So you caught the point. 5 billion doesn’t get you national security. This 5 billion isn’t worth the small amount of additional security it gets you.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
Printable View
So you caught the point. 5 billion doesn’t get you national security. This 5 billion isn’t worth the small amount of additional security it gets you.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
I completely disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
The wall could save us billions in welfare payments and healthcare for drug overdoses every year. We have quite the deficit, you know!
Before I get the "Trump tax cut" argument, I present exhibit 1 showing that we don't have a taxing problem...we have a spending problem. It is hard to look at this graph and make a partisan conclusion either, so anything that starts with "repub" or "dem" is just tribal crap.
If spending money will save us money, we need to do it. I am all for spending as much as possible to make sure those that come here are ready (and capable) to work and not just add to this problem. This is NOT the same place the folks who went through Ellis Island came to (thanks to the welfare state).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Government.png
Please note when LBJ's and the libs "Great Society" and the followup enabling off the backs of taxpayers kicked in.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
The last "caravan" was all about the children. You were in to the socialist mantra they used unsuccessfully that time. You have challenged anybody who said this caravan contained anybody but asylum seekers. When your own news sources admitted it, you finally give in and agree there are a few who may not actually be seeking asylum. But, let them in anyway right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I would have agreed that there were some who’s asylum claims were faulty from the get go if that were your argument. But that is not what you argued. You are still doing the same thing - arguing that a small number of the group that are not really seeking “asylum” proves the caravan didn’t include legitimate asylum seekers following a legitimate method for claiming asylum. The average asylum denial rate is somewhere greater than 80% in most offices. That doesn’t mean that someone doesn’t have a right to request it at a port of entry at the border.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
And I never said it was about the children. That was all you.
Caravaners are demanding $50K to return home. Extortion, baby! Of course those who orchestrated all of this get a hefty % of that money. Like slimy attorneys.
A WALL....with doors. But now, even I...who has been a moderating voice in this discussion....am growing weary of the BS coming from the caravaners and their enablers. I am getting closer to hardening my position on this matter.
talk to your doctor about cialisQuote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
On "the wall"....
Opponents to The Wall claim it won't stop illegals, won't stop terrorists, won't stop the flow of illegal drugs into our country. More on that later. But, what I can say without any reservations is this. Putting up "walls" (high fences) curbs criminal activity in neighborhoods.
I own rental properties, mostly in Natchitoches, and I have three units near NSU's campus in the area between MLK Blvd and 2nd Street, bordered by University Parkway and Bossier Street. One of the bigger rental property owners, the J's, hold 20+ properties in that same area. They spent $tens of thousands building solid, tall fences, 9-footers, topped by spikes to secure their properties. I cooperated, and shared the cost, where one of mine bordered their property. It has made a difference!
Most of the tenants in that area are students, and some faculty and coaches at NSU. There was a consistent problem with drugs, petty theft, simple burglary, vandalism, and general loitering for years. Since the fences were completed this summer....nothing. The police tell me the number of calls they get for that area has dropped dramatically. The bad guys used to cut between the houses, jump the 4-foot high fences, where there were fences, and operate at will. Not anymore!
Apparently walls work.
Look at those surpluses from 1998-2001. Some more of that right about now would really help.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
No it wouldn't. Our federal debt, when combined with the unfunded federal liabilities that exist, is already way past the point of no return. At this point we might as well print enough dollars into existence to give everybody everything they want with no income taxes at all. What difference does a few trillion dollars added to what we already owe make?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
The only way we'll ever be able to repay the debt we have is by monetizing it through hyper inflation and the absolute destruction of the dollar. A day of reckoning is coming and whenever it happens, we're all going to suffer the consequences of over 50 years of irresponsible congressional spending.
I don't believe "we", and by "we" I mean all of us, the whole American Nation, have the political will to fix the debt problem. We will continue to kick that can down the road...right up to one of those barriers you see at the end of a dead end road. We will, at some point, 10 years from now? 20 years? whenever it happens, run out of road.
It'll be like that scene in Forest Gump when he suddenly stops running. The crowd of sheeple who had been following him were lost..."Now, what are we supposed to do?" Those of you still around, when this nation runs out of road, will just have to deal with it.
:icon_roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
We won't get there with the dems promising tax cuts for "the rich".Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I think we'll soon see a short period of deflation followed by a long period of hyperinflation. I don't see how we'll possibly make it another 10 years without some kind of reset of the financial system, but I never thought things would have held together this long either.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80