The Secure Fence Act of 2006

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by thewap, May 7, 2016.

  1. thewap, May 7, 2016
    Last edited: May 7, 2016

    thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #1
    Quoted form article;
    This Republican-backed legislation, which turned undocumented workers—as well as anyone who provided them with aid—into criminal felons, was the provocation that sparked the mass protests.

    “I cannot and will not support one-sided solutions that sound tough but neither deal with our porous borders nor treat with respect and dignity the millions of families who live and work in our country,” Hillary Clinton declared.

    Last Friday, however, she did exactly that, joining Senate Republicans and the majority of her Democratic colleagues in voting for an ignominious piece of legislation known as the “Secure Fence Act of 2006.”

    Why did Clinton vote for it?
    The thinking of the New York senator and her political handlers runs along the following political lines: “Even if a vote for the anti-immigrant wall upsets Latinos and others, what are they going to do about it ?, vote for the Republicans?”

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2006/10/wall-o04.html


    What difference does it make?
    What are they going to do about it?

    Clintonism, just gotta love it..
     
  2. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #2
    Well eating taco salad and claiming a magical wall will fix it is no better.
     
  3. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #3
    I don't agree, I'll take Taco salad...I mean tacos..o_O
     
  4. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #4
    I did enjoy this particular passage:

    So, 700 miles of fencing was estimated to cost $7 billion, but Trump claims his 1000-mile concrete wall stretching 35-40 feet in the air will cost only $8 billion?

    Now, can you quote the text in the bill which "turned undocumented workers—as well as anyone who provided them with aid—into criminal felons", or anything in the bill in question which makes any mention of cracking down on undocumented workers?
     
  5. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #5

    He quoted 10 billion.
     
  6. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #6
    After numerous call-outs. Didn't he start at $2 billion or something?
     
  7. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #7
    Bernie voted against the "Secure Fence" Act. FYI.
     
  8. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #8
    And by the way, $8 billion was backed up by numerous sources.
    Washington Times
    Washington Post
    Politico
     
  9. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #9
    I've been watching his speeches, never heard him say 8 billion, always said probably around 10 billion. With a 58 billion deficit with Mexico, one or two billion is a moot point.
     
  10. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #10
    Well, click that Politico link. There's a video. He says $8 billion. It's "simple numbers".
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    Mexico is building the wall, labor will be cheaper so 8 billion is probably too much.
     
  12. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #12
    The irony of this statement is too much to bear.
     
  13. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #13
    The fact that you seem to thing these 2 are connected in any sensible way just shows how far our Trumpians are....
     
  14. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #14
    Reduce the deficit with Mexico by 10 billion...it's not rocket science..lol
     
  15. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #15
    What is the difference between changing opinion over time with reasoning, and pandering flip-flopping?
     
  16. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #16
    Clinton is an expert at that, she wants to bring back coal jobs now... must be her short term memory.
    She does however remember to keep a bottle of hot sauce in her purse at all times...you never know when she will have to spike minority lunches.
     
  17. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #17
    no trump wants to bring them back just ask him along with steel jobs too.
     
  18. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #18
    Even IF Trump could win that tradewar you'd have an US econmy smaller and the average american poorer.

    And somehow the result is 2billion (or more) in tax revenue :confused:
     
  19. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #19
    Still waiting for the text from the Secure Fence Act of 2006 which does this.
     
  20. thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #20
    What trade war? If we export products to Mexico they charge 16% to 146% tariffs. Needless to say not many US products sold there. If Mexico exports to us = $0 tariffs - we make no money - Mexico = cha ching.

    Mexico corp tax 15% or less, US corp tax 35% plus regulation feres. US corps offshore to Mexico less tax, wages lower, then export back to us for nothing = we lose all our manufacturers and jobs = Mexico cha ching!

    There is no war, the US surrendered already with our govt getting paid off by special interest.

    Now the govt under Obama and Clinton want to expand on the above with the TPP which would also give foreign authority to regulate the US over our constitution.
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #21
    Clinton didn't say the quote you have bolded. Instead, that's something the writer injected.

    Anyway, the "World Socialist Web Site" is made at Clinton because Clinton voted for it because she's a "centrist" who voted for apparent security needs when comprehensive immigration failed.

    This was Democrats hoping to work with Republicans who refused to pass immigration reform until the border was secure. So, they gave the Republicans an unfunded mandate, and the Republicans continue to natter on about border security because they won't fund the act.

    Because Republicans don't want immigration reform. And, Democrats don't either, because both parties think of this issue as a nice cudgel. Republicans keep pretending that the border is America's undefended skirts—no mind that the Border Patrol alone has doubled and deployed millions in technology—and Democrats keep telling Hispanics (Latinos) that after the next election, they'll get around to immigration reform.

    Now, political active Hispanics have figured out that both parties all full of it when it comes to CIR, but they've also paid sharp attention to the rhetoric, and they know that between Mitt "Self-Deportation" Romney and Don "the Wall" Trump, Democrats are still in their corner.

    And, they see who built and defended DACA, and who has tried to cap the kneecaps of DAPA. And, they're getting frustrated and, hopefully mobilized.

    Frankly, I hope Hispanic voters come out in force and burn Republicans from the top of the ticket to the bottom, and then turn to Democrats and say, get it done or you're next.

    Right. The current fence is a mixture of "bollard fencing"–metal ribs that rise high into the air with concrete slabs, Normandy barriers—roughly, giant jacks intended to stop vehicles—and metal screens.

    That's nothing like what Trump is talking about, so we can't really use the current fencing as an indicator of the actual cost. (Not to mention the logistical problems of trying to build such a wall across multiple river systems, and across federal and public land, and the Tohono O'odham Nation who will likely fight such a wall in federal court.)

    The best assumed cost of Trump's wall is $17 billion in materials alone.

    I think the article is confusing the Secure Fence Act with the Illegal Immigration Reform Act, which implemented the 287g program, among other things. I don't know WSWS.

    As above, he said it during an interview on MSNBC.

    Also, the 58 billion deficit is a trade deficit. That means that Mexico is selling more products to the United States than the United States.

    As the Cato Liberty Institute pointed out:

    Trump has said that the U.S. would build the wall, and then we would force Mexico to pay for it. Try again.

    ...

    Trump knows nothing (like Jon Snow nothing) about the U.S-Mexico border. His policies are insanely expensive, likely to set off a trade war between the U.S. and Mexico—which will hammer the southwest states and choke off winter vegetables for the entire United States, driving up food prices—and will fail to cut off illegal immigration and drug smuggling.

    The current fence is, in the words of a Border Patrol agent, a "speed bump" and works only as part of "tactical infrastructure" to slow people down. It takes agents on the ground to make apprehensions.

    While the National Border Patrol Council, the Border Patrol's union, has taken the unusual step of pushing Trump, even they have argued that the agency needs more agents (from a union this is a "no duh" argument) and technology, including drones and remote cameras.

    We don't need a $17 billion wall that will be tunneled beneath, cut through, or surmounted with a good ladder.

    We need a realistic immigration policy, and smart policies to deal with drug and human smuggling. The wall is stupid rhetoric that won't be funded by Congress and will become a gyre of lawsuits and construction problems. (Good luck getting that thing over the Baboquivari mountains alone.)
    --- Post Merged, May 8, 2016 ---
    Source?
     
  22. thewap, May 9, 2016
    Last edited: May 9, 2016

    thewap thread starter macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #22
    The problem with Nafta and trade imbalance has to do mostly with the manufacturing sectors eligible under the agreement where textiles are tariff free but communications, transportation and flour do not qualify. Mexico does not produce the aforementioned (but textiles are), and while we do, those products do get tariffs that are calculated according to the product sector. The greatest trade imbalance is doing business in Mexico as a US company where a US company would not incur tariffs exporting to the US and enjoy Mexico taxes that are much lower than US corp. Taxes, and employment wages are much lower in Mexico. The other problem is flooding the US market with foreign products imbalance.
    http://www.citizen.org/documents/FTA-V-No-FTA-Factsheet.pdf

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/nafta-at-20-one-million-u_b_4550207.html
     
  23. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #23
    So the US becomes the 'green zone'.... I would have preferred the money be spent on a thousand miles of infrastructure like roads. bridges and railways.
     
  24. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #24
    Indeed. Which is why I'm questioning how Clinton signed something that would turn "undocumented workers—as well as anyone who provided them with aid—into criminal felons". She voted yes on a bill about constructing some fencing, nothing about making people felons. Thus, I consider this article, and this thread, pretty much bunk.
     
  25. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #25
    Just don't buy the fence or concrete from Halliburton or other military style company. You can get more cost effective cement from mob. Or buy from Walmart, may have direct shipments from China right to border.
     

Share This Page