Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Dark_Grey

Border Wall Funds Approved

315 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RavenHawk
2 minutes ago, Claire. said:

From your lips to Trump's ears.

Hey, I said I agree with the general concept.  I didn’t say I had his ear.  It’s just that if anybody asks me for my opinion, this is it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

That's not how it works.  In imminent domain the land they don't use must be sold at a profit by law.

The Fifth Amendment contains property rights protection in that it guarantees that no private property shall “be taken for public use without just compensation.” The land doesn't have to be sold at profit, but the owners must be given what the land is worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
13 minutes ago, OverSword said:

That's not how it works.  In imminent domain the land they don't use must be sold at a profit by law.

Well then the law needs to be changed; there needs to be a special exemption in this one case.  I said my treatise was not all inclusive.  I don’t want to hear negativity.  I don’t want to hear that you can’t do that.  I do want to hear that there might be a problem with this part or that part and here are (rational) possible solutions.

Edited by RavenHawk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
9 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Hey, I said I agree with the general concept.  I didn’t say I had his ear.  It’s just that if anybody asks me for my opinion, this is it.

It was just my way of twisting an idiom around to suggest that what you wrote should be 'heard' by Trump. :)

Edited by Claire.
Major typo correction.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
9 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Well then the law needs to be changed; there needs to be a special exemption in this one case.  I said my treatise was not all inclusive.  I don’t want to hear negativity.  I don’t want to hear that you can’t do that.  I do want to hear that there might be a problem with this part or that part and here are (rational) possible solutions.

What do you mean by a special exemption in this case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kartikg
34 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I can tell you I'? m against the government spending (wasting) money like this.  In 2 yea? rs when this won't be funded again, or in 4 years when it will be dropped altogether, then what will this have been spent on?  How far in debt are we?  How much further in debt do you want to go?  What percentage of our collective income is the government spending?  This is waste.

Okay so your gripe is about money, and you will be okay if government finds cheaper but effective alternatives in preventing the illegal border crossing? in theory you wouldn't mind a wall if usa had money to burn? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
55 minutes ago, OverSword said:

try a few miles northward.for construction sites, material storage etc. 

There should be enough federal lands already in existence within miles of the border to stage material storage, barracks, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
41 minutes ago, Claire. said:

What do you mean by a special exemption in this case?

After the owner is compensated, they don’t have any right to that land.  If the government then wants to sell off any excess land, the original owner can certainly put in an offer, but usually that land will be sold for more than what the owner was compensated for.  What needs to happen is that actual compensation isn’t given until final disposition of the Wall.  If the owner can show a loss of income, then the government should compensate for usage until the project is over.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
1 hour ago, Claire. said:

The Fifth Amendment contains property rights protection in that it guarantees that no private property shall “be taken for public use without just compensation.” The land doesn't have to be sold at profit, but the owners must be given what the land is worth.

But after the land has been purchased they don't return it to the entity they bought it from for the same price (which is usually an undervalued amount based on taxes paid on the property for the previous10 years or something) They sell it for a profit and minus that amount from the money they spent on the project.  I know because this happened to my uncle when they took his land using eminent domain for a place to park heavy equipment while updating train tracks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
47 minutes ago, kartikg said:

Okay so your gripe is about money, and you will be okay if government finds cheaper but effective alternatives in preventing the illegal border crossing? in theory you wouldn't mind a wall if usa had money to burn? 

I think his gripe is that times change and one Administration is under no obligation to fulfill any project the previous Administration starts.  By the end of Trump’s term, most everything established by the Obama Administration will be a bad memory.  I agree with OverSword about it being a waste at this point in time but at the same time I see it as defeatist.  Also, one of the main functions of government is building and maintaining national infrastructure, more so than social programs.  Social programs are not “The General Welfare”.  Providing border security is.  Congress needs to reform immigration law to include long term support of border security which would include anticipating future Executive Orders that might weaken the border wall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Stupid question.  Why is everyone saying a border wall is being funded when the only thing they are building is some fences and a levee?

From the article:  GOP leaders said the $1.6 billion fully meets Mr. Trump’s request to begin wall construction, which includes 32 miles of new border fencing in Texas, 28 miles of levee wall along the Rio Grande Valley, also in Texas, and 14 miles of replacement fence in San Diego.

So we are getting 28 miles of flood protection and 32 new miles of fencing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
1 hour ago, CeresExpo2000 said:

Benefits : Less Mexican Heroin pouring into the United States.

Are you really such naive to think that a multi-billion "industry" that performs perfect logistc will get stopped by a stupid fence? You are a dreamer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
3 minutes ago, OverSword said:

But after the land has been purchased they don't return it to the entity they bought it from for the same price (which is usually an undervalued amount based on taxes paid on the property for the previous10 years or something) They sell it for a profit and minus that amount from the money they spent on the project.  I know because this happened to my uncle when they took his land using eminent domain for a place to park heavy equipment while updating train tracks.

Ah okay, I misunderstood your earlier statement. Thanks for explaining. Your uncle must have been livid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
20 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Stupid question.  Why is everyone saying a border wall is being funded when the only thing they are building is some fences and a levee?

From the article:  GOP leaders said the $1.6 billion fully meets Mr. Trump’s request to begin wall construction, which includes 32 miles of new border fencing in Texas, 28 miles of levee wall along the Rio Grande Valley, also in Texas, and 14 miles of replacement fence in San Diego.

So we are getting 28 miles of flood protection and 32 new miles of fencing?

You have to start some place, even if it’s bolstering existing structure.  There probably will need to be a lot of prep work done before actual construction.  That could take a while.  But you have $1.6 billion for 1989 miles.  That comes to $804,000 per mile.  It obviously will cost more for building along the Rio Grande than it will cost for stretches in the Arizona/New Mexico deserts, but that will make for a very nice wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
13 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Ah okay, I misunderstood your earlier statement. Thanks for explaining. Your uncle must have been livid.

That would be putting it mildly.  He had to board his horses at a very expensive boarding ranch.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
9 minutes ago, toast said:

Are you really such naive to think that a multi-billion "industry" that performs perfect logistc will get stopped by a stupid fence? You are a dreamer.

Sooner or later, TPTB will understand that it won’t be the stupid fence that stops them but the armed patrol on our side of the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
1 minute ago, OverSword said:

That would be putting it mildly.  He had to board his horses at a very expensive boarding ranch.

Your Uncle is Trump? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
8 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Bolded: Israel seems to be doing just fine with their's. 

That... and it's a military fortification with personnel and monitoring along its entire length.

And... they proactively chase down thr enemy they are trying to keep out.

Israel's Wall is so much more than bricks and mortar (and razor wire and ditches.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
10 minutes ago, OverSword said:

That would be putting it mildly.  He had to board his horses at a very expensive boarding ranch.

That's really unfortunate. Abuse of eminent domain is not at all unusual and it would not surprise me if land seizures for the wall get just as ugly as they did during the Bush administration. Apparently condemnation letters have already gone out to some property owners (primarily for fence repairs). We'll have to see how it all unfolds.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
18 minutes ago, OverSword said:

That would be putting it mildly.  He had to board his horses at a very expensive boarding ranch.

So there is a market to make money from? When the wall is built and the land is taken from private ranchers, grazing land is going to be required.

If I had money I would be investing in it. There is opportunity in everything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
32 minutes ago, Kismit said:

So there is a market to make money from? When the wall is built and the land is taken from private ranchers, grazing land is going to be required.

If I had money I would be investing in it. There is opportunity in everything.

The only problem with your idea is that the land is picked up by the government for a price based on the taxes the current owner is paying, which is usually less than what the actual value of the land is and then the land later sold by the government (assuming there is any) goes at a premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Sooner or later, TPTB will understand that it won’t be the stupid fence that stops them but the armed patrol on our side of the fence.

 

You`re naive too. There is a market for drugs in the US and the needs of that market will be served in a way to fullfill the needs of the market. Thats simple basic economics and there is no difference if the products are bananas or drugs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
31 minutes ago, toast said:

You`re naive too. There is a market for drugs in the US and the needs of that market will be served in a way to fullfill the needs of the market. Thats simple basic economics and there is no difference if the products are bananas or drugs.

And do you have evidence where this government is getting kickbacks?  Although, wasn’t that what Fast and Furious was all about?  But then that has only been part of the Obama Administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian
On 7/13/2017 at 11:55 AM, Sweetpumper said:

We should just wall off California while we're at it.

No need, California is already initiating self-segregation with domestic travel bans!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
16 minutes ago, Wickian said:

No need, California is already initiating self-segregation with domestic travel bans!

Need I explain why that is a pet peeve of mine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.