House approves 5 billion for Trump’s wall

Page 4 of 6 [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Taradine
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 8 May 2018
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 117
Location: fold

21 Dec 2018, 8:57 pm

i'll tell you what it's called: huffing propane


what are you even trying to say


_________________
m


Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:03 pm

Buc wrote:
I hire illegals and I still want a wall. It’s called border security.

That's great, except it's not going to solve it. They'll just walk around the wall (there are areas that a wall physically can't be built on the border, but can be crossed by a human, albeit dangerously), dig under it, or avoid it all together and come by sea, or do like most do already: get a VISA and just overstay it. Hadrian's wall didn't stop the Romans from being overrun by the Saxons, the Great Wall of China didn't stop Kublai Kahn from conquering the Song dynasty, and a wall won't provide us any more border security than air because in the modern world there are multiple ways of bypassing it.

Edit: You're also one of the problems with illegal immigration, if you'd stop hiring them they'd stop coming. Stop giving them incentives to come here.



Last edited by Aristophanes on 21 Dec 2018, 9:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2018, 9:05 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
EzraS wrote:
I was referring to yours and others overall posting style displaying what appears to contain emotional reasoning and ranting. Referring to several people in general: "he's full of s**t and a liar!" type comments. If I ask if the person saying such things, if they have analyzed what was actually said, I get responses like "I don't have to, he's a liar and a conman!". So if hyperbole isn't the right term for that kind of rhetoric, what is?

Again, it's called a fact Ezra: Fact Checker Analysis President Trump has made more than 5,000 false or misleading claims

EzraS wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Again, 0 wall, 10 billion to Mexico is not hyperbole, it's technical term is called: a fact.


I still think a couple of years ago he actually did have some plan in mind, such as tariffs or similar, to get Mexico to fund the wall in a round about way.

Which should tell you how serious he was about it-- if he were serious you'd remember because he'd constantly be bragging about his plan. He is not, therefore he was not serious. And again, there was never a plan, there were 'ideas', which are nowhere close to a 'plan', which alludes to some strategy and process to accomplish a goal. Here's the ideas:
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Mexico will never cut a check to the U.S. Treasury, but President Donald Trump is zeroing in on a plan so that the president can argue America’s southern neighbor will indeed fund the border wall, according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

The plan aides are piecing together would force Mexico to pay for the wall in indirect ways, including through remittance fees and tapping Mexico’s trade surplus with the United States.

“He will find a way,” said a former Trump adviser who is in close contact with the White House. “The wall will be funded partially or all by an additional revenue stream.”

Publicly, the priority is getting the $25 billion or so that Trump says is needed to fund the wall as part of a package deal that would protect so-called Dreamers and reduce family migration. Privately, the White House is mulling over various proposals to ensure U.S. taxpayers are reimbursed for the wall’s initial costs — or at least some of the price tag.

While Trump’s team has not reached a consensus, leading proposals include adding a small percentage fee on money sent by individuals in the United States to recipients in Mexico. Another is directing a surplus in revenue from a revised trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short has also spoken favorably of a proposal presented by Republican members of Congress to have foreign tech workers, though largely not Mexican, pay for part of the wall, according to a U.S. source familiar with the conversations.

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, has shared a proposal on remittances with the White House.

“There are many, many proposals in the hopper,” she said. “They’re going through a process.”

SOURCE

So see, a bunch of ideas, but no plan. That was February of this year btw, so that was 10 months ago, and still no plan. That should tell you how serious he was about Mexico paying for it. Ask yourself: If this were Trump's personal business and there was a property he seriously wanted to acquire, would he wait around 10 months (and counting) to start the ball rolling? Again, he's not serious, he's stringing you along.

To be honest, the Republicans have been stringing you all along for almost 40 years. You know who was the first president to campaign on being tough on illegal immigration? Ronald Reagan in 1984. You know what the result was? The first amnesty bill for illegal immigrants. You know who echoed that sentiment in his campaign? George H.W. Bush. Result: he was the first president that worked on NAFTA. You know who else was going to be tough on immigration (but compassionate about it)? George W. Bush. Result: you got a dinky fence around a small section of Texas that illegals routinely just walk around. And then there's Trump, who was going to be super tough on immigration and build a wall to end all walls. Result: 10 billion dollar stimulus to Mexico. See, the Republicans keep TELLING you they're going to do these things, but their ACTIONS are the complete opposite. There's two factors at play here, the wealthy elite that fund the Republican politicians, and thus are their boss, do not actually want illegal immigration solved because it would eliminate their near slave-labor and cut into their profits, and 2nd, the Republican politicians have every incentive not to solve immigration because it would take an issue off the table, an issue they can get you to go out and vote for them over and over and over again, so long as it never gets solved. Again, it's called a string along.


In my observation the Washington Post is highly partisan, unreliable and untrustworthy.

I have seen for myself examples of where what Trump actually said was taken out of context or misinterpreted etc. Because I paid attention to what was actually being said and in what context. Which I think is easier for me than others because I have no love or hate type of emotions when it comes to Trump. Which I believe is due to my autistic detachment. I think emotional bias tends to obscure or even cancel out reason and objectivity.

As for past US presidents and their administration wanting tougher immigration laws, you should also include Bill Clinton and the democrats.



Last edited by EzraS on 21 Dec 2018, 9:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Buc
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Dec 2017
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 320
Location: Los Angeles

21 Dec 2018, 9:14 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
Buc wrote:
I hire illegals and I still want a wall. It’s called border security.

That's great, except it's not going to solve it. They'll just walk around the wall (there are areas that a wall physically can't be built on the border, but can be crossed by a human, albeit dangerously), dig under it, or avoid it all together and come by sea, or do like most do already: get a VISA and just overstay it. Hadrian's wall didn't stop the Romans from being overrun by the Saxons, the Great Wall of China didn't stop Kublai Kahn from conquering the Song dynasty, and a wall won't provide us any more border security than air because in the modern world there are multiple ways of bypassing it.

Edit: You're also one of the problems with illegal immigration, if you'd stop hiring them they'd stop coming. Stop giving them incentives to come here.


I don’t mind the Mexicans. I don’t want the Arabs.


_________________
I buy my cats couches to scratch.


Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:20 pm

Buc wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Buc wrote:
I hire illegals and I still want a wall. It’s called border security.

That's great, except it's not going to solve it. They'll just walk around the wall (there are areas that a wall physically can't be built on the border, but can be crossed by a human, albeit dangerously), dig under it, or avoid it all together and come by sea, or do like most do already: get a VISA and just overstay it. Hadrian's wall didn't stop the Romans from being overrun by the Saxons, the Great Wall of China didn't stop Kublai Kahn from conquering the Song dynasty, and a wall won't provide us any more border security than air because in the modern world there are multiple ways of bypassing it.

Edit: You're also one of the problems with illegal immigration, if you'd stop hiring them they'd stop coming. Stop giving them incentives to come here.


I don’t mind the Mexicans. I don’t want the Arabs.

Oh I see it's just racism then. Good to know. And yeah, it is racism because illegal immigration isn't about 'Mexicans' it's about illegal workers driving down the wages of working citizens. But yeah, the fact you won't pay an American worker makes me sick to my stomach.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:32 pm

EzraS wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
EzraS wrote:
I was referring to yours and others overall posting style displaying what appears to contain emotional reasoning and ranting. Referring to several people in general: "he's full of s**t and a liar!" type comments. If I ask if the person saying such things, if they have analyzed what was actually said, I get responses like "I don't have to, he's a liar and a conman!". So if hyperbole isn't the right term for that kind of rhetoric, what is?

Again, it's called a fact Ezra: Fact Checker Analysis President Trump has made more than 5,000 false or misleading claims

EzraS wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Again, 0 wall, 10 billion to Mexico is not hyperbole, it's technical term is called: a fact.


I still think a couple of years ago he actually did have some plan in mind, such as tariffs or similar, to get Mexico to fund the wall in a round about way.

Which should tell you how serious he was about it-- if he were serious you'd remember because he'd constantly be bragging about his plan. He is not, therefore he was not serious. And again, there was never a plan, there were 'ideas', which are nowhere close to a 'plan', which alludes to some strategy and process to accomplish a goal. Here's the ideas:
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Mexico will never cut a check to the U.S. Treasury, but President Donald Trump is zeroing in on a plan so that the president can argue America’s southern neighbor will indeed fund the border wall, according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

The plan aides are piecing together would force Mexico to pay for the wall in indirect ways, including through remittance fees and tapping Mexico’s trade surplus with the United States.

“He will find a way,” said a former Trump adviser who is in close contact with the White House. “The wall will be funded partially or all by an additional revenue stream.”

Publicly, the priority is getting the $25 billion or so that Trump says is needed to fund the wall as part of a package deal that would protect so-called Dreamers and reduce family migration. Privately, the White House is mulling over various proposals to ensure U.S. taxpayers are reimbursed for the wall’s initial costs — or at least some of the price tag.

While Trump’s team has not reached a consensus, leading proposals include adding a small percentage fee on money sent by individuals in the United States to recipients in Mexico. Another is directing a surplus in revenue from a revised trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short has also spoken favorably of a proposal presented by Republican members of Congress to have foreign tech workers, though largely not Mexican, pay for part of the wall, according to a U.S. source familiar with the conversations.

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, has shared a proposal on remittances with the White House.

“There are many, many proposals in the hopper,” she said. “They’re going through a process.”

SOURCE

So see, a bunch of ideas, but no plan. That was February of this year btw, so that was 10 months ago, and still no plan. That should tell you how serious he was about Mexico paying for it. Ask yourself: If this were Trump's personal business and there was a property he seriously wanted to acquire, would he wait around 10 months (and counting) to start the ball rolling? Again, he's not serious, he's stringing you along.

To be honest, the Republicans have been stringing you all along for almost 40 years. You know who was the first president to campaign on being tough on illegal immigration? Ronald Reagan in 1984. You know what the result was? The first amnesty bill for illegal immigrants. You know who echoed that sentiment in his campaign? George H.W. Bush. Result: he was the first president that worked on NAFTA. You know who else was going to be tough on immigration (but compassionate about it)? George W. Bush. Result: you got a dinky fence around a small section of Texas that illegals routinely just walk around. And then there's Trump, who was going to be super tough on immigration and build a wall to end all walls. Result: 10 billion dollar stimulus to Mexico. See, the Republicans keep TELLING you they're going to do these things, but their ACTIONS are the complete opposite. There's two factors at play here, the wealthy elite that fund the Republican politicians, and thus are their boss, do not actually want illegal immigration solved because it would eliminate their near slave-labor and cut into their profits, and 2nd, the Republican politicians have every incentive not to solve immigration because it would take an issue off the table, an issue they can get you to go out and vote for them over and over and over again, so long as it never gets solved. Again, it's called a string along.


In my observation the Washington Post is highly partisan, unreliable and untrustworthy.

I have seen for myself examples of where what Trump actually said was taken out of context or misinterpreted etc. Because I paid attention to what was actually being said and in what context. Which I think is easier for me than others because I have no love or hate type of emotions when it comes to Trump. Which I believe is due to my autistic detachment. I think emotional bias tends to obscure or even cancel out reason and objectivity.

As for past US presidents and their administration wanting tougher immigration laws, you should also include Bill Clinton and the democrats.



Yes, yes, your autism gives you the super power of no emotions, giving you the ability to see real reality where the rest of merely seeing a dream. Problem is you forget, I have the same ailment, and we do indeed have emotions just an inability to express those emotions properly. Think about what you're saying: I'm different than everyone else, I'm the only one that sees truth because of detachment. Well, hate to tell you this, you're human, just like the rest of us and you suffer from the same problems of perspective we all do: no one has the ability to see a Godlike third person omniscient view of the world. As Quintillian said: "You'll never meet a man without an agenda, merely one that claims they have none."

And yes, Bill Clinton gave the string along too-- he poached a good portion of those wealthy donors back in 1992 and they demanded the same concessions from him they did from the Republicans. He also weakened the Democratic platform by doing so, the Democrats used to be unabashedly pro-worker, now they're just 'meh, it'll sort itself out'.



Buc
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Dec 2017
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 320
Location: Los Angeles

21 Dec 2018, 9:36 pm

Californians are sh***y workers. You have to hire illegals. It’ll come out like s**t if you don’t.

There’s always white people at Home Depot looking for work, but nobody wants them. They’re all f****d up on drugs.


_________________
I buy my cats couches to scratch.


Meistersinger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,700
Location: Beautiful(?) West Manchester Township PA

21 Dec 2018, 9:45 pm

Buc wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Buc wrote:
I hire illegals and I still want a wall. It’s called border security.

That's great, except it's not going to solve it. They'll just walk around the wall (there are areas that a wall physically can't be built on the border, but can be crossed by a human, albeit dangerously), dig under it, or avoid it all together and come by sea, or do like most do already: get a VISA and just overstay it. Hadrian's wall didn't stop the Romans from being overrun by the Saxons, the Great Wall of China didn't stop Kublai Kahn from conquering the Song dynasty, and a wall won't provide us any more border security than air because in the modern world there are multiple ways of bypassing it.

Edit: You're also one of the problems with illegal immigration, if you'd stop hiring them they'd stop coming. Stop giving them incentives to come here.


I don’t mind the Mexicans. I don’t want the Arabs.


I don’t care if you hiring Mexicans, Israelis, Finns, or even little green men from Andromeda. If they’re here illegally (what people almost 50 years ago in my neck of the woods would call WOP’s (short for without Papers), your business deserves to be seized by the IRS (since you are obviously not withholding FICA, SSI, and Medicare for those illegals (by virtue of not filing W-4s or 1099’s) your illegal employees be seized by ICE and deported (since you obviously didn’t file I-9’s with, IIRC, INS), and your sorry butt be forced into bankruptcy and thrown in jail. The law is the law, even if it is an ass.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:52 pm

Buc wrote:
Californians are sh***y workers. You have to hire illegals. It’ll come out like s**t if you don’t.

There’s always white people at Home Depot looking for work, but nobody wants them. They’re all f****d up on drugs.

My god. I've met lazy Mexicans, I've met Mexicans that work their ass off, same with white people, can't say on African-Americans because there are none in my area but I assume it's just like any other demographic: there's probably some lazy ones and some go-getters, probably some kind ones and probably some downright evil ones. Outside skin tone, all the races in the U.S. are pretty much the same because we're all competing for the same crap in the same system under the same rules. There are white people gaming the system, black people gaming the system, and hispanics gaming the system, but there are also white people working hard for the system, black people working hard for the system, and hispanics working hard for the system. And yeah, I'm sure it's completely because 'all the whites are lazy' and not because you don't want to pay a working American wage.

For Ezra-- pay close attention to Buc and his attitude towards American workers: he's one of the people giving your side the string along on illegal immigration. Perhaps that'll illustrate to you better than I can why the Republicans will never solve this issue.



Buc
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Dec 2017
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 320
Location: Los Angeles

21 Dec 2018, 9:53 pm

I’m having them do yard work and fix stuff. They don’t make me money.


_________________
I buy my cats couches to scratch.


Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:54 pm

Meistersinger wrote:
Buc wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Buc wrote:
I hire illegals and I still want a wall. It’s called border security.

That's great, except it's not going to solve it. They'll just walk around the wall (there are areas that a wall physically can't be built on the border, but can be crossed by a human, albeit dangerously), dig under it, or avoid it all together and come by sea, or do like most do already: get a VISA and just overstay it. Hadrian's wall didn't stop the Romans from being overrun by the Saxons, the Great Wall of China didn't stop Kublai Kahn from conquering the Song dynasty, and a wall won't provide us any more border security than air because in the modern world there are multiple ways of bypassing it.

Edit: You're also one of the problems with illegal immigration, if you'd stop hiring them they'd stop coming. Stop giving them incentives to come here.


I don’t mind the Mexicans. I don’t want the Arabs.


I don’t care if you hiring Mexicans, Israelis, Finns, or even little green men from Andromeda. If they’re here illegally (what people almost 50 years ago in my neck of the woods would call WOP’s (short for without Papers), your business deserves to be seized by the IRS (since you are obviously not withholding FICA, SSI, and Medicare for those illegals (by virtue of not filing W-4s or 1099’s) your illegal employees be seized by ICE and deported (since you obviously didn’t file I-9’s with, IIRC, INS), and your sorry butt be forced into bankruptcy and thrown in jail. The law is the law, even if it is an ass.


Exactly, the only way to solve this issue is to s**t hammer the people giving illegals the incentive to come over here.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 9:56 pm

Buc wrote:
I’m having them do yard work and fix stuff. They don’t make me money.

It's still a job an American citizen could have done.



Buc
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Dec 2017
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 320
Location: Los Angeles

21 Dec 2018, 10:00 pm

No it isn’t. The white people at Home Depot look like they just left a brick fight.


_________________
I buy my cats couches to scratch.


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2018, 10:04 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
Yes, yes, your autism gives you the super power of no emotions, giving you the ability to see real reality where the rest of merely seeing a dream. Problem is you forget, I have the same ailment, and we do indeed have emotions just an inability to express those emotions properly. Think about what you're saying: I'm different than everyone else, I'm the only one that sees truth because of detachment. Well, hate to tell you this, you're human, just like the rest of us and you suffer from the same problems of perspective we all do: no one has the ability to see a Godlike third person omniscient view of the world. As Quintillian said: "You'll never meet a man without an agenda, merely one that claims they have none."


Again I see so much drama written there by you, leading to a ridiculous assessment of what I said. I remember you said you prefer to employ tactics to win over your audience, based on that segment in the movie Thank You for Smoking, rather than having a straightforward conversation. In other words you are putting on a performance. And once again the thread has derailed into being about you and me rather than about the subject.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 10:09 pm

EzraS wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Yes, yes, your autism gives you the super power of no emotions, giving you the ability to see real reality where the rest of merely seeing a dream. Problem is you forget, I have the same ailment, and we do indeed have emotions just an inability to express those emotions properly. Think about what you're saying: I'm different than everyone else, I'm the only one that sees truth because of detachment. Well, hate to tell you this, you're human, just like the rest of us and you suffer from the same problems of perspective we all do: no one has the ability to see a Godlike third person omniscient view of the world. As Quintillian said: "You'll never meet a man without an agenda, merely one that claims they have none."


Again I see so much drama written there by you, leading to a ridiculous assessment of what I said. I remember you said you prefer to employ tactics to win over your audience, based on that segment in the movie Thank You for Smoking, rather than having a straightforward conversation. In other words you are putting on a performance. And once again the thread has derailed into being about you and me rather than about the subject.

Then you misinterpreted what I was saying: Thank You for Smoking illustrates a ton of rhetorical devices in an easy to follow, humorous context. And no, what I'm saying is that you're not special, none of us are, you have bias just like everyone else, it's a part of being a living creature: personal perspective. You can claim to have no bias all you want, but you still have it even if you don't recognize it, because we all have it, it's a part of the human experience. And derailed how, we're still talking immigration, and thus the wall.

Edit: assuming you'd have responded to the Bill Clinton part at least.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

21 Dec 2018, 10:22 pm

Government will shutdown at midnight.

So see, as predicted the GOP is shutting down the government, and this entire thread was moot. Go go obvious results!