It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: CranialSponge
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
The next step should be purging the CIA and DEA, since they caused the hell hole in Mexico.
Wall or no wall, the CIA/DEA will continue with their drug running cartel operations without even so much as a hiccup in the process.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: solargeddon
We ARE in a strong position. If we have to pay for the wall, it'll likely be more than compensated by the reduced drain on our economy.
If the rest of the world wants to trade with mexico, bully for them.
H.R. 6061, the "Secure Fence Act of 2006", was introduced on September 13, 2006. It passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on September 14, 2006 with a vote of 283–138.
On September 29, 2006, by a vote of 80–19 the U.S. Senate confirmed H.R. 6061 authorizing, and partially funding the "possible" construction of 700 miles (1,125 km) of physical fence/barriers along the border. The very broad support implied that many assurances were been made by the Administration—to the Democrats, Mexico, and the pro "Comprehensive immigration reform" minority within the GOP—that Homeland Security would proceed very cautiously. Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, announced that an eight-month test of the virtual fence he favored would precede any construction of a physical barrier.
On October 26, 2006, President George W. Bush signed H.R. 6061 which was voted upon and passed by the 109th Congress of the United States. The signing of the bill came right after a CNN poll showed that most Americans "prefer the idea of more Border Patrol agents to a 700-mile (1,125-kilometer) fence." The Department of Homeland Security has a down payment of $1.2 billion marked for border security, but not specifically for the border fence.
As of January 2010, the fence project had been completed from San Diego, California to Yuma, Arizona.[dubious – discuss] From there it continued into Texas and consisted of a fence that was 21 feet (6.4 m) tall and 6 feet (1.8 m) deep in the ground, cemented in a 3-foot (0.91 m)-wide trench with 5000 psi (345 bar; 352 kg/cm²) concrete. There were no fatalities during construction, but there were 4 serious injuries with multiple aggressive acts against building crews. There was one reported shooting with no injury to a crew member in Mexicali region. All fence sections are south of the all American canals, and have access roads giving border guards the ability to reach any point easily, including the dunes area where a border agent was killed 3 years before and is now sealed off.
The Republican Party's 2012 platform stated that "The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built." The Secure Fence Act's costs were estimated at $6 billion, more than the Customs and Border Protection's entire annual discretionary budget of $5.6 billion. The Washington Office on Latin America noted on its Border Fact Check site in about the year 2013 that the cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate was the reason it had not been completely fulfilled.
originally posted by: TheBulk
Vicente Fox thinks Trump is Hitler because he wants to put America first and promises jobs. He also said Mexicans are armed and ready to defend Mexico.......
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan
Yeah, the farm labor and day labor arenas are something I hate to see taken away.
But housekeeping can be a pretty decent paying position (especially if you get tips), and is often the target of ICE raids. Construction, oil field in particular, are solid jobs. Mechanic. Meat processing. Manufacturing dry good/frozen foods. All these are jobs that can support half a household, that are frequently raided by ICE.
Its not just migrant farm workers (who will still get in, I think, as they are crafty just like anyone else) and guys sitting outside Home Depot. Its all sorts of other jobs that should likely pay more, but dont because its under the table.
originally posted by: solargeddon
After having read this thread, I fail to see how Trump will be in a strong position.
America by the sound of it will end up paying for the wall
originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: waftist
Is President Trump completing what has been in the works for a while?
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burdman30ott6
We eliminate NAFTA and build the wall and the savings on eliminating all of those illegals from America's social spending programs combined with the tariffs on Mexican imports and return of many jobs to the US from Mexico will pay for that wall... Who presently benefits from that social spending and those jobs? Mexico does, obviously. The $100 Billion+ annual tax payer expense to feed, educate, incarcerate, and medically care for all of those illegal aliens is $100 Billion+ Mexico doesn't have to spend on their escapees and the $64 Billion annual US losses thanks to NAFTA are presently $64 Billion additional dollars into Mexico's economy.
Actually, it appears that we may need illegal/undocumented worked to help bolster our social services programs.
The truth is that undocumented immigrants contribute more in payroll taxes than they will ever consume in public benefits. Take Social Security. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), unauthorized immigrants -- who are not eligible to receive Social Security benefits -- have paid an eye-popping $100 billion into the fund over the past decade. "They are paying an estimated $15 billion a year into Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits," Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the SSA told CNNMoney. "Without the estimated 3.1 million undocumented immigrants paying into the system, Social Security would have entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover payouts starting in 2009," he said. As the baby boom generation ages and retires, immigrant workers are key to shoring up Social Security and counteracting the effects of the decline in U.S.-born workers paying into the system, Goss said. Without immigrants, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects that the system will no longer be able to pay the full promised benefits by 2037.
A 2013 CBO analysis of the failed bipartisan bill introduced by the so-called "gang of 8" that would have created a path to legal status for many undocumented immigrants found that increasing legal immigration would increase government spending on refundable tax credits, Medicaid and health insurance subsidies, among other federal benefits. But it would also create even more tax revenue by way of income and payroll taxes. That could reduce deficits by $175 billion over the first 10 years and by at least $700 billion in the second decade. ITEP estimates that allowing certain immigrants to stay in the country and work legally would boost state and local tax contributions by $2 billion a year.
Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Most of these programs require proof of legal immigration status and under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years.
Please read up at the link. This issue is more complicated than people like to make it out to be.
Mexico is in the weaker position, but they are in a "symbiotic" relationship with the US and while we may like to pound our chests because we are the big dog on the block, we may be only hurting ourselves in the end for no logical reason.
originally posted by: muse7
Do we really want to have a hostile nation on our southern border?
Do we really want to have Chinese military bases in Mexico?