Politicspoliticssenatedemocratstrumpidioticwall70billion

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:29 PM

Senate Democrats: Cost for US-Mexico border wall could 'soar' to $70 billion

The US Govt. may shutdown this month over trump's idiotic and silly wall http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-democrats-cost-us-mexico-border-wall-soar/story?id=46875887

Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security Committee estimated that the total cost of the construction of the border wall could "soar" to nearly $70 billion, according to a report prepared by minority side of the committee, which is led by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri.

However, the report also says that "no reliable estimate of the cost of construction for the full border wall currently exists."

The findings were based on the per-mile cost was extrapolated from information provided by Department of Homeland Security to the Senate and then multiplied by the length of the potential border wall -- 1,827 miles.

The Democrats also looked at calculating the total wall costs based on cost estimates for wall prototypes proposals -- ranging from $200,000 to $500,000 for a 30-foot-long wall.

Based on those estimates, it would cost at least $64 billion to construct the wall, according to their report.

Those construction estimates don't include the potential costs of acquiring the land on which the wall will be built or maintenance costs, which may total nearly $150 million per year, according to the report.

17 replies, 287 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 17 replies Author Time Post
Reply Senate Democrats: Cost for US-Mexico border wall could 'soar' to $70 billion (Original post)
Letmypeoplevote Apr 2017 OP
oldenuff35 Apr 2017 #1
Shkreli Apr 2017 #2
U.S.Awesome Apr 2017 #3
Letmypeoplevote Apr 2017 #4
Nostrings Apr 2017 #5
Grumpy Pickle Apr 2017 #6
Argentina Apr 2017 #9
Grumpy Pickle Apr 2017 #11
Tolk Apr 2017 #7
Scratch Apr 2017 #8
NeoKhan Apr 2017 #10
Letmypeoplevote Apr 2017 #12
Da Mannn Apr 2017 #13
DavesNotHere Apr 2017 #14
Letmypeoplevote Apr 2017 #15
Letmypeoplevote Apr 2017 #16
Hades Apr 2017 #17

Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:40 PM

1. Compared to the cost of keeping the illegals her that we have now and allowing more to enter???

It is far cheaper to build the damn wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:40 PM

2. A worthy expense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:41 PM

3. The only way a wall would cost $200,000/30ft is if a Democrat were building it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:41 PM

4. 5 reasons the government might shut down

It will be fun to see a govt. shutdown due to trump's idiotic wall http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/congress-shutdown-pentagon-obamacare-237373

The tallest hurdle may be Trump’s request to fund a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Securing the $1.4 billion down payment would help Trump fulfill a top campaign promise but it’s facing stiff Democratic resistance. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has said adding wall funding would be “a loser” — finding few Democratic votes while even losing some Republicans.

In recent days, some administration officials have made clear that the president is not wedded to the idea of a physical wall covering every mile of the border and that some spots could be covered by technological additions like drones. But the White House is also under internal pressure to secure a win and is eyeing a harder line on the issue.

Some Republican appropriators, such as Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), are suggesting a more palatable plan could be to shift some money within the Department of Homeland Security’s budget toward the border. Generally beefing up border security funding might appease the president and still hold onto enough Democratic support to pass the package.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:41 PM

5. Since border security is a legit constitutionally authorized power of government, I approve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:48 PM

6. Lots of American citizens would volunteer to build it.

Free labor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Grumpy Pickle (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:17 PM

9. Or Mexicans might volunteer to build it if they could be on the American side of the wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Argentina (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:17 PM

11. Actually that's not a bad idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:06 PM

7. I'm sure if the Democrats got their way

It would cost even more than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:15 PM

8. No problem. (How much is that in pesos?)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:50 PM

10. It'd be worth five times that cost if we could dump the dems on the other side of the wall.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:23 PM

12. Democrats to Trump: You dont have the leverage. We do.

The Democrats will not back off on not funding trump's idiotic wall https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/04/21/democrats-to-trump-you-dont-have-the-leverage-we-do/?utm_term=.4a07a2e9540a

But on the Thursday night conference call, House Dems resolved not to back down in the face of any such pressure, according to a readout of the call provided by a Democratic aide.

“We have the leverage and they have the exposure,” Dem leader Nancy Pelosi told people on the call, per the aide, adding that, because Republicans are in the majority, keeping the government funded will be seen as “their responsibility.”

Also on the call, Rep. Nita Lowey — the ranking Dem on the Appropriations Committee — flatly declared: “We are not building a wall.” Lowey said progress was being made in negotiating with GOP appropriators towards a short-term government funding bill. But she noted that a short-term extension of the previous funding bill — called a “continuing resolution,” or “CR” — might be necessary first, which suggests Democrats are willing to allow things to come to a head before buckling to White House demands.

Now, it remains to be seen whether Democrats will hold as firm as their current posture suggests. It also remains to be seen what Democrats will get out of these negotiations. But it looks likely that Republicans will need Democratic votes to pass a government funding bill, both in the Senate (where Republicans only hold 52 seats and will need to break a Dem filibuster) and in the House (where conservatives may bolt, leaving Republicans short of a majority on their own). Democrats want Republicans to drop the White House demand for funding for the border wall and increased deportations, and they also want Republicans to fund the “cost sharing reductions” (CSRs) that subsidize low out-of-pocket costs for lower-income people, to prevent insurers from fleeing the individual markets, which could leave at least 10 million uncovered.

The White House position is that the need to fund the CSRs gives Trump leverage to demand funding for the wall and a deportation force. But why should Democrats give Republicans anything in exchange for funding the CSRs, when Republicans are currently trying to inflict far more damage on the Affordable Care Act than not funding the CSRs would?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:49 PM

13. worth every penny. close the border, build the wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:09 PM

14. Wow, that's probably about a billion dollars for every immigrant it will keep out. They might

do better to have a bunch of guys at the border with buckets of cash and give all attempted immigrants $1000 to turn around and go back to Mexico.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 08:43 AM

15. Trump's silly wall


?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F10028961574

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Mon Apr 24, 2017, 07:53 PM

16. Your Grammar Would Be As Weird As Trumps If You, Too, Saw the Future

Trump's latest defense of the wall is really funny A silly but sad conservative talking about irony. That is so very funny http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/04/24/trump_s_mystical_grasp_of_time_is_straining_the_limits_of_grammar.html


?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2017%2F04%2F24%2Ftrump_s_mystical_grasp_of_time_is_straining_the_limits_of_grammar.html

Eventually, but at a later date so we can get started early, Mexico will be paying, in some form, for the badly needed border wall.

Marvelous! This means something. But what?

Some say it means that President Trump is on drugs.

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2017%2F04%2F24%2Ftrump_s_mystical_grasp_of_time_is_straining_the_limits_of_grammar.html
Some say it means the White House must have screened Arrival this weekend. Now Trump is trying to think in four dimensions.

I think that Trump is setting the table for his best excuse yet—a grammatical one. The problem is straightforward: English simply lacks a tense to describe the point in time at which Mexico will pay for the wall.

In the “later” part of “eventually,” at a moment before which beginning to construct a wall amounts to an “early” start, Mexico will already “be paying” (in some form). Where is the spot of time—sorry, Wordsworth—that sees Mexico actually pulling out Mexico’s wallet and putting down some pesos? Maybe the consolation here is that, in a certain dimension, existing theoretically and eventually if not visibly and actually, there may already be a wall. Write this down, Spicer: There is already a wall.

Trump may be unconsciously drawing on philosophical precedent. “Lord, let me be chaste, but not yet,” cried Augustine of Hippo in his Confessions. “Mexico, pay for my wall,” commands the president, heir to (or perhaps father of?) Gus’ scholastic hairsplitting. “At some point.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Original post)

Mon Apr 24, 2017, 07:59 PM

17. Cheaper to have lots of military patrol it...

...with round the clock drone surveillance up and down the entire stretch. Make it an invisible wall, so to speak. Add in motion detectors up and down the stretch as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticssenatedemocratstrumpidioticwall70billion