If The U.S. Wants To Build a Border Wall, Why Should Mexico Be Expected To Pay F

1. 91

   Rock_njposted 7 years ago

   If The U.S. Wants To Build a Border Wall, Why Should Mexico Be Expected To Pay For It?
   
   Is there any reason why Mexico should pay for a wall that the current U.S. administration wants to build?

   replyreport
2. 77

   lovemychrisposted 7 years ago

   no. its political theatre for the trumpsters. 14 billion, which our grand children will be paying...to satisfy the minority vote.

   replyreport
   1. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Very interesting number for us Californians. We are looking at a probable tab of 200 billion$ for a bullet train that makes absolutely no sense.
      14 billion compared to 50 billion a year in remittance exceptions to existing law?

      replyreport
   2. 81

      jackclee lmposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It is funny how liberals complain about the cost of the wall and weapons for national defense and say nothing when they spend billions on food stamps and welfare and fraud...The first two are part of the duties of the Federal government.

      replyreport
   3. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The money is already there appropriated specific for the wall and with Homeland Sec. Now just tax Mex. goods coming in and remittances going out. A wallah Mex. pays for the wall.

      replyreport
   4. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      lol! theres that "fraud" word again...someone send out a memo? (gingrich?)i do remember i used to love john mccain back in the day, when hed lambast everybody for stupid, wasteful spending.you know, like this wall.

      replyreport
3. 50

   bradmasterOCcalposted 7 years ago

   
   
   John
   The US not only gives money each yr to Mexico, but for a very long time WE and not Mexico have supported their Citizens with free education, welfare, free medical and other freebies. These free services come out of our tax money. It costs the US a lot of money to round up, process, temporary detentions and other costs to send them back to Mexico.
   
   More importantly, Mexico has been a bad neighbor in that they are ineffective or just don't care that the Mexican Drug Cartel and other Drug cartels own the northern parts of Mexico. These drug cartels transfer their illegal drugs across the US border, in the order for several billions of dollars each yr. The big problem is that the US has given up on the War on Drugs. The US has a lot of people on these drugs, and direct and indirect cost and well as the well being of the people are significantly impacted.
   
   Mexico doesn't allow their southern neighbors to cross that border and live in Mexico, but they do give 21 day visas to them for the purpose of making it to the US border. Among these are gangs members from some of the more heinous gangs in the world. We put some of them in our prisons and jails when we catch them in their criminal activities in the US. They comprise a significant number of the 2 million in US jails and prisons.
   
   Anyone that has ever gone to Mexico outside the tourist resorts knows  Americans have NO rights there, &corruption is rampant.
   
   BTW, what right do  Mexican citizens have to circumvent the US Immigration laws. This is not fair to all the immigrants that Try to come to the US legally. Most of them are turned away because of country quotas. This doesn't affect people that can just walk across the US border.
   
   So Why Shouldn't Mexico pay for the wall, and why should anyone in the US want to stop the wall. Open borders are a plus for Mexico but cost the US $100s of billions in direct and indirect expenses. More importantly Open Borders allows Easy Access for Terrorists, Drug Cartels, and unvetted immigrants that drain our medical services and increase the price of healthcare for all of us. California gives them driver's licenses, but what about Obamacare mandatory health ins? or even vehicle insurance.
   
   In Cal Whites have less people that Mexicans &Latinos. It is a fact, on how many more births they have than whites or other races. These become American Citizens which is wrong. Why shouldn't Mexico help the US with the border. They have been making us pay for their Citizens!

   replyreport
4. 45

   Ericdierkerposted 7 years ago

   Interaction between The United States of Mexico and the United States of America are not well served by sound by and one liners insisting how relations will be in the future.
   Remittances are no way no how a garuanteed right of citizens or foreign nationals. In fact they are more closely akin to an exception to law which forbids it. Much is governed by our Uniform Commercial Code. Believe my there are stringent controls over the laundering of money and IMF has much to say. Think of our rich guys stashing their money overseas. This gets real complicated. But absolutely it is within the power of the Chief US Executive to enforce laws already in place to stop the remittances. Think of remittances to North Korea -- ain't going to happen legally. So yes the impact of keeping all that money here just on interest would pay for two walls in about 18 months.
   There are other ways to make Mexico pay. Think of our phrase - "you will pay for that". Well sooner or later Mexico must pay for inducing and literally promoting illegal cross border human trafficking. We figure that about 200 people die each year due to exposure while illegally crossing. That is a disaster and the only way to stop it is a wall and remittance law enforcement. (please note that remittances only count if it is from a non citizen)
   The failure of the Mexican government to curtail cartels is most disturbing. No one can look at it and not be certain that payments to governments officials is what makes it thrive. Well Mexico needs to "pay for that".
   Now here is a big international no no. Subsidizing industry so they are no controlled by free market. Mexico is a real prick in this regard. They infuse money into their export industry in ordef to sell at lower prices internationally.
   Now labor and quality standards, Remittances and our buying from Mexico actual tends to support child labor, horrible worker safety standards and no quality control. We get product that children die from because the Mexican control factors are bribed away.
   Mexico's legal system for foreigners is horrendous they use the Napoleonic code. You know the one that says you are guilty until you prove your innocence. Way whacked.
   
   So Mexico is "going to pay for it's transgression". All our POTUS need do is enforce existing law. I understand that there is about 1 billion dollars all ready allocated to the wall. It just was not spent. And now it will be.
   All this hoopla is really amazing. Trump does not have to change a single law.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      the whole of the gop works on the napoleanic code. except theirs is more like julius ceasar...."lets make something up, then spend millions trying to prove it" or was that caligula?? (small feet, loonybird.kookoo)

      replyreport
   2. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      No they do not. You are just trying to win an argument. Do you really think that that is a quote dating back to a Caesar. Hint Caligula was not his name. That is a made up man by writing artists. Which may indicate that you believe non-truths?

      replyreport
   3. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      was hillary guilty until proven innocent or not? even when proven innocent, you all still call her guilty! and they did bring charges, then made up the crime. otherwise, bannon and conjob would not be using private server, cause its a crime.

      replyreport
   4. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Leslie it would be well if you spoke a bit more in reality than rhetoric. GOP is not a court. They cannot hold one guilty. Even an impeachment is not guilt. HRC faced no legal charges. You seem to blur lines of tabloid and real. Note: LA has Nap code

      replyreport
   5. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      no legal charges? then why do tea party republicans call her a criminal?no legal charges?i thought trump crowds big mantra was "lock her up"...i know general flynn used it.so, it was all a big propoganda campaign to demonize her?lovely.politics, usa

      replyreport
   6. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      No matter how much you hate these folks it does not change the fact that there were no charges filed. People can be criminals and called criminals without being charged.

      replyreport
   7. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      um, id say the ones screaming lock her up are the haters, wouldnt you? and no way to pay for that wall yet....guess thats another one they make up along the way. Bluto: "ill gladly pay you thursday for a hamburger today!"..bwahaha

      replyreport
   8. 77

      Misfit Chickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      U R determined all against Trump R haters & labeling us so, Eric. Its MADDENING & there is no reason to listen to your intellectual essays until that gets gone. There is no reason anymore to listen to any of you, we've heard your hate & R

      replyreport
   9. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      get used to it. its back to hating america because we dont support trump. meanwhile, we also hated america FOR supporting obama. the only way we can be ok is to follow them. thats not freedom.

      replyreport
   10. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       OK maybe my bad. I will go more gentle. But I value you opine and really think we do well here cutting through our mutual rancor. What do you two think about remmittances? Do you think them a right? Transferring money out of country?

       replyreport
   11. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       transferring money out of country? we have billionaires doing it all the time!you know, to avoid taxes. i dont like being used for money, and i dont like americans losing jobs. but you can lay that blame right where it belongs; business owners.

       replyreport
   12. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       You do well to point out "offshore" misuse. I think Trump said he would go after it. It is very cool how it works legally. Extremely sophisticated. If the money goes into direct development of developing nations it is clear. Remittances go different.

       replyreport
   13. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       well, i hate to tell you, but if trump is going after offshore money, hell have to start with himself and his cabinet...and half of congress, id imagine. remittance..yeah, i get the anger about it. and the anger about underbidding jobs.hard situation

       replyreport
   14. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Could you be wrong there. Trump made his money leveraging and arbitrage in a gentle sense. That would suggest that his money is legit and transparent for credit and borrowing reasons. His "towers" are built on credit. He would not hide funds.

       replyreport
   15. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       no eric, its a pretty easy google search. not to mention, he was in the panama papers. he has offshore money...lots of it. and so does mnuchin..probly all of them. they are billionaires. you dont get that way by honest means! fortune=crime.i believe!

       replyreport
5. 0

   PeterStipposted 7 years ago

   The wall is a business project. Trump will use his own building companies to make the wall, profit from it and let the Americans pay.
   It's a personal project to make money on the expense of the ordinary people.

   replyreport
   1. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That is the kind of "stated as fact" comment that insures there is no civil discourse. Are you trying to tell the truth from your opinion or trying to make sure two sides cannot work together? You do well with the later.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      this is my opinion, not a state of fact.
      A fact is that the Trump empire is build on real estate (pin not intended.)
      fact is : building a wall is a real estate project.
      My opinion is : conflict of interests.

      replyreport
   3. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I get it. Oh boy, if that happens the turmoil will be radical I am sure. OTOH it may be better to have a builder build something than a politician who is just paying the freight to lobbyists. You raise a good point but it is projecting - pun intended

      replyreport
   4. 88

      RJ Schwartzposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It will be done by the regular bid process - stop with the sensationalism

      replyreport
   5. 0

      PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry Ralph but I've seen to much corrupt politicians. (left wing and right wing) and know that there is always a second agenda. We the people only hear the slogans. The real power and money projects are not talked about in public.

      replyreport
   6. 91

      Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      If we put in this Border Adjustment Tax in place, U.S. consumers will pay for the wall 10,000 times over.  Everything we buy from Mexico will be increased by this levy for years and years to come.  Must be a better way.

      replyreport
   7. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You have a very valid point. I sopped getting stuff from Mexico a bit ago. The cheapness of the quality, with breakage and the like just made it cheaper in the long run to by USA.  If they tax cigarettes to death to save us -- why not imports?

      replyreport
   8. 0

      PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It's irrelevant who's gonna pay for the wall. (populist discussion) The question is: Who is going to collect the money and in which pockets does it end up?
      Trump is a business man remember, he thinks in money, his own money.

      replyreport
   9. 91

      Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that there is big money to be made by Trump and connected contractors.  I just don't think they should try to get Mexico to pay for a wall some in the U.S. want to build, especially not via a never-ending tax on imported goods.

      replyreport
   10. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       John what do you think about a 7% tax on remittances. Enforcement is hard but it seems fair for 5 years or so. Most countries do not allow remittances at all. We could even beef up real laundering that way. You against it?

       replyreport
   11. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Its a great opportunity for Bansky though..

       replyreport
   12. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Funny you should say that but some of the finest murals I have ever seen are on our border - both ways. I think there is even a name for one in Nogales. Here next to TJ just awesome.

       replyreport
   13. 91

       Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Eric,  I am not opposed to a 7% tax on remittances on any particular principle, except that I don't see any reason why Mexico or Mexicans who happen to live in the U.S. should pay for national security or immigration walls built by the U.S.

       replyreport
   14. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       That is so cool you narrow it down. Think this way: I am here and you are there and you will not get across so my value will exponentially increase based on supply and demand.
       Crazy - the wall benefits those already here!!!

       replyreport
   15. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       SORRY Eric, but "ATTACHING" Remittances of HARD Working Mexicans is INHUMANE & Will NOT Happen & a 20% Tax on Mexican IMPORTs would Devastate the U.S. Consumer ~ "Drumpf" should TAX Saudi Arabia Remittances, That's where the TERRORIST R

       replyreport
   16. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Interesting claims AP. There is no doubt that POTUS can make remittances conditional on legal status here in the US. He can pick which country he does it with.  I think the threat might be enough. Mexico will decide. Their choice.

       replyreport
   17. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       See it like a divorce. The US wants it, so the US has to pay for it. Whats more, the US should give Mexico compansation because its the richer of the two. When a rich husband wants to divorce its spouse it has to give the spouse compensation.

       replyreport
   18. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Peter, I do not mean to be insulting but this " US should give Mexico compansation because its the richer of the two", Sure sounds like White Privilege guilt talking.
       Not at all like a divorce. You know that. Definitely competitors.

       replyreport
   19. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       lol Eric ~ NOW we know WHY "Drumpf" had 2 RELY on his DADDY's Dirty Money after all his DOOMED Business FAILUREs ~ Inhability 2 THINK Things Thru ~ If U Can't FIND the Remittances HOW on Earth do U place Conditions on them ??

       replyreport
   20. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I know, I took the case into the extreme to show that the other extreme. "Build a wall on your own soil and let the other pay for it" is also ridiculous looked at from an neutral perspective.

       replyreport
   21. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Peter on that we surely agree. If you look at it purely neutrally. Of course we pay. And for sure purely neutrally we do not put it up at all. Back to yours for fun - have you ever seen a neutral divorce?
       1,000 miles? 700 already voted for by congres

       replyreport
   22. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       A neutral divorce, no. Only a few pop star cases..in the end I think the whole wall project is a minor point in politics and maybe never done. But a big voting point and a diversion from what's really going on in the White House.

       replyreport
   23. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Peter, I think you are right. It is really kind of strange down here driving the I8 and seeing that fence for miles and miles.

       replyreport
   24. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Take care Eric, I hope they wont build a wall around the internet and make it a local (read country) thing.

       replyreport
   25. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Peter you are so right. I did work on opening the internet from Vietnam. Note I do not say "in" Vietnam. ICANN from 1998. Right on EFF!

       replyreport
6. 76

   Ken Burgessposted 7 years ago

   Simple answer is, because we can...
   
   A better answer is, because if they don't, their economy tanks, their President gets thrown out on his ear because his economy tanks, and the country sinks into a level of civil disobedience and discourse that it hasn't seen in a generation.
   
   Now for those that understand trade imbalances, like Trump does, know that Mexico does not have a leg to stand on in this fight, the fact that the President of Mexico has made it as high profile as he has only shows what an idiot he is... you don't try to talk and act big when you are in a fight where you are carrying a knife and the other person is in an AH-1 Cobra Helicopter... you're not going to win.
   
   Like Trump said, Mexico will pay for it one way or another... I am sure they will, considering they make 60+ billion a year off America in trade, it won't take much for Trump to confiscate through tariff, tax, or outright seizure as much of that as he feel he needs for the wall.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      well, i dont want it.i dont want a wall, i hate the idea, and will be forced to pay for it against my will. but hey..you guys had to pay for healthcare,so i guess were even.just expect the same opposition,and dont whine about it.trump can do no wrong

      replyreport
   2. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I am having trouble recognizing any rational or logical though here: "well, i dont want it.i dont want a wall, i hate the idea". The author is very smart and capable but perhaps this approach borders on something akin to hysterical.

      replyreport
   3. 91

      Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Some people just think it's a bad idea.  I can see both sides.  We tore down the Berlin Wall only to put up another one on our border?  But, we also do have a problem with illegal immigration and other criminal activity coming into the country.

      replyreport
   4. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Nov. 9th, 89 flying back from a trade negotiation for strategic commodities in Mex. City, the pilot announced about the announcement of the wall coming down. Cheers all around. As we circled to land in TJ we saw the wall going up. An eerie silence.

      replyreport
   5. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      yes. its symbolic. a wall, to me, does not represent keeping others out, but rather keeping us in. and for god sakes, its symbolic to prez too. no one in security biz thinks its a good use of money. its for his base."whos gonna pay?" "mexico" yayyyyy

      replyreport
   6. 86

      Terrielynn1posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      If he does then I wonder what will happen when people want to vacation in Mexico. I think he needs to find a different way. Maybe just improve what's there. Why is everything so over dramatic with him.

      replyreport
   7. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      politics.

      replyreport
   8. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Careful buying into the private security pundits. They get paid to have the Gov. do less and pay them more. But fore sure their expertise is already in the mix with the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

      replyreport
   9. 53

      elinadecruifesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Valuable site, where did u come up with the information in this posting? I am pleased I discovered it though, ill be checking back soon to find out what new content pieces u have.Very good Suggestions for Learning Path Toward Future Career Goals. I d

      replyreport
7. 88

   crankaliciousposted 7 years ago

   Mexico will not pay for the wall. The American people, through higher product costs, will pay for the wall. This is exactly what Trump has stated. He has explicitly said "Mexico will pay". However, the method of payment is a tariff on goods coming across the border from Mexico, so things like cars, food; etc. Thus, those selling those goods here will raise prices accordingly to cover their increased costs and those buying the goods will pay for the wall.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      Ken Burgessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I could work that way, sure, but I think there is a bigger issue here Trump will get to.
      Thanks to NAFTA Americans, truckers most recently by the thousands, have lost jobs. that will change. Many things will change, not just a Wall or tax.

      replyreport
   2. 88

      crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That doesn't address the fact that Americans will pay for the wall and not Mexico. And it will be expensive and do virtually nothing to stop illegal immigration.

      replyreport
   3. 76

      Ken Burgessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Mexico will pay, and pay dearly, when NAFTA is revised it will be at their expense. When financial aid is cut, those funds will go to the Wall. When someone crosses the border into America they will pay a $50 fee.  Mexico will pay one way or other.

      replyreport
   4. 88

      crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      When you hamper free trade, it's the consumer that usually suffers.

      replyreport
   5. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      And we recognize that free trade only exists when both parties seed a parody based on equal incentives and not government subsidized ones like Mexico. An unsafe product shipped to a country with high safety rules, it is not free trade.

      replyreport
   6. 91

      Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      How much financial aid do we give to Mexico?  Curious?

      replyreport
   7. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      $320 mil a year,with the bulk of it going to law enforcement.what would really help is if americans stopped using drugs.oh,and i'll bet theres a huge underground market in gun sales, too.seems to me,we are blaming mexico for our problems.guns n drugs

      replyreport
   8. 58

      Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "WALL Dreamers" don't understand the FACT that 97% of Mexicans REJECT Drumpf & his Demented Thoughts & Guess what? They R BOYCOTTING USA Products which will COST JOBs ~ So, how does that FACTOR into "Delusional Donald's" Retarded Equation?

      replyreport
   9. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      And just why at the negotiating table should one give a rat's bottom how Mexico feels? Money for Mex. or for projects in Detroit. Yout choice dude in your Belair home. Save Mex. and screw Watts? Arrogance at it's peak.You hate your own??

      replyreport
   10. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       your attitude explains the protests against trump. trump makes products overseas, as does ivanka. trump and bannon think if they can strong arm some jobs, they can have "judeo christian" rule for 50 yrs out..kinda like hugh hewitt, rule for 40 years.

       replyreport
   11. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Hmmm, how was my comment even remotely based on Trump. I was addressing an issue not a man or woman. Our largess toward others and ignoring our own was my point. Again how was this a Trump deal at all?

       replyreport
   12. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Well Eric, you'd better "CARE" about how the Mexicans feel because in SHORT Order, your PSEUDO-Pres "Drumpf", PUPPET of Vladimir Putin has STRAINED Relations with them & has Recklessly INDUCED a BOYCOTT of USA Products which will COST Jobs

       replyreport
   13. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       because trump doesnt give a rats bottom how mexico feels, how muslims feel, how americans who oppose him feel, how all those people he kicked out of their homes feel.  its trumps philosophy in a nutshell. and this is why we object.

       replyreport
   14. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Leslie, I really respect beliefs as opposed to facts. Both have equal merit. So I respect your belief that Trump has all that negative stuff and that he is evil. But I have to recognize that it is a belief and not a fact. A wall because he hates??

       replyreport
   15. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       no, because saying it was a way to get elected. just like saying he was anti wall street....can we just pause a minute on that one? just like crooked hillary, lyin ted, little marco. im sorry, but what kind of person votes for that??? and enjoys it?

       replyreport
   16. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I do not condemn a person for being a winner. Oh the things a tight end will do to gain advantage on a linebacker. Oh what a trial attorney will say to clear a man from the death penalty. You are right in this motion of consistency. Bites?

       replyreport
   17. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       the end justifies the means? where have we heard THAT before?

       replyreport
8. 78

   emgeposted 7 years ago

   The wall is just rhetoric. Even Trump knows that Mexico won't pay for the wall. But he continues hammering at this theme. He is playing to the gallery of his supporters. The wall will cost $ 28-30 million and take years and Tump won't be there but he will benefit as his companies will rake in the cash. I will say he is an extremely short sighted man who really has his own interests at heart and not of the nation.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      DzyMsLizzyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      He knows the wall will stop no one, in light of the sophisticated tunnels that already exist!  So, you build a 30-ft. high wall?  Go under it.  Or get a 31-ft. ladder!  HA!

      replyreport
   2. 77

      lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      hear hear!

      replyreport
9. 72

   Pax Pacisposted 7 years ago

   Honestly, Mexico will have to pay for the wall because a 20% increase on their current border crossings will make their goods not competitive if they try a pass through. American and other COO goods will be lower in price (for once). An increase in Mexican COO taxes will level the playing field against domestic and European manufactured goods.
   
   You could make a great case of keeping the tax and the wall completely separate issues.
   
   As to WHY build the wall: because walls work when properly manned. The flow of illegal goods (both drugs and counterfeit) and the mass incursions of illegal aliens are clear indicators that we need one. We have to stem the tide of illegal aliens (we have no idea who they are or why they are really here) somehow, and a border wall is the most effective way to do that. Hadrian did it, the Qin dynasty did it, the USA needs to do it.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      Ken Burgessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Good answer, and it still doesn't cover the extent of how and why, one way or another Mexico WILL pay for it. They don't have a choice in the matter... other than to play nice and pay for it, or play it the way they are now pay 100 fold.

      replyreport
   2. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      There is a wonderful (I will call it Jerichoen) notion that a wall not manned by righteousness will fall to the trumpets and hollering of another. Perhaps we, as a nation, can meet that test, for if we cannot soon our moral walls will crumple quicker

      replyreport
   3. 85

      DzyMsLizzyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You can't be serious! First, the drugs and many of the illegals won't be stopped by a wall; there is already a sophisticated TUNNEL system in place. Next, a majority of the illegals come here to work & do jobs Americans feel beneath them.

      replyreport
   4. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Liz you can go to ice.gov and learn about the tunnels. The over dramatized "news" sells but is not accurate. There is no vast system of tunnels. And a barrier equipped with proper equipment would make thwarting any tunnel easier.

      replyreport
   5. 58

      Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, in REALITY, there R TUNNELs which Undermine the Ridiculous "WALL in Drumpfs HEAD" Notion ~ There R also Ladders, Aircraft, Drones, Cannons, Dynamite, Ramps, Balloons & Boats etc 2 Circumvent USELESS Concrete ~ Where there's a WILL

      replyreport
   6. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      AP you make a good point. They really will have to go to a lot more effort than just walking across. I was on the fence (lol) until now.

      replyreport
   7. 80

      2besureposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Good points Pax!

      replyreport
10. 85

    DzyMsLizzyposted 7 years ago

    No, and it's all pure, unadulterated BS.
    Make no mistake: any tax on imports to "make Mexico pay" will simply be passed on to the end consumer.  In other words, we Americans, as individuals will be stuck with the tab.  But, it isn't going to happen, anyway, so no worries.
    
    However, I did see a funny meme on Facebook the other day.  It said, "Mexico agrees to pay for the wall ... ... with the 1848 boundaries."  LOL!  That would make part of Texas, most of California, and bits of Nevada and Arizona all Mexico, and we'd all have to learn Spanish in a big hurry!  :-D I thought it was hilarious.

    replyreport
    1. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Liz I get from your heartfelt comment that you believe inferior, safety defective and adulterated food should come here and compete with American made products that meet our standards. Just me maybe but I am tired of that. Car seats made in Mexico??

       replyreport
    2. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Really ERIC? Then U must be TIRED of JUNKY "Drumpf Merchandise" because much of it is MADE in Foreign Lands NOT the USA ~ GREED Always comes before Patriotism with these ANTI-American DREGs of Society ~ Anyone seen the CHECK 4 the WALL??

       replyreport
    3. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       AP do you know the difference between importing and outsourcing? I do not think anyone wants us to stop exporting and importing. Our imports are about equal to our exports which is good.

       replyreport
    4. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       NICE Dodge Eric ~ That doesn't JUSTIFY "Drumpf's" APPETITE 4 GREED which is his TOP Priority BEFORE his Allegiance to the USA ~ It's ASTOUNDING how some POOR Souls R still Bamboozeled by this Unhinged FRAUD ~ But, the MAJORITY R RESISTING

       replyreport
    5. 68

       wrenchBiscuitposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Eric, I thought Monsanto was an American company. Are you suggesting that  the company that has poisoned and killed more Americans than any other with DDT,Agent Orange,Roundup, etc., is Mexican?

       replyreport
    6. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       That one is interesting. They trade under (MON) stock going up. They do more outside the US than in, although out of Missouri. I think that if you could ethnicitize a group they would be genocidal. Less product exported than produced elsewhere.  ????

       replyreport
    7. 60

       MichaelMcNabbposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Liz that is not the whole story.  The tax that consumers end up paying actually makes Mexico less competitive and therefore opens a door to American manufacturing.   Nobody cares what a consumer ends up having to pay for a television.

       replyreport
11. 61

    fpherj48posted 7 years ago

    John, it would be my reasoning that Mexico may pay for the wall because that wall is necessary due to the Mexican Drug Cartels, bringing massive loads upon loads of drugs into OUR country.
    Having said this, I see there will also be a considerable increase in Border Patrol Officers.
    What I feel might need some thought is that the vast majority of these illegals drugs are carted not ON the border or Over the border, but UNDER the border via miles and miles of underground tunnels. It's the El Chappo Syndrome.  So, we get to sit back and see what's next.

    replyreport
    1. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Submarines and elephants. If there be demand here there will be ingenuity to supply that demand. Can we cut that supply chain by wall and personnel? I think so. Force the enemy into a narrow of passage and you can cut them off at the pass.

       replyreport
    2. 91

       Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       A lot of drugs also enter the country via shipping containers at our ports.  The govt could do a better job screening all those containers, but there are so many of them that arrive each day.

       replyreport
    3. 61

       fpherj48posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       John...Of course.  You have a very valid point.  Truth is, there's more than a few ways to "smuggle!"  and we must realize these criminals use ALL of those ways. Hasn't the so-called drug war been seen as a true losing battle 4ever?

       replyreport
    4. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       70% of the 94,000 weapons recovered from Mexican drug cartels between 2006 and 2011 come from the USA. (source wiki) just saying....

       replyreport
    5. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       In Addition ~ The VAST Majority of Murders in the USA are American Citizen on American Citizen CRIMEs, NOT by Un-Documented Immigrants which account 4 very few in COMPARISON ~ But Hey, WHY let FACTs interrupt a Good Story 4 the "Trump SHEEP"

       replyreport
    6. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       The wall story is just a diversion to make the electorate happy. Real politics is about money. immigracion, fear for a minority religion, projection of problems on other countries. It's just a news story to let the people feel good/ or bad.

       replyreport
    7. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Isn't the Secure Fence act of 2006, which was bipartisan still a law?
       The money is basically allocated, albeit in tranches or pay as you go but the democrat congress voted it in. So this is not anything new at all Trump is only following the law.

       replyreport
    8. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Eric ~ BIG Difference Between a "CHEAP Symbolic FENCE" & the "GREAT Wall Inside Donald's Demented HEAD" ~ too bad we didn't have the "GREAT Wall" & "Immigration BANs" around the time "Drumpf's" DEAD-Beat Ancestors tried 2 get into the USA

       replyreport
    9. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       ahahaha! that was funny

       replyreport
    10. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        AP I am glad that you quit selling stock and went to Hollywood because you are entertaining to the max. Birthday party for my SEVEN year old in just a few. I know at least two dads will be illegals. And that is not including my illegality. Great!

        replyreport
12. 58

    customer numberposted 7 years ago

    Trump is 4 Times bankrupt, so he know the worth of money........................

    replyreport
    1. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       he owes a lot of countries, including china and russia. how he escaped scrutiny is beyond me.

       replyreport
    2. 86

       Terrielynn1posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       John, I looked it up. The latest news is 11 times.

       replyreport
    3. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Are you guys really that unsophisticated? Is it possible? Trump has never declared bankruptcy. GM has. Morgan Stanley has. Cities and States have. I think B of A has. But Donald Trump never has. Even Snopes confirms this fact. Look it up.

       replyreport
    4. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       yes, we are unsophisticated. we're rubes, cause we cant see how amazing trump is. you look it up. he owes russia, china, not to mention the workers he hasnt paid. check this out: Adam Khan@Khanoisseur. or Scott Dworkin@funder...facts and documents.

       replyreport
    5. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I thought I was harsh saying "unsophisticated" and I do apologize. I will just let your latest comment speak for itself. Fact versus belief may be harder than I thought to differentiate. Atheist vs. Christian arguments have same problem.

       replyreport
    6. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       yes. and fertilized egg v fully realized human being is one that this religious gvt will determine for me and my daughters.
       
       funny, i thought freedom also meant freedom from gvt. my bad

       replyreport
13. 0

    Shirl Urso-Farmerposted 7 years ago

    It seems to me that it's like putting up a fence around your yard and expecting your neighbor to pay for it.. just my thoughts..

    replyreport
    1. 91

       Rock_njposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I was just thinking about the analogy this morning.  If you have a problem with your neighbor, you put up a fence, but you don't send them the bill for what you did to solve your problem and make you more at ease.

       replyreport
    2. 76

       Ken Burgessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       If my neighbor's business was making 60,000 a year of off me, and I submitted a bill to him for a 15,000 fence, and he didn't pay it... I'd make sure he was no longer making 60,000 a year of off me thereafter... just saying... that's the reality.

       replyreport
    3. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Sure you would and you would sue him for the cost if he did not pay if he had dangerous Pit bulls running around with no fence of his own.

       replyreport
    4. 61

       fpherj48posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       John, It depends on what the "reason" is that U have a problem w/ UR neighbor. If he is dumping lethal poison on UR property, not only would he be totally responsible to pay 4 UR wall but he'd be arrested, fined, sued & possibly jailed.

       replyreport
    5. 61

       fpherj48posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Do U honestly believe 4 a moment this is not fair, just & a simple matter of legal common sense & responsibility?  Or do U think UR $$ should PAY 4 UR neighbor's crimes? The analogy is quite different now, don't U agree?

       replyreport
    6. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       And how much is the US making out of Mexico? selling arms, cheap labour for American factories, etc.
       Anyway building a wall is a simplistic way of dealing with problems, but that's Trump style. Don't think to much.

       replyreport
    7. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Peter, I am beginning to see a pattern in your comments. You really think that it is up to us to be fair to Iran, Mexico and Syria. And that them being fair to us -- is like a white priviledge thing. We do not deserve comity? We succeed so we owe?

       replyreport
    8. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       No Eric. I simply prefer a dialogue above a polarisation. I prefer a bridge above a wall. Working together instead of expulsing a foreign nation.
       The US is a leading nation and should be an example. Imagine every country building a wall.

       replyreport
    9. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Obviously, some don't understand a Robust Economy ~ NOW, Without a WALL & Due 2 Pres. Obama's Genius, We stand at Historically LOW 4.8% Unemployment, ZERO Inflation, Gas Prices Reasonable, Goods & Services Reasonable & Stock Market HIGHs

       replyreport
    10. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        AP that is just so cute and adorable. I really love how you frame things all good Obama and all bad Trump. Kind of like the dark knight and the white knight. Black and white. You should teach and make sure that your students can never see shades.

        replyreport
    11. 0

        PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Eric why is Trump seeking conflict. With Europe, China, Australia, Mexico. Just in a view weeks he turned the rest of the world against him. This never happened before with a US president. Not a wise strategy.

        replyreport
    12. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        its wise from a russian stand point. wreck western powers, cause division, hatred...walk right in to world domination. dont kid...china will stand w russia, as will iran. BRICS. what better way--destroy all we stand for.make us break.tried and tested

        replyreport
    13. 0

        PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Yes. Forget the Wall but take a look at Wallstreet, that's  where the real politics is. Trump is preparing it for another crisis. nothing better then a good crisis for the 1%. Disaster capitalism in making.

        replyreport
    14. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Peter this is a rational argument? "he turned the rest of the world against him"
        Black and white thinking combined with a healthy dose of embellishment of the truth. Politics are strange.

        replyreport
    15. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        what's stanger is that you are the same way with trump. he can do no wrong. in fact, all the rightys who mocked others for supporting obama or hillary are the same. they said, "hes your messiah", or "you worship her". well, take a look in the mirror!

        replyreport
    16. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Leslie that is false. Show me one full comment where I was supporting Trump instead of an issue. Where did you get your reason for this comment?

        replyreport
    17. 58

        Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah, Eric is WRONG on most issues, but I he doesn't seem to be GULLIBLE enough to have Voted for an UNHINGED Pathological LIAR Charlatan like "Donald Drumpf" ~

        replyreport
    18. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        because you never say the same thing to a trump supporter. you never accuse them of being black and white, and you never tell them to be more civil when they insult, mock and belittle.

        replyreport
    19. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Please do not get mad at me that the Trump supporters do not so much attack me. I have done a whole lot of work with Mex. Lived there. Live within 5 miles of border. Speak Spanish. My work was with China & Canada & Mex. Law & Biz is how I

        replyreport
    20. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        no, YOU dont attack THEM. if they say something negative about obama or hillary  you dont demand that they be fair. and when they insult liberals, you dont tell them to be civil. its like the ones here who say they are independent, but only bash dems

        replyreport
    21. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Do I have this right? You judge me harshly based on me not judging others harshly? Yikes. Go ahead and say something inanely Trump. I will smash you with my battering ram and infiltrate with my verbal catapult.  Show me once where I attacked a person

        replyreport
    22. 58

        Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        WoW Eric, U LIVE 5 Miles from the Border & Your Still ALIVE?? NOW B HONEST. what gives U the WILLIEs More, an Un-Doc Mexican Immigrant or a Drunk Christian Hillbilly with a Confederate FLAG Flappin' in the Bed of his PICK-Up Truck ??

        replyreport
    23. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        no, eric. you judge liberals harshly, and you dont do the same to republicans. thats all. and it seems to be a national disease. suddenly, its bad to obstruct the opposing party!..how do you like that? its awful to say bad things about the president

        replyreport
    24. 60

        MichaelMcNabbposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Oh but you forgot about your neighbor's biting dog and the lawsuit that follows.

        replyreport
    25. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        not only that, its taxation without representation! dont want it, wont use it, think its an affront to the word "freedom"! this is presidential overeach into me and my kids and their kids and their kids kids pockets: for a campaign slogan!

        replyreport
14. 86

    Terrielynn1posted 7 years ago

    Some of these answers make me , lol.  Here in Canada we share would share the cost. Put the fence on the border and each pay half. We have done this. I believe mr president won't though.

    replyreport
    1. 48

       mosquinposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       american posts are only for AMERICAN PPL. PLS.. DONT MAKE US BUILD ANOTHER WALL

       replyreport
    2. 0

       PeterStipposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       where was it stated that this post was for American people only?

       replyreport
    3. 86

       Terrielynn1posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Not sure why you felt the need to comment on my post. There is nothing stating it's a US question. I don't agree with a wall. There is already a fence. Everything the USA does effects us.

       replyreport
15. 80

    kwade tweelingposted 7 years ago

    Why should they be expected to pay? In a word: "Entitlement."
    
    It's interesting to me that we have people with this huge blind spot. "We are against the idea of taking resources from one person and giving them to another." Followed by, "we're going to take resources from Mexico, to pay for a wall we want, to keep them out."
    
    Double standard? Yes.
    
    There's a whole lot to be said about socialism that ties into this idea too, but to keep it simple: "We want a wall to keep you out, so you have to pay for it." Is exactly the ideology that is usually fought against by the Republican party, and pushed by the Democrats. Usually there's a big push to make it on one's own merit by Republicans.
    
    Keep in mind, this isn't even addressing whether or not I want a wall built. That's a different conversation altogether. The point is, if we want something, should we not be the ones to pay for it?

    replyreport
    1. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Out here when someone does construction that lays the ground barren, they have to build retainer type wall to keep mudslide and runoff from going on another's property. This idea that the creator of a nuisance should get a free wall is nonsense.

       replyreport
    2. 80

       kwade tweelingposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       ERIC! Hi.
       
       That's a fair point. That case has a clear offender though. (As not all Mexicans are a problem.)
       
       We could equate Mexico paying for a wall to US citizens paying for damage US based corporations do.

       replyreport
    3. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Kwade, there is no doubt that without a wall some get injured and with a wall some will get "injured". I suppose in the balancing act we will make some mistakes. Nice to here from you.

       replyreport
    4. 80

       kwade tweelingposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Agreed. We're not perfect. That's part of why we debate.
       
       I do think the wall is a mistake (partly because there's already one in place). I think it's more bait and switch: "Mexicans bad."
       
       Ditto. Nice to see you're still around too.

       replyreport
    5. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I think we have to be intelligent about three things here.
       A wall is slogan -- Fence is what we are talking about.
       You will pay for it -- does not mean writing a check to the contractors.
       Secure Fence Act -- sounded better than "wall" Act.

       replyreport
    6. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       so trump was lying when he said hed build a big beautiful wall. and mexico would pay for it. lying, or making it up for votes.

       replyreport
    7. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       That is a valid point. He used the word wall. I grant you that. That is why I do not necessarily suggest Trump is right. But rather the barrier/fence is right.
       For fun though consider this. It is bad if the "wall" of your intestine is perforated.

       replyreport
    8. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       its bad if you think its horrendous to always claim were broke when people need help, but you can curry favor and spend billions on an unproductive monstrous atrocity, because you used it as a slogan to get elected. 14 billion+...but "were broke" SMH

       replyreport
    9. 80

       kwade tweelingposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       On that note, roll back a bit here. There already is a fence.

       replyreport
    10. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        yes.and experts who say a wall is a waste of money. but all of us who have to hear the outrage about obamacare will now have to pony up for trumpenstein.and my kids.and their kids.and their kids kids.benefits me zero. but hey...double standards rule

        replyreport
    11. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Kwade it is an amazing project. To my knowledge under budget. Hundreds of miles of it. My chit chat with BP tell me it helps funnel and make their job easier. Around the sand dunes of So. Cal. it really looks strange. Wall/Fence? Who cares.

        replyreport
    12. 80

        kwade tweelingposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Exactly, Eric. It funnels well. Remember El Chapo? A new fence means new tunnels. The way I see it, a better fence is a band-aid approach. Good for certain times, but what I think we really need now is empathy. More love for each other.

        replyreport
    13. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Kwade that is awesome. My empathy rips me a new orifice over things like fences. But it has not infiltrated my logic center yet.

        replyreport
16. 57

    Freyja Holtposted 7 years ago

    Simple; Mexico shouldn't be expected to. If 45 and his supporters want a wall, they can pay for it.

    replyreport
    1. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Understood but why? A bad land owner creates a hazard to effect an adjacent landowner. He has to build a wall to keep his hazard in. The Law since before Plato. Why different now? In Mexico you cannot set a border between properties without a wall.

       replyreport
    2. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Walls Have Been OBSOLETE 4 Centuries Because the FOLLOWING Exist ~ DRONEs, Ramps, Ladders, Tunnels, Airplanes, Dynamite, Cannons Capable of Projecting DRUGs etc, Hot Air Ballons, BOATs etc ~ DUMPING Tons of Useless CONCRETE Solves NOTHING

       replyreport
    3. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       AP how about just one unbiased professional source for what you say. Just one that is not obviously anti-Trump. I am very interested to see if your opinions have a factual basis. Really, I really am.

       replyreport
    4. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       As USUAL Eric, I have no idea what your trying to say ~ In my Previous COMMENT, I Listed Several CONCRETE Proven Methods to BREACH and or CIRCUMVENT a Big Useless PILE of Obsolete Concrete ~ U can ACCEPT the TRUTH or Not, it's your CHOICE

       replyreport
    5. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       AP I simply ask for some sort of professional standard as to what you say in your opinion. I have no basis to determine if things like cannons and drones really defeat the purpose of the Fence Defense Act passed my democrats.

       replyreport
    6. 58

       Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Eric ~ Just 2 CLARIFY, I'm NOT a Gullible Hillbilly Trump SHEEP Living somewhere out in the STIX ~ DRONEs Fly Over WALLS & Cannons Shoot DRUG Projectiles OVER WALLs ~ lol ~ These R NOT "Professional Standards" they R Common Sense FACTs

       replyreport
    7. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       AP I have always loved the term for religionists as sheeple. I think you could work that in right with Trumpogolobites. I will meet with an ICE agent about a bad shooting down here, 5 miles from the border. I will run your "facts" by her. ????

       replyreport
17. 74

    Omar Eldamsheetyposted 7 years ago

    Why USA wants to build a wall? is this acceptable now ?

    replyreport
    1. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       well,we dont really know.according to one poll, 60% are opposed to it.it also doesnt matter. trumps base wants it, and trump is president.irrelevant whether the rest of us do.we will just be paying for it.after all,you cant repeal and replace a wall!

       replyreport
18. 60

    slock62posted 7 years ago

    I believe the issue  with Mexico is not going to be solved with a wall. They will  find a way into the US if they really want to  come here.They will just go around the wall. I'm sure there are ways to get in by water. Unless we can build the wall out into the ocean we might as well give up. I believe its a huge waste of tax dollars.
    Trump should just  give up trying to get Mexico to help pay for it.
    There are better ways to get them to stop coming here, like employers refusing to hire imigrant workers and stop  subsidizing their efforts to stay.  If they know they cant work here, they will stop coming.
    .

    replyreport
    1. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       some of us dont want to stop them from coming! some of us want there to be legal means for them to work and go home. or stay and be citizens. you know its drugs n guns that cause the problem.and people looking for cheap labor. this wall symbolic.

       replyreport
    2. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Leslie, this made me stop and think about the utility and efficacy of a nation doing symbolic things. Perhaps; Embassies, Bases in Germany, Warships in the Gulfs, Nat. Disaster aid, taking in 1,000 from Aus.,Marijuana,  planned parenthood. Hmmm

       replyreport
    3. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       yeah, like electing a woman prez. but what do we get? bush, 3 on hyphonated steroids. (actually, id call it putin 1.)

       replyreport
    4. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Leslie, good point. Maybe electing Trump was an in your face symbolism. Back to the Secure Fence Act which Democrats voted in favor of. Trump symbolically follows the law??  HRC voted for 700 miles of it.  Not originally a Trump idea. Hillary's yes!

       replyreport
    5. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       a fence is not a wall...hence, the symbolism. i saw a news report about this fence. people can still communicate through it, look at each other, possibly touch. a wall is an impenetrable barrior. closed. silent. forboding. are we keeping out vikings?

       replyreport
    6. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Pretty hard to touch between a double fence. 700 miles of it is not symbolic. But now you claim a wall is impenetrable. Killing other arguments saying wall is ineffective. I think we are coming to an agreement here. A barrier is good per HRC.

       replyreport
    7. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       excuse me, i never said wall is ineffective, i said i dont want it! talk about word games.
       
       i hate the idea. i dont want it. ill have to pay for it anyway, cause you do.
       america.

       replyreport
    8. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Oh I apologize, I see how my comment may have referred to you. Mea Culpa. You reflect your consistency well and thank you for challenging my thoughts and positions. My values respect your values.

       replyreport
    9. 77

       lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       i never see respect. i see mocking. quite obvious why so many people love the mocker-in-chief. remember the disabled reporter? i wont ever forget it. "go back to univision"  "get out of my country" i dont respect those values one iota. sorry.

       replyreport
    10. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        That seems like just an attack on the POTUS and nothing to do with Secure Fences Act being carried out now. Trump did not even vote on it like HRC.

        replyreport
    11. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        so where were all the favorable comments towards hillary from republicans?didnt they like her support of the fence?let me guess, since she was for it,they were for open borders..oops,your girlpal here said hillary was for open borders.1 of u is wrong

        replyreport
    12. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Make no mistake. None at all. Hillary voted for a 700 mile long double fence, via the Secure Fence Act. Leslie I am not even sure our congress did the right thing there. But it is a fact that the Act and the money were appropriated. Trump and the Law

        replyreport
    13. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        well, if thats true, then we have been subject to years of right wing propaganda against her. i saw right here on hp, that she is a soros open border nwo type, who wants muslims to come here, & institute sharia law..just like obummer. this is a l

        replyreport
    14. 60

        MichaelMcNabbposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        I agree with Leslie and I think the wall is stupid but the idea of Mexico paying for it doesn't bother me in the least.  I think it's funny actually and it's about time someone tells off the half witted Mexican government.

        replyreport
    15. 45

        Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Leslie I am talking public record here. Not fake news.

        replyreport
    16. 77

        lovemychrisposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        well, i wish you had said something when the fake news was being bandied about as fact! the fake news is why i dont believe anything coming from the rightensteins. not one syllable!!

        replyreport
    17. 54

        Hermela Debessayposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        Am slock what do u mean by having to stopthem from coming,I would like to inform u that half of the population of America is of immigrants and Americas economy is what it is because of the abundant labour America gets from this immigrants

        replyreport
19. 57

    bluesradioposted 7 years ago

    Not only who is going to pay for the wall, but who is going to build it?  Have you looked at a construction crew lately, and who makes up a large portion of the crew.......and you expect them to build a wall to keep out their relatives?  Yeah RIGhT!!!! That's not happening...The wall will look like Swiss Cheese....

    replyreport
20. 60

    ThinkHardposted 7 years ago

    They best way to stay out of this stop entering U.S without proper legal permission.

    replyreport
21. 80

    2besureposted 7 years ago

    They should pay for the wall because their people sneak into the US to work and send money back to their country thus helping the economy of Mexico.  Also, they are too afraid to deal with murderous drug cartel, so we have to deal with their problem.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       wrenchBiscuitposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Did U attend college, or public school? Did you not know that for the supply side of the equation to function there must be a demand? White Americans have created a demand for cheap Mexican labor. White Americans have also created a demand 4 drugs.

       replyreport
    2. 45

       Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Dang, I reckon white man is responsible for every failing spirit in the Navajo/Dine' world. My grandfather told me that we must give our heart for it to be taken. Have you given your heart Ronnie?

       replyreport
22. 52

    Sparkylambposted 7 years ago

    Well you could look at it this way; The Mexican government knows that the people are not supossed to be here in the U.S. so they must build a wall to keep thier own people inside thier own country,

    replyreport
23. 67

    Erin Orickposted 7 years ago

    I do think we need a wall as well as tougher laws for illegals and for the laws we have to be enforced more but I do not think Mexico should have to pay for the wall. Though I do think they are hypocrites for objecting to a wall being built. After all they have a wall to keep Guatemalan illegals out and the penalty for being in Mexico illegally for an American is automatically 2-10 years in prison, here in the US you get asked nicely to show up at a court hearing, might be deported but not guaranteed to be so and the American tax payers paying for their care. SO we need a wall but no need to make Mexico pay for it because it would pay for itself the first year alone when we are not loosing billions of taxpayer dollars to care for people that are not citizens.

    replyreport