Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"It may be fine with you that your southern neighbors have their property seized by the Federal government"
Oh, please STOP with wild exaggerations.
We are only talking about about several YARDS or property.
People EVERY DAY face eminent domain to build new road, bridges buildings, etc.
Gosh ... another post for me ...
Yes, I used hyperbole to describe the impact on Rio Grande landowners whose properties border the river. This was to mimic Trump. He's framed this whole discussion with "wild exaggerations" (your term). Picture the invasion (here he draws a lot on the caravans, who are largely irrelevant to the wall decision or effectiveness) ... and the three women with tape on their mouths.
That said, I doubt many landowners would concur with you that a wall several yards in width but stretching the length of their property truncating it isn't much to concern themselves with. In some situations, entire properties will be seized. Or be made useless.
Again, please understand. If there is a reason for that to occur after that cost-benefit analysis mentioned earlier - with no viable alternatives - then fine. Trump, however, has not been persuasive here - the three women with tape on their mouths aside. He's STILL bringing them up when challenged. Did it the other day. Try to talk about drugs, he talks about the women.
It is the drug addicts in the US and Europe who keep drawing criminals from Latin America to the north like a magnet.
Drug addicts keep the whole drug mess going, they are the real culprits as they create the demand for drugs.
Drug addiction should be fought mercilessly, then drug supply and crime would collapse all by itself.
That's just a sisyphean task trying to fight a problem that has been a part of human nature since before the dawn of civilization. If you want to destroy the drug crime trade you legalize and regulate to destroy the black market profit incentive. No funds no power. And it can realistically be achieved, unlike the idea you propose here.
That's just a sisyphean task trying to fight a problem that has been a part of human nature since before the dawn of civilization. If you want to destroy the drug crime trade you legalize and regulate to destroy the black market profit incentive. No funds no power. And it can realistically be achieved, unlike the idea you propose here.
I don't think so. Drugs are destroying so many lives, making cocaine legal would not change anything about that.
And there are societies where there is virtually no abuse of hard drugs at all, for instance in Muslim countries.
The same goes for alcohol:
In other words, it is not in humans' genes to take drugs, it is merely a cultural thing. I live in the West, but I have never taken any drugs, I don't even drink alcohol or smoke.
I don't think so. Drugs are destroying so many lives, making cocaine legal would not change anything about that.
And there are societies where there is virtually no abuse of hard drugs at all, for instance in Muslim countries.
The same goes for alcohol:
In other words, it is not in humans' genes to take drugs, it is merely a cultural thing. I live in the West, but I have never taken any drugs, I don't even drink alcohol or smoke.
I thought the problem we were talking about was drawing in drug criminals now you want to bait and switch to talking about the harmful impacts of the drugs themselves? It isn't about the individual level, tons of people "have never taken drugs" although you probably have. Caffeine anyone? It is about the macro level and on the macro level there have always been subsets of humans who "self medicate" going all the way back to hunter gatherer times. Attempting to legislate that away is utterly futile.
I thought the problem we were talking about was drawing in drug criminals now you want to bait and switch to talking about the harmful impacts of the drugs themselves? It isn't about the individual level, tons of people "have never taken drugs" although you probably have. Caffeine anyone? It is about the macro level and on the macro level there have always been subsets of humans who "self medicate" going all the way back to hunter gatherer times. Attempting to legislate that away is utterly futile.
It is connected. If people in the West stopped consuming drugs, criminals from LA would no longer come north. Even in LA crime would diminish drastically, which would enable people there to have a perspective and stay there.
No, I don't drink coffee, either
All I am saying is that Trump's wall makes no sense, it puts the blame on Latin Americans instead of the drug addicts.
"It may be fine with you that your southern neighbors have their property seized by the Federal government"
Oh, please STOP with wild exaggerations.
We are only talking about about several YARDS or property.
People EVERY DAY face eminent domain to build new road, bridges buildings, etc.
In the meantime, several Texans who would lose their personal and private property have already filed suit because this is real to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067
In all honesty I don’t think Trump thought he would lose control of the house, he thought for sure that he had more time then he really did.
Possible but were it a 'real emergency' this would have been the number one thing on his agenda. Instead, it was a tax break for the 1%. Some emergency, eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spottednikes
The libs called it a humanitarian crisis/emergency when 2 illegal alien kids died in the last few months. But are silent when US citizens are murdered or killed by illegal aliens.
And Trump is silent when homegrown Americans kill their own. Does one death matter more than another? Come on; we have to get real here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
Trump stood in the Rose Garden and stated he didn't need to declare a national emergency.
Now it is either a national emergency or it is not.
Which is it?
Trump stood in the Rose Garden and let loose a stream of consciousness than even his supporters had difficulty interpreting. He garbled out lie after lie after lie. When questioned - he indicated that his own administration's statistics were fake news. He sought to further divide this country (all he knows how to do) by indicating that the 'real Americans' were for the wall when nothing is further from the truth.
He did some kind of sing-song rap about the legal process that would be underway (straight outta the mouth of Hannity).
In short, that was one of the most idiotic press conferences I have ever seen.
Lastly, WHY does he keep calling on Acosta if he hates him so much???
It shows the undemocratic, dictatorial traits of Trump, the same kind of person as Putin for instance.
And it shows that the US system has loopholes regarding checks and balances. Basically the strategy is declaring the state of emergency, then losing all court battles until the issue goes to the supreme court, which however is a highly politicized instrument, which should not be the case in a solid democracy. Its judges should be chosen from a huge pool of qualified judges of all political orientations by a random generator, not by governments. And their term should be limited to, say, 6 years.
Shouldn’t have to go to the courts.
Congress can override it with a simple majority. Just two Republicans would have to break ranks.
It is connected. If people in the West stopped to consume drugs, criminals from LA would no longer come north. Even in LA crime would diminish drastically, which would enable people there to have a perspective and stay there.
No, I don't drink coffee, either
If we had flying unicorns to ride around on we wouldn't need cars either. We should legislate that everyone gets a flying unicorn.
Why? There are lots of people that don't have cars and don't take any drugs. It is not something impossible like a unicorn
Tbh if you wanna debate your pet issue go start a thread on it instead of derailing this one and I'll pop in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
