General Election 2016 - Trump v. Clinton

[Locutus]

I honestly don't think that she knows that blue text indicates a link which means that we've been posting links to information for years that she's never seen.  Disturbing but it sure would explain a lot! 

"That's not how this works.  That's not how any of this works." 

I'd like to give her the benefit of that doubt, but I'm not so sure until I hear a confession from her. 

Won't hold my breath though.   

[me]

And here, again, is the reality of Trump's wall from an engineering perspective.

In the link you provided, Trump states, "It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year," ostensibly suggesting that the cost of this wall would be no more than $10 billion.  Here another engineer estimates the cost of the materials involved based on national average costs:

Going off of materials estimate we have...
167,272,000 cubic yards of cast-in-place concrete at $93/cubic yard = $15,556,296,000
1,030,000 segments of 10' pre-cast panels at $17/panel = $17,510,000
2,500,000 tons of steel rebar at $600/ton = $1,500,000,000

Total Material Cost Estimate: $17,073,806,000

So, that's almost double before labor, machinery, logistical support, etc. are even factored in.  Trump's wall is a bullshit pipe dream that will never be built.  Anyone who believes otherwise is an idiot and really, really bad at math.

Didn't read the article did ya?

Yes, I did, stupid.  How else would I have quoted it?  Did you?  Did you bother to read either of the articles which illustrate how infeasible this wall is?

Your figures came from the article in the link you posted not the one I posted, you did not quote anything but the link to my article with this link, http://imgur.com/gallery/KVdSb, included in your reply when the word "here" was clicked on. Absolutely nothing to do with or included in my article.

[Locutus]

 

[AbbyTC]

OMG!  Is this an episode from the Twilight Zone?  How many of us will it take to point out the same thing to get me to understand?  I really can't believe this.   

[Palehorse]

Oh Holy Hell! 

[Palehorse]

I'm going with 53 pages by the time the election is decided.

Now at 8 pages. . . 

[me]

Where in this article does it say how many miles of wall or what materials it will be made of? This is what is in my article.

Compelling Mexico to Pay for the Wall

Introduction: The provision of the Patriot Act, Section 326 - the "know your customer" provision, compelling financial institutions to demand identity documents before opening accounts or conducting financial transactions is a fundamental element of the outline below. That section authorized the executive branch to issue detailed regulations on the subject, found at 31 CFR 130.120-121. It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year. There are several ways to compel Mexico to pay for the wall including the following:

    On day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31 CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to include wire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.
    On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
    On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
    Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States, in addition to revenue from any tariffs themselves. Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation. By definition, if you have a large trade deficit with a nation, it means they are selling far more to you than the reverse - thus they, not you, stand to lose from enforcing trade rules through tariffs (as has been done to save many U.S. industries in the past).
    Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points. We also have leverage through business and tourist visas for important people in the Mexican economy. Keep in mind, the United States has already taken in 4X more migrants than any other country on planet earth, producing lower wages and higher unemployment for our own citizens and recent migrants.
    Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year. The border-crossing card is also one of the greatest sources of illegal immigration into the United States, via overstays. Mexico is also the single largest recipient of U.S. green cards, which confer a path to U.S. citizenship. Again, we have the leverage so Mexico will back down.

Conclusion: Mexico has taken advantage of us in another way as well: gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States. The United States has borne the extraordinary daily cost of this criminal activity, including the cost of trials and incarcerations. Not to mention the even greater human cost. We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage. It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/pay-for-the-wall

Here, again, is Ex's reply. Now show me where in my article is the part of the link Ex posted is. That is something Ex added not anything out of the article.  Do you see a mention of length or materials to even start to make an estimate in the article I posted?

And here, again, is the reality of Trump's wall from an engineering perspective.

In the link you provided, Trump states, "It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year," ostensibly suggesting that the cost of this wall would be no more than $10 billion.  Here another engineer estimates the cost of the materials involved based on national average costs:

Going off of materials estimate we have...
167,272,000 cubic yards of cast-in-place concrete at $93/cubic yard = $15,556,296,000
1,030,000 segments of 10' pre-cast panels at $17/panel = $17,510,000
2,500,000 tons of steel rebar at $600/ton = $1,500,000,000

Total Material Cost Estimate: $17,073,806,000[/i]

So, that's almost double before labor, machinery, logistical support, etc. are even factored in.  Trump's wall is a bullshit pipe dream that will never be built.  Anyone who believes otherwise is an idiot and really, really bad at math.

[AbbyTC]

[Exterminator]

I wonder if we ignore her if she'll just go away?   

[me]

Oh, pardon me I forgot you're so smart you can guess what length wall and what materials will be used so that engineer's guesstimate makes perfect sense to you.

[Locutus]

Now at 8 pages. . . 

[Exterminator]

This forum needs an ignore button so we aren't exposed to posts that make us feel stupider just for having read them.

[Henry Hawk]

    Hey HH, out here in the real world, here's what Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had to say about your hero, Donald Trump:

"I can't imagine what this place would be -- I can't imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president," Ginsburg told the New York Times. "For the country it could be four years. For the court, it could be -- I don't even want to contemplate that."

She recalled a joke her late husband, Marty, used to make about unfortunate political outcomes: "Now it's time for us to move to New Zealand."

-- Did Ginsburg cross line with Trump remarks? by Aaron Blake and Robert Barnes, today's Washington Post

www.washingtonpost.com

Yeah she did cross the line and now she is back peddling...there is also a code of conduct for United States Judges the FLATLY states that a "judge should not publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office".
She needs to go!

[Exterminator]

...there is also a code of conduct for United States Judges the FLATLY states that a "judge should not publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office".

Doesn't apply to the Supreme Court.

[Henry Hawk]

Doesn't apply to the Supreme Court.

Interesting...i just read that myself.  I wonder why?  It makes it easy for MORE corruption to me...the is a Code Of Conduct For Federal Judges...but somehow, the SCOTUS has excluded themselves to it.  It really doesn't make a lick of sense.