Jump to content

Photo

U.S. Government Set to Shutdown for Third Time This Year


135 replies to this topic

#121
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

They got 245 votes for the resolution that Trump just vetoed. To override the veto, they’d need 290, or two-thirds of the chamber. DOA.

 

DOA


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#122
vla1ne

vla1ne

    Edited for spelling errors.

  • Elite Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,722 posts
    Last Visit Today, 05:50 AM
  • Spouse:Lung Tien Lien

Gotta say, the sheer amount of resistance to a physical barrier is rather surprising. 23-25 billion for a two year (tops) project to stauch the flow of illegal immigration isn't that bad. We have numbers from multiple areas along the border that already have wall attesting to the validity of a border wall in relation to border security. We have contractor estimates that put the wall at 22-33 billion overall from the start, proving it wouldn't be all that expensive. We even have word from border patrol telling us they gave input on the wall for maximum practicality. Yet we see multiple people trying to stop the wall by any and all means available. Even assuming they don't like the idea, it's not something that's so expensive, or such a net negative that it should be getting battled this hard in government. there have been far worse ideas proposed and pushed forward without this level of absurd resistance.


"Watch, Listen, and Think For Yourself"

nothing of interest


My friend codes are:
ThatGuy @4957-40030345 PM me and I'll add you.

#123
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    Warrior's Strike R when?

  • The Chariot
  • 26,659 posts
    Last Visit Today, 08:00 AM

Gotta say, the sheer amount of resistance to a physical barrier is rather surprising. 23-25 billion for a two year (tops) project to stauch the flow of illegal immigration isn't that bad. We have numbers from multiple areas along the border that already have wall attesting to the validity of a border wall in relation to border security. We have contractor estimates that put the wall at 22-33 billion overall from the start, proving it wouldn't be all that expensive. We even have word from border patrol telling us they gave input on the wall for maximum practicality. Yet we see multiple people trying to stop the wall by any and all means available. Even assuming they don't like the idea, it's not something that's so expensive, or such a net negative that it should be getting battled this hard in government. there have been far worse ideas proposed and pushed forward without this level of absurd resistance.

 

How is 22 billion in any way not expensive? Sure, the House only approved 7% of the money he wanted, but I think Trump should take the money that they're giving him, because they need to spread out their money. Trump just seems to think that the wall is where the majority of the money should be funneled towards, and his emergency is receiving this much resistance because the declaration is inherently unconstitutional. I'd say Pelosi was to right to call out the GOP for being hypocrites here, because the GOP will defend the Constitution to the death, and are quick to perceive threats to the Constitution, except when Trump actually does pose a legitimate threat to the Constitution that they hold so dear, they are all too happy to let Trump violate it.

 

I'm going to head off yet another "But what about when Obama or these other Presidents did it?" deflection. I am not interested in discussing those past presidents. I do not care about comparing Trump to anyone else. I'm only here to talk about why Trump's declaration is unconstitutional by itself. Trump threatens to cut scientific institutions, and redirect the money to the wall. Trump operates largely by repealing Obama-era initiatives, seemingly for absolutely no other reason than Obama did them. I have no patience for the "No president has been hated as much as Trump is" when he immediately follows a president that he started a birther conspiracy towards, while Merrick Garland was opposed by McConnell, again for absolutely no other reason than being nominated by Obama.

 

Trump has tunnel vision for his wall. Congress has a responsibility to fund more initiatives than just the wall, but Trump seems to be going all or nothing with the wall. If he can't have his wall, what good is anything else that the budget needs to delegate money towards? He also seems to think that the wall and border security are one and the same. To have border security means to have the wall, and without the wall, border security is worthless.

 

I know it's come up before that the wall should target areas because the middle of nowhere is popular for migrant traffic, but even the people building the wall haven't seen any trace showing that the middle of nowhere has actually been used that much.



#124
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

You need three groups of people to sign off on a budget

 

50% of the HOR

 

60% of the Senate

 

and the President

 

Why should he budge if he's getting a pittance while everyone else gets everything they want


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#125
vla1ne

vla1ne

    Edited for spelling errors.

  • Elite Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,722 posts
    Last Visit Today, 05:50 AM
  • Spouse:Lung Tien Lien

it's extremely simple, 22 billion, even up front, is the total cost of building the wall, and construction would take years to complete. this is all it would take to ensure that coming over illegally would be made all the more difficult and discouraged all the more. 22 billion is nothing when it comes to securing the borders, and if they could have at least agreed to 7 ot 10 billion yearly, we could have seen a peaceful resolution to the entire problem. but nope.

 

 

As for the builders not seeing anybody, Illegal immigrants, especially those coming through such open spaces, are not likely to risk getting caught by running near such a bustling hub of activity. If i'm coming in illegally, then i'm going to see the top of your construction equipment, long before you catch sight of me, and if i'm not trying to get caught, i'm going to avoid you before we can even encounter each other. They can see the wall going up already, why would they be blatantly stupid enough to try crossing there? As for why there, it makes perfect sense. if you only block off populated areas, what exactly prevents people from walking right around the border? building around specific areas is only a stopgap till they're all built across, past that, you then have to ensure that the clearly open spaces are not easily exploitable/ not worth attempting. you don't just cover a couple spaces and call it a day, you cover all areas and make sure you have people and surveilance to back it up.


"Watch, Listen, and Think For Yourself"

nothing of interest


My friend codes are:
ThatGuy @4957-40030345 PM me and I'll add you.

#126
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    Warrior's Strike R when?

  • The Chariot
  • 26,659 posts
    Last Visit Today, 08:00 AM

You need three groups of people to sign off on a budget
 
50% of the HOR
 
60% of the Senate
 
and the President
 
Why should he budge if he's getting a pittance while everyone else gets everything they want

 
Because the budget shouldn't depend on one man's vanity project. Calling $1.6 billion dollars a "pittance" is nothing short of entitled and ungrateful.
 

it's extremely simple, 22 billion, even up front, is the total cost of building the wall, and construction would take years to complete. this is all it would take to ensure that coming over illegally would be made all the more difficult and discouraged all the more. 22 billion is nothing when it comes to securing the borders, and if they could have at least agreed to 7 ot 10 billion yearly, we could have seen a peaceful resolution to the entire problem. but nope.

 
https://www.gazetten...letter-23957452

According to the Brookings Institute, $25 billion is $9 billion more than a child care subsidy that would essentially make good child care accessible to all families in this country. $25 billion could be much better used to repair crumbling roads, bridges, and schools, provide fuel and nutritional assistance, ensure living wages for school teachers, and so much more.

So no, the 22 billion is far from "nothing". The money needed to fund that could be better spent elsewhere, and that's the part that you seem to be ignoring. This isn't all or nothing, where 22 billion is some small amount that could be easily spared towards the wall. Being angry that everybody else gets everything they want and the money that is spared towards border security is somehow a "pittance" shows a gross misunderstanding of how the money needs to be delegated.
 

As for the builders not seeing anybody, Illegal immigrants, especially those coming through such open spaces, are not likely to risk getting caught by running near such a bustling hub of activity. If i'm coming in illegally, then i'm going to see the top of your construction equipment, long before you catch sight of me, and if i'm not trying to get caught, i'm going to avoid you before we can even encounter each other. They can see the wall going up already, why would they be blatantly stupid enough to try crossing there? As for why there, it makes perfect sense. if you only block off populated areas, what exactly prevents people from walking right around the border? building around specific areas is only a stopgap till they're all built across, past that, you then have to ensure that the clearly open spaces are not easily exploitable/ not worth attempting. you don't just cover a couple spaces and call it a day, you cover all areas and make sure you have people and surveilance to back it up.


Except the article was all about how the builders are in an area that isn't a bustling hub of activity. That's the key point of the article, so I'm not sure how you missed that.

 

"What exactly prevents people from walking right around the border?" is really the question that should be asked if this wall were to ever get finished. Seriously, this wall is touted as if that alone will be the definitive deterrent against illegal immigration, but what's to stop people from going around it?

 

This entire fiasco is because Trump based his campaign promise on building a wall as if the wall in and of itself will discourage illegal immigration, and when he was a granted a sixth of what he's now asking for, he shut down the government and threatened to violate the Constitution. This is a president who has called for a ban on Muslims, so his issue isn't whether or not people are breaking the la. It's discrimination couched in a pretense of supposedly protecting the country from "invasion". We're not asking him to budge for a "pittance", we're asking him to take the money he's been granted and actually work with Congress instead of throwing a temper tantrum when he's told he can't ban brown people. When Trump has a history of acting with prejudice, you honestly expect me to believe that this wall isn't par for the course with him?

 

I'd be more willing to support any form of security that could mitigate illegal immigration if this wasn't Trump and the GOP desperately trying to justify their racial prejudices.



#127
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

 
Because the budget shouldn't depend on one man's vanity project. Calling $1.6 billion dollars a "pittance" is nothing short of entitled and ungrateful.

Not in context of the Federal Budget 


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#128
vla1ne

vla1ne

    Edited for spelling errors.

  • Elite Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,722 posts
    Last Visit Today, 05:50 AM
  • Spouse:Lung Tien Lien

 

Except the article was all about how the builders are in an area that isn't a bustling hub of activity. That's the key point of the article, so I'm not sure how you missed that.

 

"What exactly prevents people from walking right around the border?" is really the question that should be asked if this wall were to ever get finished. Seriously, this wall is touted as if that alone will be the definitive deterrent against illegal immigration, but what's to stop people from going around it?

 

This entire fiasco is because Trump based his campaign promise on building a wall as if the wall in and of itself will discourage illegal immigration, and when he was a granted a sixth of what he's now asking for, he shut down the government and threatened to violate the Constitution. This is a president who has called for a ban on Muslims, so his issue isn't whether or not people are breaking the la. It's discrimination couched in a pretense of supposedly protecting the country from "invasion". We're not asking him to budge for a "pittance", we're asking him to take the money he's been granted and actually work with Congress instead of throwing a temper tantrum when he's told he can't ban brown people. When Trump has a history of acting with prejudice, you honestly expect me to believe that this wall isn't par for the course with him?

 

I'd be more willing to support any form of security that could mitigate illegal immigration if this wasn't Trump and the GOP desperately trying to justify their racial prejudices.

 

The builders themselves are in the area. That is the point. You may have missed that. there is still a group of people, doing very visible work. If you were an illegal trying to get across, and you saw that in the distance which isn't difficult considering the amount of large machines involved, would you decide to walk right through it? Or anywhere near it? No, you would take as wide a path as reasonably possible to avoid detection till you were in a less observe area.

 

Look back, through every single discussion you and everybody else has had with me on this particular aspect of the wall if you want the explanation. I have elaborated multiple time to you the answer, let me elaborate it again: The wall is a PART of the solution, NOT the entire solution. It reduces the amount of ground that needs to be covered when patrolling the border. It acts as a deterrent to those attempting to cross illegally. It reduces the strain on the actual border patrol agents, especially while there are less personnel. It delays illegal immigrants long enough after surveillance detects them for border patrol to arrive on the scene. It increases the amount of ground that needs to be traversed in order to cross the border illegally. It removes the open lengths of border that currently make crossing and evading border patrol such a problem. It adds onto the other additional methods such as camera surveillance and personnel deployment. It is another part of the solution as a whole I have said this in threads that you yourself have frequented, multiple times, you yourself have asked this question alongside multiple other people, and you seem to forget the answer every single time we enter a new thread. If they walk around the border after it's built, then they are deliberately covering hundreds, if not thousands of miles to circumvent the legal process, and should be deported on sight..

 

He also ran on removing incentives that entice illegal immigrants to come over, and he has attempted multiple times to remove those incentives. Guess what, democrats in congress fought tooth and nail to keep their sanctuary cities and government funded benefits for illegal immigrants. You gonna endorse them keeping incentives too? Incentives were yet another part of the solution as whole, and as we can see from them dragging it through every court they could, nobody wants to give those up. He finally got a ruling in his favor as far as withholding federal funding from states who ignore federal law, so we'll at least see California and New York take hits for ignoring the law. You know as well as i that he was not granted a sixth of his funding. 5 billion would have been a sixth, guess what? Nobody budged for it, so the government stayed shut down. They wanted to give him something closer to a 20th of what he was asking for (1.3 billion), with heavy limitations placed upon even that much. He called for a restriction on travel from countries that were declared dangerous by the prior administration. He did not ban muslims, only immigrants from countries that hold high hostilities with america in the contentious areas of the middle east. as was declared by the administration prior. You said it to winter, i'll say it to you, I do not care what personal beliefs they hold as far as this topic goes. He could be literally hitler and it would not change the validity of his arguments. Discuss the argument, not the person. The arguments are that trumps wall would be a net positive to the countries national security, that there are in fact grounds for him to declare a national emergency, and the congress will reject all proposals by trump because he is trump. I have been proven consecutively right on the third point, as i have laid out multiple times over the past few pages. The second point is hard fact, as it is directly related to border security, and the numbers historically, despite the small dip for a few moths prior, have trended towards increased detection of illegal immigrants Like the caravans with thousands of illegals. As for the first point, you still have yet to explain to me exactly why the border wall (that is being built with input from border agents might i add) IN COMBINATION WITH surveillance, border personnel, and removal of legal incentives, is in any way bad policy. that is what trump is pushing for, and his character does not matter one bit. Nobody cares if you call trump a racist, or if you call him a nazi, or whatever other thing you wish to call him. The arguments i presented stand regardless of his own character.

 

You yourself, directly stated that character is irrelevant, and happened to even agree with my own quote affirming as much. Your opinion of their character is irrelevant. They could be literal piles of human excrement and their argument would still stand and fall on it's own merit. The actual solution presented in regards to illegal immigration is a sound one. Stop acting like their character has anything to do with their arguments. You are doing the exact thing to trump that you claim winter does to you. You do not address the argument for trump, you address the person, and it causes you to miss things that have already been pointed out dozens of times prior.


"Watch, Listen, and Think For Yourself"

nothing of interest


My friend codes are:
ThatGuy @4957-40030345 PM me and I'll add you.

#129
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    Warrior's Strike R when?

  • The Chariot
  • 26,659 posts
    Last Visit Today, 08:00 AM

https://www.thebalan...eakdown-3305789
https://reason.com/b...eal-includes-bi
 
Both articles offer some good breakdowns of how the federal budget is spread out. In particular, I think it's important to single out how the second article summarizes that "Overall, the new spending agreement hashed out by Congress includes $22.5 billion for border security." While it's not specifically about the wall, it does show that $22B is being delegated to border security, just not the wall specifically.



#130
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

15z3v52vqgn21.jpg?width=768&auto=webp&s=


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#131
Nathanael D. Striker

Nathanael D. Striker

    My Friends Are My Power!

  • Topic Starter
  • Twilight Wanderer

  • 19,614 posts
    Last Visit 3 minutes ago
  • Discord:Striker#1560
  • Alias:Striker

15z3v52vqgn21.jpg?width=768&auto=webp8cd


Nice meme you have there, this isn't Misc. If you don't plan on intelligently adding something to this, then go away. Also, do you happen to have a non-partisan sources as well?

eqa4wo.jpg


#132
Flame Dragon

Flame Dragon

    Pokemon Breeder

  • Super Moderators
  • 23,994 posts
    Last Visit Today, 05:23 AM

Nice meme you have there, this isn't Misc. If you don't plan on intelligently adding something to this, then go away. Also, do you happen to have a non-partisan sources as well?


This. This isn't where memes go.
cZx2XQg.png
FC: 0989-1906-1912

#133
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

Nice meme you have there, this isn't Misc. If you don't plan on intelligently adding something to this, then go away. Also, do you happen to have a non-partisan sources as well?

I mean that's pretty much the meaning of average.  Would you like to know which states would have flipped in 2016 with 200K new voters?


If CNN is allowed, I don't see why Fox Shouldn't be


This. This isn't where memes go.

It's a pretty convenient way of conveying the information. It's been greenlit in the past


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#134
Nathanael D. Striker

Nathanael D. Striker

    My Friends Are My Power!

  • Topic Starter
  • Twilight Wanderer

  • 19,614 posts
    Last Visit 3 minutes ago
  • Discord:Striker#1560
  • Alias:Striker

I mean that's pretty much the meaning of average. Would you like to know which states would have flipped in 2016 with 200K new voters?

If CNN is allowed, I don't see why Fox Shouldn't be


I said as well, not instead of. Please learn to read carefully. Also, just because something was allowed in the past doesn't mean it should continue to be allowed.

Anyway, about that source? That way, I read something without being subjected to an unwarranted meme.

eqa4wo.jpg


#135
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    Warrior's Strike R when?

  • The Chariot
  • 26,659 posts
    Last Visit Today, 08:00 AM

I mean that's pretty much the meaning of average.  Would you like to know which states would have flipped in 2016 with 200K new voters?


If CNN is allowed, I don't see why Fox Shouldn't be


It's a pretty convenient way of conveying the information. It's been greenlit in the past

 

You've attacked users for using "lefty sourcing", and dismissed the ACLU for absolutely no reason in this very same thread. You should be prepared to have your own sources held to the same standard. Though Striker was far more generous, since he's at least asking for additional sources to corroborate your meme, rather than snarking about Fox and dismissing them solely because of who they are.

 

For what it's worth, I have looked this up and did find other sources about the detainments. But the point is that you need to provide them yourself without relying on memes as a substitute for an argument.



#136
Ryusei the Morning Star

Ryusei the Morning Star

  • Night's Watch

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,702 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 09:58 PM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

You've attacked users for using "lefty sourcing", and dismissed the ACLU for absolutely no reason in this very same thread. You should be prepared to have your own sources held to the same standard. Though Striker was far more generous, since he's at least asking for additional sources to corroborate your meme, rather than snarking about Fox and dismissing them solely because of who they are.

 

For what it's worth, I have looked this up and did find other sources about the detainments. But the point is that you need to provide them yourself without relying on memes as a substitute for an argument.

The difference is I explained why the I was snarking on the ACLU, and explained in that post why their metric as wrong given their assumption about the GOP priorities 


Also roxas you've straight up refused to accept breitbart in the past after making me find like 40 links. Not sure you of all people have a leg to stand on here

 

I said as well, not instead of. Please learn to read carefully. Also, just because something was allowed in the past doesn't mean it should continue to be allowed.

Anyway, about that source? That way, I read something without being subjected to an unwarranted meme.

I was asking about Fox? Every news source is partisan by that measure. 

 

I feel the meme was an effective way of conveying exactly how many illegals the left is fine with allowing invade out country tbh


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif




Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users