Why do liberals keep asking the same, tired, old stupid questions? We answer them, and we answer them ... and sure enough, the next day, some idiot asks the same questions.
Geesh .....
You don't know how to answer it and you know it.
They have been endlessly answered ....
If you promise to never ask them again, I'll answer them.
Okay. However my stipulation is that they are valid answers to the points I gave You
1) How would the wall prevent tunnelling or people, you know, climbing over it?
Liberals have intentionally restricted the border protection discussion to consider nothing but the physical “wall”. In fact, they have even rejected the idea that a fence constitutes a ‘wall’.
The reality is much different. While a physical fence/wall/barrier will be built the length of the border, there are many other elements that will be used to provide border protection. Drones, Border patrols, satellite scans, ground-penetrating radar, tripwires, and overflights will all be used to secure the border. While the exact performance parameters of GPR is classified, suffice it to say that it will easily identify tunnels, and can do it from great distances. In addition, thermal scans, from satellites, will be able identify tunnels, since the tunnel radiates a different temperature than the surrounding earth. It’s like painting a Picasso.
2) How will the wall be built through private land, mountains, rivers, and towns? Whose authority would decide how it be would re-routed through those areas?
The engineering will, most likely, be done under the control of the Army Corps of Engineers. The methodology used, at any given point, is dependent on the terrain and ground source. It will obviously change as the terrain changes. Just like your city has an easement in your back yard for power or cable lines, the federal government has the same easement for lands abutting the border, with the exception of a single 75 mile strip that is controlled by the Navajo. They have, however, very clearly indicated that they want the wall built, since their area is a primary funnel for drug and human trafficking, and they suffer all the issues of that (theft, murder, destruction, etc.)
The federal government, of course, still has right of eminent domain for all land if needed for national security sources. Procurement of the land isn’t a legal issue, but recompense may be.
3) How about the never ending cost of staffing or maintaining the wall's viability?
Frankly, maintenance of a concrete wall is not a big issue. I would assume they will use a sensor system to monitor the integrity of the wall, and respond from some central location when needed. The cost of maintenance is negligible. I would think that, eventually, maintenance of the wall will be turned over to the military or other government agency.
4) How would it do anything to prevent the high percentage of illegals who cross the border legally but overstay their visas?
A non-sequitur. You’re asking the solution for one portion of the immigration problem to be the total solution.
Some sources estimate that about 54% of all illegal immigration comes across the border. Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States
The concept is simple. Stop the flow (or at least, slow it significantly), and then move on to the next element. While I don’t have direct access to the sequence of events, I would imagine it looks something like this:
1) Secure the southern border (build, and man, the wall)
2) Overhaul the visa system to increase tracking and reporting
3) Enhance Immigration Services to interdict and remove those who overstay their visa, or violate reporting procedures.
4) Once the flow of illegal immigration is stopped, begin to address the issue of those illegal immigrants already in country.
5)
I think it’s clear to everybody – even those liberals who whine about deportation forces, etc., etc. because that fits their political narrative - that there will never be a wholesale deportation. Once the criminal element is removed, and a process is established to remove those who become criminals (elimination of sanctuary cities), there will be a discussion about the humane handling of the remaining illegals.
5) WHO THE HELL IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE WALL? it won't be Mexico, ya dumbassess. Just because you think Mexico is inferior, it doesn't mean they are pussies. They don't roll over like Repubs in office do to special interests.
Everybody understands that, in the end, the consumer will pay for the wall, whether it’s thru our own taxes paying for the wall, or because of the increased cost of goods from Mexico.
However, what fails to be mentioned is that increasing the costs of goods from Mexico increases the viability of those goods being produced in the US. If Ford can’t get its cars cheaply via Mexico, they will make them here in order to avoid shipping costs.
In addition, we need to realize that the US truly has the big stick. We buy about $295 billion worth of goods from Mexico, or about 23% of their GDP. They, on the other hand, buy about $235 billion worth of goods from the US, or less than 1% of our GDP. Cessation of trade between the countries would be catastrophic for Mexico, but would hardly make a blip in our economy. They, simply, cannot afford a trade war.
In addition, we provide about $320 million in aid, the loss of which would be disastrous for Mexico. U.S. provides aid worth $320 million a year to Mexico; experts say yanking it could hurt
The short answer to your question – the consumer ALWAYS pays increased cost of goods, no matter how it’s packaged. However, diverting money intended for Mexico could offset the government’s investment. When you couple that with some businesses returning to the US, the overall benefit might be more than you suspect.
Mexico and the US will come up with some face-saving device that transfers Mexican money to the US, and then they will recoup it thru increased product costs. They, simply, cannot afford not to – no matter the preening and posturing.
Lol
1) Okay, so you're saying that hi-tech technology would prevent tunnelling and jumping the wall? Um okay. When did Trump ever explain this? When did he ever say the cost for such technology wouldn't be astronomical?
2) This isn't an answer. You don't explain how engineering capability would adapt to ANY foundation material.
3) "I would assume..." Is Trump listening to your suggestions? We have no fucking idea what Trump's design is for this.
4) There is no Trump plan for those types of illegals. Someone obviously convinced him a mass deportation policy is a stupid idea as well.
5) Oh, so now you're okay with a public cost? Why didn't Trump just lay this out clearly before?
1) Trump isn't an engineer - he's a director. He directs something to happen, and engineers figure out how to get it done. This is part of the problem liberals are having. They are trying to take everything Trump says literally, rather than conceptually. Somebody said, ":Liberals take Trump literally, but not seriously. Conservatives take Trump seriously, but not literally." That seems more and more obvious every day.
As for the cost of this "technology" - in the scheme of things, it's nickels and dimes. This is technology that is decades old. When I was in Viet Nam, we used sensors to COUNT the number of troops moving up and down the Ho Chi Minh trail. Even then, these sensors were throw-away items. GPR,and heat sensing has been used by the military for at least a decade. In the late 70s, I was assigned to a SAC base that had ground sensors surrounding the Alert Ramp (where the B-52's were loaded with nuclear weapons), we could tell when a rabbit hopped too close to the fence.
In addition, construction is what Trump did. These things are self-evident to him - he forgets how uninformed most people are about it.
2) Sorry - I assumed that was self-evident. In 'normal' dirt, the foundation is poured and secured with rebar. In rock, pins are driven into the bedrock and then the wall is attached to those pins. In mud, cement stanchions are driven thru to the base, and the wall foundation is attached to those stanchions. (I'm not a structural engineer - I'm sure we have somebody here who could give you a more concise answer)
3) Since I don't have access to the wall plans, I can't say definitively that they will install sensors in the wall, but given that the sensors are installed in all dams, I am sure the Army COE are well aware of them. Frankly, if we were told the design, we probably wouldn't understand it - we would just accept it because it sounded sufficiently complex.
4) You can't fix the wound until you stop the bleeding.
5) I think Trump assumes that you are intelligent enough to understand that the consumer always pays ultimately. What he hasn't figured out yet is that the left chooses to be deliberately ignorant and simplistic. Further, his approach leaves the ball squarely in Mexico's court. They can either accept the fact that they are going to have to sell their goods at a higher, and thus less competitive, price, or they are going to have to lose "free money" coming from the US. There is more to come, to be sure.
