The wall costs the government $10 more than a large pizza.

[Sunstone]

I have no side, next.

Yeah, and I'm a Nigerian prince who needs your help to shift ten million dollars out of my country. Send me five grand for the details. You're really creditable, MM. So really creditable.

Your side is losing this one. And with each day of the shutdown, it's losses grow bigger.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I live in a relatively crime free area but ever since my garage was broken into and my expensive power tools were stolen I keep a locked gate across the drive.

My insurance company want to know where I keep my vehicles overnight and because they are in effect in a locked compound, my premiums are reduced.

This makes sense to me and I can’t see why the same principle cannot apply to a country.

Are you serious?

 

[Mindmaster]

This is nonsense. There have been several bills passed by the House, including additional funding for border security. The GOP in the Senate even approved of it. Now they won't vote at all. That is where the blame rests despite your desire for the contrary.

It's not someone's fault because they raised an objection, you apparently don't understand negotiation. If someone objects to your proposal it's YOUR FAULT if you do not address their concern. So, if Trump says, "I'll do everything you want if you help me get X." Then, it's up to them.to accept or refuse that "counter-offer".

To put in another context, say we're buying a house... Owner wants $100,000 for it, you propose that you'll only pay that much if they fix the roof as well. If that owner refuses it's his fault the deal wasn't made, because if he accepted that he'd immediately get the house sold sans the small price of the roof repair. This is essentially what the Democrats are doing here, so despite all the media bull**** spin he counter-offered and they rejected it -- it's on them. Whether Trump accepts the deal or not, it's in their court -- they can hit back with another offer, or drop it. But, it's still their fault until there is a proposal on the table and they're not even doing that. They could have simply said, "OK, we want 5 billion for that and we'll give you 5 billion for this." But, that hasn't happened.

 

[Quetzal]

It's not someone's fault because they raised an objection, you apparently don't understand negotiation. If someone objects to your proposal it's YOUR FAULT if you do not address their concern. So, if Trump says, "I'll do everything you want if you help me get X." Then, it's up to them.to accept or refuse that "counter-offer".

Democrats offered compromise, he said no and doubled down. If that is what you think negotiation is, there is a career in obstructionist politics with the GOP waiting for you.

 

[Spirit of Light]

If we built the wall and rectified visa overstays, we'd save at least 150 billion each year after the initial outlay. So, how many poor people can you help with that?

150 billions are good, but instead of sending them back to a poor country like Mexico why not take care of them in America since they are there. Why not try to find friendly ways to dealing with people instead of hate and scaremongering and war?

I have no belief in Trump going to make america great again, he might make america only White but that will not make a happy nation

 

[Mindmaster]

Yeah, and I'm a Nigerian prince who needs your help to shift ten million dollars out of my country. Send me five grand for the details. You're really creditable, MM. So really creditable.

Your side is losing this one. And with each day of the shutdown, it's loses grow bigger.

I'm losing nothing, but my coffee... it just shot out my nose.

Anyway, follow the forum rules and talk about the topic, not me. If you have nothing to add that is relevant to the conversation, do so. Otherwise, please leave the thread to the topic, thanks.

 

[Estro Felino]

I read so many Mexican articles titled Los beneficios y las ventajas del muro....I mean....security is understood by both sides

 

[Mindmaster]

150 billions are good, but instead of sending them back to a poor country like Mexico why not take care of them in America since they are there. Why not try to find friendly ways to dealing with people instead of hate and scaremongering and war?

I have no belief in Trump going to make america great again, he might make america only White but that will not make a happy nation

Do we have a shortage of citizens here that wouldn't be helped by that money already? Just saying... I just think our duty is primarily to our own citizens, if we got something left after that we can save the planet with that. That's kind of where I am at with it... If we don't have a single American person homeless and starving then I'm down with giving any extra money away.

And, it has nothing to do with hate or scaremongering, unless you think all crime statistics are racist. If that's the case, I can't help you.

 

[Mindmaster]

I read so many Mexican articles titled Los beneficios y las ventajas del muro....I mean....security is understood by both sides

I'm pretty sure the wall would even make things easier for the Mexican authorities, I mean there are always good guys in law enforcement who are not corrupt, even in the countries where it is rampant. If the US border is closed to the bad traffic it stops going through border towns -- their quality of life immediately improves.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm losing nothing, but my coffee... it just shot out my nose.

Anyway, follow the forum rules and talk about the topic, not me. If you have nothing to add that is relevant to the conversation, do so. Otherwise, please leave the thread to the topic, thanks.

Attempting to dismiss me will not change the fact the American public has decided that your Toddler in Chief -- and not the Democrats -- is the one to blame for the shutdown. I'm just the messenger.

 

[Notanumber]

Are you serious?

Absolutely, the UK would be in an even sorrier state if we did not have the English Channel.

 

[Mindmaster]

Democrats offered compromise, he said no and doubled down. If that is what you think negotiation is, there is a career in obstructionist politics with the GOP waiting for you.

As is his right to do so, he has a right to reject any deal that doesn't meet his requirements. They know what his requirements are, so they can either deal with that or not. And personally, I want both parties to "get what they want" if it's reasonable. I'm still trying to figure out where that 50 billion that was already supposed to be spent on this went... And that was during Obama's tenure...

So, I'm mostly at this point with it -- the Dems were cool with spending 50 billion because it wasn't Trump's idea, and now that it is 5 billion (on tenth of that) is a sticking point. Yeah, call me confused.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Do we have a shortage of citizens here that wouldn't be helped by that money already? Just saying... I just think our duty is primarily to our own citizens, if we got something left after that we can save the planet with that. That's kind of where I am at with it... If we don't have a single American person homeless and starving then I'm down with giving any extra money away.

And, it has nothing to do with hate or scaremongering, unless you think all crime statistics are racist. If that's the case, I can't help you.

I see people as people, not as nationality, i dont care where people come from. Just see that The way USA is going now they will close them self in and not be the "leading nation" they used to be before.
Nations need to work together to make our world better, but no nation want to do so because the "lose" the power over others. Just stupid, we are all human beings who should help each other withour thought of locking someone out. If nations worked together all crime could be solved

 

[Revoltingest]

In my view yes. If there is need, Democrats should start charitable fund me's to support the furloughed state employees...but not a single penny should go to that ridiculous idea of a wall.

Ridiculous ideas do get funded.
Some of them are far worse than the proposed wall, eg, the various recent wars.
Their ill effects & costs dwarf the wall, yet they got & still get bi-partisan funding.

As we approach the cost of the shutdown exceeding the cost of the wall, it appears
that the Dems are cutting off their nose to spite their face. IOW, to save money on
the wall is going to cost more than building it even if they get their way.
(Game of go analogy: When you have a heavy group under attack, defending
it can create weaknesses which will cost you the game. Don't save the group,
but force the opponent to attack in such a way that he's weakened.)

Their problem is that they're too wedded to the belief that Trump is wrong, & they are
right. Being right is irrelevant. Trump is who he is, & he does what he does.
I won't say that "resistance is futile", but "resistance must be tempered with practicality".
It's a game of chicken, thus each side must consider the predilections of the other.
The most efficient path is negotiating something quickly.

 

[Mindmaster]

Attempting to dismiss me will not change the fact the American public has decided that your Toddler in Chief -- and not the Democrats -- is the one to blame for the shutdown. I'm just the messenger. And yes, you are a partisan for Trump. If you deny that, what does it say about you to anyone who is reading your thread?

Well, as the chief messenger of my political views, I hereby relieve you of your duty based on not knowing what you're talking about . (Which are not "Republican" or "Democrat", but I may vote for either, provided the candidate themselves is compelling.)

Probably, the only thing I like about Trump is he's not a politician, we've had enough of those screwing things up, time to pass the torch. I don't agree with everything he states, but I feel he cares about the country -- my impression of the Democrats and most of the establishment Republicans is that they only care about themselves. I have no "joy" in shutdowns, human suffering, or whatever.. But, sometimes what has to be done for the long haul involves some short-term hardships. I can deal with that if I can see a net positive for the country, messes are not made in a day nor unmade in one -- these matters are complicated. Sometimes all you do is make a bigger mess, but if you don't try something out you certainly won't improve. To quote an old basketball coach, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take." The Democrats really seem to be afraid of making "shots", and that doesn't equate to leadership to me. If that changes, I'll vote Dem again, until that time, nope, no way. (I barely like the Republicans, I just agree on constitutionalism and parts of their economic platform, but at the end of the day money is the only thing the government is involved in that personally affects me.)

 

[Augustus]

This is essentially what the Democrats are doing here, so despite all the media bull**** spin he counter-offered and they rejected it -- it's on them... the only thing I like about Trump is he's not a politician, we've had enough of those screwing things up, time to pass the torch. I don't agree with everything he states, but I feel he cares about the country

Didn't he have 2 years when the Pubs controlled both houses during which he failed to get his wall built? If it is an issue of such grave national importance, why didn't he make such a noble and principled stand when his own party was being so petty and churlish that they wouldn't let him get such a teeny-tiny sum of money? He'd have had far more leverage in that situation and would have been bound to win. And if it wasn't so important then, why does it now justify shutting down government in order to get it built?

 

[Mindmaster]

I see people as people, not as nationality, i dont care where people come from. Just see that The way USA is going now they will close them self in and not be the "leading nation" they used to be before.
Nations need to work together to make our world better, but no nation want to do so because the "lose" the power over others. Just stupid, we are all human beings who should help each other withour thought of locking someone out. If nations worked together all crime could be solved

I do care, but only in the economic sense. Those other countries are generating resources for those people, and we are doing the same for ours. But, that being said all economies are competing with each other, they don't live in a bubble. Wealth is always going to gravitate to whoever is better at making it, there is no way to "even it out". People are people, but people are also Americans, Polish, British, and so on. And, that division is actually helpful -- it keeps the entire world from imploding during financial crises and localizes the damage. Sure, some are going to have more or less, but that's what you get with trade -- some countries are just better or worse at it. It doesn't necessarily make them "bad people", but maybe they are "bad at making money" in comparison to another nation. Anyway, I'm not against helping other countries do as well as us or even better (showing them the ropes, etc.), but I'm completely against handouts -- it creates dependency, and doesn't solve their true problems. (Lack of skill earning....)

All that will happen if the USA stops giving away it's money is the world will have to switch from being a vassal state of the USA to standing on their own two feet. It's better for the world, and actually better for them. Though, it certainly wouldn't be in the short run.

 

[Mindmaster]

Didn't he have 2 years when the Pubs controlled both houses during which he failed to get his wall built? If it is an issue of such grave national importance, why didn't he make such a noble and principled stand when his own party was being so petty and churlish that they wouldn't let him get such a teeny-tiny sum of money? He'd have had far more leverage in that situation and would have been bound to win. And if it wasn't so important then, why does it now justify shutting down government in order to get it built?

The politics of this are complex, but the short of it is -- many center-leaning Republicans were in hotly contested races. They were not voting along the party lines because of concerns of being re-elected, ultimately it was foolish for them though because most of them lost their seats anyway. Despite what people think, many Republicans are RINOS and are very liberal or center-leaning. There are also a fair bit of center leaning or more conservative Democrats too. It's not all black and white.

 

[Stevicus]

"President Trump is asking for $5.7 Billion, out of an annual budget of $4.407 Trillion.

In other words, Trump wants 57 bucks, out of an annual budget of $44,070.

Think about that. Imagine your spouse saying, "We're not going back to work, the kids aren't getting their allowances, and no bills are getting paid until you give up the idea of spending 57 bucks to fence in our yard."

This is what Pelosi and Schumer have halted our government for."

source: Red White Blue News


Essentially, this is the level of absurdity to the Democrat position. They're literally arguing over one large pizza or so... (For us normal folks...) So, everyone has to suffer for that. Does that seem justified?

Anyway, I think such comparisons are important to understand what a pittance the total amount is. How does this make you feel about the positions various politicians are taking on this matter?

I don't particularly find that Democrat voters themselves are largely against border security or reasonably priced wall. (It seems price is the largest concern for Dems... Not whether we need to have one, or the people to keep it running.)

P.S. Also, what happened to the Secure Fence Act 50 billion? H.R.6061 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Secure Fence Act of 2006 Does anyone know? That's a helluva lot of fence.

I recall a scene from the movie Support Your Local Sheriff where they're putting Joe Danby in jail, but it was a new jail where they haven't put the bars in yet. The sheriff had a novel approach to dealing with the issue:

 

[youknowme]

"President Trump is asking for $5.7 Billion, out of an annual budget of $4.407 Trillion.

In other words, Trump wants 57 bucks, out of an annual budget of $44,070.

Think about that. Imagine your spouse saying, "We're not going back to work, the kids aren't getting their allowances, and no bills are getting paid until you give up the idea of spending 57 bucks to fence in our yard."

This is what Pelosi and Schumer have halted our government for."

source: Red White Blue News


Essentially, this is the level of absurdity to the Democrat position. They're literally arguing over one large pizza or so... (For us normal folks...) So, everyone has to suffer for that. Does that seem justified?

Anyway, I think such comparisons are important to understand what a pittance the total amount is. How does this make you feel about the positions various politicians are taking on this matter?

I don't particularly find that Democrat voters themselves are largely against border security or reasonably priced wall. (It seems price is the largest concern for Dems... Not whether we need to have one, or the people to keep it running.)

P.S. Also, what happened to the Secure Fence Act 50 billion? H.R.6061 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Secure Fence Act of 2006 Does anyone know? That's a helluva lot of fence.

If it is only 57 bucks then you pay for the wall. The value of 5.7 billion does not magically change just because you mentioned a bigger number in the same sentence.