher. Ergo, illegal immigration benefits some businesses. I have lots of anecdotal evidence that cuts both ways on this, so I am open. To that end, a work program is acceptable, but strict control must exist for laborers to leave. I put that on the businesses that use these laborers. But already there is abuse in legal immigration programs for certain type of workers (computer programmers), or so I have read.
    
    As with everything, the devil is in the details. But that is not in Trump’s wheelhouse, details. Curious how selective he has become on what campaign promises he addresses. The article nails why the Reagan-era legislation failed. Business gets what business wants.
    - 03/20/2017 at 2:01 PM #31216
      
      Ultimate Ute
      Participant
      
      Government and business lack the guts to implement E-Verify.
      
      Prices of many things would go up 10-20%. Just like they would if Asian and Latin American countries rigorously enforced child labor laws.
      
      Santa Maria California agriculture pretends to be red blooded conservative, except when E-Verify talk gets serious. This mornings L.A. Times article describes Malibu residences desire for the status quo, i.e., cheap reliable illegal immigrant gardeners, cooks, laborers, etc., who commute from L.A.
      - 03/20/2017 at 6:46 PM #31225
        
        UtahFanSir
        Participant
        
        I get it. All the while, the unwashed masses of Americans, poor whites, and the working class are p**sed off. So who do we listen to, the weathy who want their “gardeners, cooks, laborers, etc.” and businesses that wink and nod employ the illegals, or that unruly bunch who put Trump in office? We can’t have our cake and eat it too, as the saying goes. My view, Trump will build a useless wall or at least part of it, wasting my money, claim success in a ‘Mission Accomplished’ manner and be done with it. Business as usual, after paying some lip service to it.
        
        The Social Security Administration knows who and where the illegals are using fake SSNs. Only that extra 5%± cash they extract goes into the USG kitty never to pay out to them is too rich to fuss about in regards to apprehending illegal immigrants.
        
        The NYT article did a reasonable job of explaining the problem and offering a solution. I agree with it. Kick out the deadbeats and criminals, find a solution for the others who are hardworking to gain citizenship, and make the E-Verify system work absolutely on a MANDATORY basis with criminal charges to officers of the company who thumb their noses at it. Reagan is the poster boy for the GOP right? Unless its criminal, it will not be enforced. What gets measured gets done, you know that. Then instead of more border guards, have inspectors looks at company records in the same way an audit is done. Plus, get SSA involved.
        
        But as I said, what business wants, business gets, they are as we know, people too. Hypocrisy personified.
      - 03/20/2017 at 8:08 PM #31229
        
        zeous
        Participant
        
        What does Israel do?
  - 03/20/2017 at 1:31 PM #31214
    1
    
    Stradlater
    Participant
    
    Good points. Trump’s wall is an expensive symbol more than a real solution. We need politicians with the spine to pass real immigration solutions rather than run from them because it might cost them votes.
- 03/20/2017 at 10:42 AM #31196
  
  concerned
  Participant
  
  6. Free throw shooting
  - 03/20/2017 at 11:26 AM #31202
    1
    
    Utahute72
    Participant
    
    Yea, the FBI confirmed today that Trump can’t shoot a free throw worth a damn.
  - 03/20/2017 at 12:17 PM #31209
    
    Guido
    Participant
    
    So when the wall is built, we should put up basketball standards on it? That actually makes more sense.
    - 03/20/2017 at 1:10 PM #31211
      1
      
      PlainsUte
      Participant
      
      Wall would be good for tennis practice, or maybe a game of strike-out.
      
      Trump will probably stencil “NO PEPPER” on it.
  - 03/20/2017 at 8:02 PM #31228
    
    zeous
    Participant
    
    6. Free throw shooting
    
    Wrong category. Come on!
- 03/20/2017 at 1:39 PM #31215
  1
  
  PlainsUte
  Participant
  
  I just thank the Founding Fathers that the President does not decide the budget.
  
  The budget he proposed is so rediculous, I can’t see much of anything going through.
  
  I still don’t know how anyone builds a wall on the Rio Grande River.
  
  https://www.nps.gov/bibe/index.htm
  
  Any fortification will just lead to people circumventing it, around or under or whatever. So foolish to cut the Coast Guard when people could just take a small boat to the Calif or Texas Coast.
  
  Anyone else see this sign on I-5 near the Marine Base?
- 03/21/2017 at 12:54 PM #31270
  2
  
  mokus
  Participant
  
  It is the 21st century and people are considering ancient Chinese security methods. Makes me want to bang my head against a…nevermind.
- 03/21/2017 at 1:28 PM #31273
  1
  
  SkinyUte
  Participant
  
  If anyone’s curious, here’s the official RFP (request for proposal) for Trump’s wall. (click on “Solicitation 1” and you can download the actual PDF).
  
  The parts that I found amusing:
  
  2) The wall design shall be physically imposing in height. The Government’s nominal concept is for a 30-foot high wall. Offerors should consider this height, but designs with heights of at least 18 feet may be acceptable. Designs with heights of less than 18 feet are not acceptable.
  
  7) The north side of wall (i.e. U.S. facing side) shall be aesthetically pleasing in color, anti-climb texture, etc., to be consistent with general surrounding environment. The manufacturing/construction process should facilitate changes in color and texture pursuant to site specific requirements.
  
  So it needs to be scary…but good looking on the US side. F**king clown shoes.
  
  BTW, the RFP was posted on 3/17, and has a response date of March 29. So we can be sure that either a) we get a completely rushed proposal, or b) Trump already has someone in mind. I’m guessing that it will come down to BarronBarriers, Eric Border Construction, or DJTjrScaryFence, all good companies with the right connections to build really an amazing multi-billion dollar wall, just the greatest multi-billion dollar wall. Oh, and aesthetics by IvankaWall.
  
  The grift must flow…
  - 03/21/2017 at 4:09 PM #31282
    
    Newbomb Turk
    Participant
    
    A response date of 3/29? Good hell. So 12 days for a contractor to survey the land, estimate the labor and materials needed, and all the other incidental costs. You are right. Trump already has somebody lined up. And it will be a cost plus contract.
Author

Posts