Drumpf

[UnderTheSun]

Since we're going to talk politics, didn't Obama do something like this?

[Nepsotic]

Iirc, the list of countries he banned was originally Obama's.

[RoryF]

probably should've been a blog cos of the above shit happening

STM man hope things get better for you, really shit policy in place atm hopefully it gets revised

[Lord Vhazen]

Jesus, how naive are you? I'd say that I wish I could bury my head in the sand as deep as you've managed, but I'm not sure if your head is in the sand or up your own ass. The fact is that this country, arguably the most powerful country in the world, has elected a man who ran on an openly nationalist platform and operates on fascist political policies. And some of us actually care about how the country we live in, or the country that is undoubtedly going to affect us, is run.

But, let's ignore how fucking indefensibly terrible his policies are. I could go on and on about him silencing several government organizations, about him branding media outlets that disagree with him as "fake news," about him wanting to publish a fucking weekly list of crimes committed by foreigners. Let's instead talk about how you decided to shit up the thread.

You came in here with grief over people complaining about Trump. You didn't defend Trump which, as much as I would like to argue against, would have been perfectly reasonable. No, you didn't give any opinion whatsoever on Trump, and you were quite intent on that. You were complaining that people were talking about Trump, in a thread about motherfucking Trump. Now, I could even defend this if you were voicing an opinion against a Trump thread in general. "Oh, we've heard so much about Trump, we see him everywhere in the news already, we don't really need to discuss him here." "Oh, I'd rather we didn't get political on OWF, it just leads to fights instead of debates." But no, as you've demonstrated, you're fine with the idea of a Trump thread.



Someone voiced their opinion, and because you didn't like it you decided to shitpost. You started an argument, knowing full well that you'd be going into it without putting up any position for you to defend, just so you could stay on the offensive and derail the fucking thread.

[Manco]

probably should've been a blog cos of the above shit happening

No, people just need to think more before they post.

Since we're going to talk politics, didn't Obama do something like this?

This claim has been popping up a lot, but it’s false. Here’s a Washington Post article explaining what happened during Obama’s presidency and how it differs from the current situation, and a Mirror article that bullet-points the differences also.

Iirc, the list of countries he banned was originally Obama's.

It’s supposedly based on a list of countries that Homeland Security deemed required further scrutiny during Obama’s administration – there’s no indication that the Obama admin planned any kind of executive order like this.

[Lord Vhazen]

It’s supposedly based on a list of countries that Homeland Security deemed required further scrutiny during Obama’s administration – there’s no indication that the Obama admin planned any kind of executive order like this.

The way I see it, since the dawn of democracy, there has and always will be a sort of "lag" effect when it comes to what we credit - or blame - our leaders for. People blamed - and still do blame - Obama for a lot of the damage that was actually caused by Bush, meanwhile Trump will probably get credit for the good decisions Obama made over the course of 4 years depending on the state of the country in that time. Then again who knows, maybe that's not always true.... Obamacare supposedly isn't anything at all like it was originally supposed to be before all that negotiation it went through before it was finally passed. And that's even when it was actually being proposed by him, after the basic idea had already been talked about for years prior. They're probably just gonna fuck with it more and more over time.

I don't really follow politics much to be honest, but I've heard that a few days ago Trump set up the paperwork for us to build that stupid wall over the next 10 years and it's supposedly gonna cost us 5-25 billion dollars in taxes. He promised we'd be "reimbursed" by Mexico meanwhile there's absolutely no legal bind saying they are supposed to, and now Mexico's giving us the middle finger by saying Trump can't be negotiated with. So basically, he just made a terrible business deal.... This doesn't really give me a good impression at all for our future here in the US.

Yeah I don't think I ever mentioned it, but I'm a fat American. :u

[UnderTheSun]

This claim has been popping up a lot, but it’s false. Here’s a Washington Post article explaining what happened during Obama’s presidency and how it differs from the current situation, and a Mirror article that bullet-points the differences also.

It’s supposedly based on a list of countries that Homeland Security deemed required further scrutiny during Obama’s administration – there’s no indication that the Obama admin planned any kind of executive order like this.

My mistake, it seems the decision was made directly by the State Department (by then, led by Hillary Clinton). However, the State Deparmnet is part of our government's executive branch, putting them under presidential authority, i.e. Obama. So, for those 6 months, Obama was likely complicit.

Furthermore, the State Deparment enacted the ban in 2011, near the end of Obama’s first term. Meanwhile, Trump is attempting to meet his campaign promise to implement strict vetting of people from, or with nationalities from, unstable countries with severe terrorism problems, barely a week after being inaugurated. He doesn't yet have Rex Tillerson to lead the State Deparment, or John Kelly to lead the Department of Homeland Security. Therefore, an executive order was, really, his only option (not that he'd avoid the backlash were they in place).

The way I see it, since the dawn of democracy, there has and always will be a sort of "lag" effect when it comes to what we credit - or blame - our leaders for. People blamed - and still do blame - Obama for a lot of the damage that was actually caused by Bush, meanwhile Trump will probably get credit for the good decisions Obama made over the course of 4 years depending on the state of the country in that time. Then again who knows, maybe that's not always true....

A very real possibility. Just look at President Van Buren winding up with the Panic of 1837 caused by Jackson’s policies such as “species circular," as well as splitting the federal bank’s funds (as a means of killing it) into poorly-managed state banks (causing massive inflation).

Obamacare supposedly isn't anything at all like it was originally supposed to be before all that negotiation it went through before it was finally passed. And that's even when it was actually being proposed by him, after the basic idea had already been talked about for years prior. They're probably just gonna fuck with it more and more over time.

Pretty reasonable, too. For all we know, Congressional Republicans modified it with unfavorable additions and set it up to fail (also explains how he became a lame duck by the end). Just look at how many times Congress voted to shut down the government. Even Trump has admitted that protecting people with preexisting conditions is great.

However, this is not to minimize Obama's failure to compromise with Congress.

I don't really follow politics much to be honest, but I've heard that a few days ago Trump set up the paperwork for us to build that stupid wall over the next 10 years and it's supposedly gonna cost us 5-25 billion dollars in taxes. He promised we'd be "reimbursed" by Mexico meanwhile there's absolutely no legal bind saying they are supposed to, and now Mexico's giving us the middle finger by saying Trump can't be negotiated with. So basically, he just made a terrible business deal.... This doesn't really give me a good impression at all for our future here in the US.

It may seem that way if President Nieto is unwilling to negotiate, but the reality is that we hold all the cards. One thing to remember is that we don't need Mexico to literally pay us, it's just that Trump promised that Mexico will "pay for" the wall. For instance, Trump just recently asked Congress to approve a 20% import tax on Mexican goods. Other potential solutions include driving up the price of visas and forbidding Mexican immigrants from sending money back home to their families (amounts to $24 billion a year).

Yeah I don't think I ever mentioned it, but I'm a fat American. :u

Nothing to worry about. I'm pretty surprised by how diverse this community is, yet it hasn't caused any problems (as far as I've seen). Besides, America's a pretty big and varied place (pretty obvious when one considers how different regions of the country vote differently).

[Lord Vhazen]

It may seem that way if President Nieto is unwilling to negotiate, but the reality is that we hold all the cards. One thing to remember is that we don't need Mexico to literally pay us, it's just that Trump promised that Mexico will "pay for" the wall. For instance, Trump just recently asked Congress to approve a 20% import tax on Mexican goods. Other potential solutions include driving up the price of visas and forbidding Mexican immigrants from sending money back home to their families (amounts to $24 billion a year).

The amount of times you had to say the word "Mexican" is the real problem here though - his whole campaign is just one giant distraction.... I have yet to see any credible evidence anywhere that the most important thing to do for our economy is to crack down on immigration. People are naturally inclined to blame others when things are bad, and - for any nation - find it easier to blame foreigners. That's what he's preying on - radical, ignorant xenophobia, and it's only going to be encouraged with this kind of behavior.... We may be able to afford a 24-26 billion dollar wall in 10 years, but the real question is, do we really need this? Will it actually make a difference, or will we just be wasting money that could be better spent somewhere else? Even some conservative values would potentially have a higher value. That's money we could spend on police, prisons or the military.

The biggest defense I've ever really heard about building the wall was that it'd create "like tons of new jobs, maaaaaan :u" But honestly, even if it really takes 10 years that still may not matter if it comes out of all of our pockets. You could say the same for any hard labor - the president could commission millions of people to recreate the Egyptian pyramids but 3x larger in Washington right now, and that'd give a lot of people jobs. But really, what would that accomplish? It'd just make us look cooler, maybe at the most increase tourism a little. To me, I foresee pretty much the same in this whole wall business. It's just gonna sit there and make us look stronger - it's the equivalent of us funding a dick-measuring contest.

Is a single dick worth 25 billion?

[moxco]

i thought it was all memes why is he doing this

see i don't really care about trump, hating him is missing the forest for the trees. Why is he in power doing this tho? Is this a flaw of the presidential system? Of first past the post voting? Is this policy something that is widely supported in the USA?

[Varrok]

about him branding media outlets that disagree with him as "fake news,"

The whole idea of propagating fight with fake news (the list, to little surprise, included platforms of other opinions, that were not really fake news) was being pushed by the far left during the election in order to get Hilary elected.

[UnderTheSun]

The amount of times you had to say the word "Mexican" is the real problem here though - his whole campaign is just one giant distraction.... I have yet to see any credible evidence anywhere that the most important thing to do for our economy is to crack down on immigration. People are naturally inclined to blame others when things are bad, and - for any nation - find it easier to blame foreigners. That's what he's preying on - radical, ignorant xenophobia, and it's only going to be encouraged with this kind of behavior.... We may be able to afford a 24-26 billion dollar wall in 10 years, but the real question is, do we really need this? Will it actually make a difference, or will we just be wasting money that could be better spent somewhere else? Even some conservative values would potentially have a higher value. That's money we could spend on police, prisons or the military.

Saying that it's all about immigration vs xenophobia, and nothing else, is gross oversimplification.

For starters, immigrants may take up jobs that native-born citizens also need, but there's also the issue of outsourcing. Corporations will exploit low-wage labor, and will leave areas where workers will not accept such low salaries. Look at what outsourcing has done to places like Detroit; the jobs leave, the money leaves, and infrastructure and quality of life crumbles. Yet the United States is still a lucrative market to sell goods in, so these corporations, such as car manufacturers, still sell foreign-manufactured cars in the very places they left. They make more money because they pay the foreign workers less, while the common man and woman suffer.

This is no good for us, so Trump's solution is implementing a 35% tariff on American corporations who think they can outsource and get off easy by selling these foreign-made goods. At the same time, Trump plans to reduce the business tax to 15%, giving these corporations an even better reason to come back (as well as more money to give workers good salaries). You can already see it with various companies abandoning plans to build factories in Mexico, and investing in plants in Michigan.

Ironically, Obama said this was impossible. He asked Trump what kind of magic wand he had to bring those jobs back. Well, looks like Trump's a wizard.

You could say the same for any hard labor - the president could commission millions of people to recreate the Egyptian pyramids but 3x larger in Washington right now, and that'd give a lot of people jobs. But really, what would that accomplish? It'd just make us look cooler, maybe at the most increase tourism a little. To me, I foresee pretty much the same in this whole wall business. It's just gonna sit there and make us look stronger - it's the equivalent of us funding a dick-measuring contest.

Is a single dick worth 25 billion?

Actually, walls remain a very practical means of controlling movement of people. For instance, look at the results of Hungary's border wall.



And if you question whether illegal aliens bring violent crime (which, in turn, a barrier to migration would indirectly stop), look no further than Israel's border fence.

i thought it was all memes why is he doing this

see i don't really care about trump, hating him is missing the forest for the trees. Why is he in power doing this tho? Is this a flaw of the presidential system? Of first past the post voting? Is this policy something that is widely supported in the USA?

It's mostly because it was a campaign promise.

I'm guessing public opinion is about 50-50 right now.

[moxco]

whats the point in building a wall when the USA caters so much to illegal immigrants. I see reports of people illegally in the USA having car licences and jobs at franchises and such. In Australia it's practically impossible to function in society if you're here illegally, unless you're getting paid cash it's impossible to have a job (because the Tax Office will know where you're working) and in my state (and I assume others) you can't get a drivers licence without a shit ton of ID. And good luck going to the doctors lol.

[Sybil Ant]

Saying that it's all about immigration vs xenophobia, and nothing else, is gross oversimplification.

For starters, immigrants may take up jobs that native-born citizens also need, but there's also the issue of outsourcing. Corporations will exploit low-wage labor, and will leave areas where workers will not accept such low salaries. Look at what outsourcing has done to places like Detroit; the jobs leave, the money leaves, and infrastructure and quality of life crumbles. Yet the United States is still a lucrative market to sell goods in, so these corporations, such as car manufacturers, still sell foreign-manufactured cars in the very places they left. They make more money because they pay the foreign workers less, while the common man and woman suffer.

This is no good for us, so Trump's solution is implementing a 35% tariff on American corporations who think they can outsource and get off easy by selling these foreign-made goods. At the same time, Trump plans to reduce the business tax to 15%, giving these corporations an even better reason to come back (as well as more money to give workers good salaries). You can already see it with various companies abandoning plans to build factories in Mexico, and investing in plants in Michigan.

Ironically, Obama said this was impossible. He asked Trump what kind of magic wand he had to bring those jobs back. Well, looks like Trump's a wizard.



Actually, walls remain a very practical means of controlling movement of people. For instance, look at the results of Hungary's border wall.



And if you question whether illegal aliens bring violent crime (which, in turn, a barrier to migration would indirectly stop), look no further than Israel's border fence.





It's mostly because it was a campaign promise.

I'm guessing public opinion is about 50-50 right now.

A: when you have immigrants coming to your country, you expand your economy accordingly. Labour is an economic input that increases your GDP. Also if a Mexican that knows thirty words of English took a job 'meant for you', you never deserved it in the first place.

B: Detroit failed because of financial nelgligence and because Obama bailed out the companies and not the employees.

C: you just used one of the most right wing governments in Europe, and an apartheid state, as evidence that walls are good. Top lad well done wew.

[UnderTheSun]

A: when you have immigrants coming to your country, you expand your economy accordingly. Labour is an economic input that increases your GDP. Also if a Mexican that knows thirty words of English took a job 'meant for you', you never deserved it in the first place.

Of course we need to expand our economy accordingly, or we will not sustain these immigrants. That's why Trump is fighting outsourcing.

B: Detroit failed because of financial nelgligence and because Obama bailed out the companies and not the employees.

But outsourcing remains a factor, correct? As the city of Detroit loses its competetive edge, yet unions shout louder and louder for unsustainable wages, the corporations move their production to low-wage foreign factories... Leaving people jobless.

C: you just used one of the most right wing governments in Europe, and an apartheid state, as evidence that walls are good. Top lad well done wew.

How does that matter? Would it work differently for a left-leaning government building a wall? Can you give me an example of such a case?

[Manco]

Of course we need to expand our economy accordingly, or we will not sustain these immigrants. That's why Trump is fighting outsourcing.



But outsourcing remains a factor, correct? As the city of Detroit loses its competetive edge, yet unions shout louder and louder for unsustainable wages, the corporations move their production to low-wage foreign factories... Leaving people jobless.

I'll need to write a fuller response to the other claims you're making in this thread another time, but a quick note on this point is that Trump himself is guilty of this type of outsourcing in his own businesses. He is a massive hypocrite, on this and many other issues.

[UnderTheSun]

I'll need to write a fuller response to the other claims you're making in this thread another time,

Sounds good.

but a quick note on this point is that Trump himself is guilty of this type of outsourcing in his own businesses. He is a massive hypocrite, on this and many other issues.

He, himself, has admitted that he's been part of the swamp he's draining. Take the beginning of this video, for instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIBCEkzPYoE

[Manco]

Sounds good.



He, himself, has admitted that he's been part of the swamp he's draining. Take the beginning of this video, for instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIBCEkzPYoE

Considering that he has refused to adequately divest his business interests, has he actually done anything about this? Admitting he's done it isn't the same as taking action to rectify it.

[UnderTheSun]

Considering that he has refused to adequately divest his business interests, has he actually done anything about this? Admitting he's done it isn't the same as taking action to rectify it.

He could very well have not done anything to alleviate these concerns in the first place.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_55...b002d5c078b44c

Handing his businesses down to his children is very much an "anything." We can't just expect him to sell what he's spent his whole life to make in a fruitless gesture to appease people who will never cut him an inch of slack regardless. He knows a terrible deal when he sees one.

[Varrok]

@UnderTheSun, I'm pretty sure Manco didn't mean Trump has to immediately get rid of his business.

@Manco, Where's the hipocrisy, exactly? Does the new solutions he presents have his business listed as an exception?

[Lord Vhazen]

Saying that it's all about immigration vs xenophobia, and nothing else, is gross oversimplification.

For starters, immigrants may take up jobs that native-born citizens also need, but there's also the issue of outsourcing. Corporations will exploit low-wage labor, and will leave areas where workers will not accept such low salaries. Look at what outsourcing has done to places like Detroit; the jobs leave, the money leaves, and infrastructure and quality of life crumbles. Yet the United States is still a lucrative market to sell goods in, so these corporations, such as car manufacturers, still sell foreign-manufactured cars in the very places they left. They make more money because they pay the foreign workers less, while the common man and woman suffer.

This is no good for us, so Trump's solution is implementing a 35% tariff on American corporations who think they can outsource and get off easy by selling these foreign-made goods. At the same time, Trump plans to reduce the business tax to 15%, giving these corporations an even better reason to come back (as well as more money to give workers good salaries). You can already see it with various companies abandoning plans to build factories in Mexico, and investing in plants in Michigan.

Ironically, Obama said this was impossible. He asked Trump what kind of magic wand he had to bring those jobs back. Well, looks like Trump's a wizard.



Actually, walls remain a very practical means of controlling movement of people. For instance, look at the results of Hungary's border wall.



And if you question whether illegal aliens bring violent crime (which, in turn, a barrier to migration would indirectly stop), look no further than Israel's border fence.




It's mostly because it was a campaign promise.

I'm guessing public opinion is about 50-50 right now.

I never said illegal immigrants weren't a problem - you could say the idea of legal immigrants too may not be the greatest for our local workforce. But our entire country was founded on immigration. My point was actually people are just using them as a scape goat more than they should be. If we dealt with immigration, I really don't think that would magically fix all of our problems.

The thing about importation tariffs though... That's one thing I can agree with, because that's a thing going after businesses not people. Corporations leap from country to country to avoid the taxation that they'd have to deal with in being a local business while exploiting cheaper, less regulated labor in foreign land, which they then turn around and sell back to us. When a business is not actually based on our soil it can be detrimental to our economy - just look at Walmart. Their entire business model was that they were the store that sells things to us cheaper than everyone else but the money they earn doesn't actually help the country's cycle besides the paychecks of the people they employ. Meanwhile they make use of cheap foreign labor and import it back to their stocks here, which they sell at cheaper rates than everyone else which really damages local competitive - especially for small businesses which just simply can't compete. Of course more people will want cheaper groceries from Walmart vs some place like Target.

Also... Comparing our immigrants to those of another country's isn't really the most valid of arguments. Israel is Israel. The entire middle-east is in the shitter right now, it's all complete chaos and many people are basically just running away from corrupt governments or the fighting between moderates and radicals vs other radicals. Of course there's more crime in Israel, their whole world over there in that part of the world is going to shit. Among the people fleeing these different lands, there are terrorists tagging behind them with two main goals: Kill the people fleeing, and kill the places they're fleeing to. This is exactly what's fueling xenophobia in all the countries they're fleeing to because as more immigrants get accepted, they potentially bring with them more terrorist attacks because of those zealots that are following them, and naturally the people living in those countries resent that. But at the same time, denying them all is basically a death sentence to them.

Mexican immigrants ARE BY NO MEANS like the immigrants over there - they don't come over to our borders with bombs strapped to their ass. Most of them are just looking for the opportunity to start a new, more stable life or they're running away from all the druglords and corrupt police forces - both of whom present MUCH less of a threat to us.

[SuperScrab]

I hate trump!!

[TheParamitePie]

I hate trump!!

I prefer him than Clinton.

[Lord Vhazen]

I prefer him than Clinton.

In the end, the Democratic party basically ruined itself by choosing literally the worst possible left-wing candidate to be its head. Why Obama was the first to sponsor her is beyond me - especially considering how viciously she fought him in the past. You know, she actually said some borderline racist shit against him in a few debates? I don't remember it much - some comment about her being lucky enough to have been "raised away from the thug life" or whatever.

She got boo'd for it and even the other speakers were surprised.

[TheParamitePie]

In the end, the Democratic party basically ruined itself by choosing literally the worst possible left-wing candidate to be its head. Why Obama was the first to sponsor her is beyond me - especially considering how viciously she fought him in the past. You know, she actually said some borderline racist shit against him in a few debates? I don't remember it much - some comment about her being lucky enough to have been "raised away from the thug life" or whatever.

She got boo'd for it and even the other speakers were surprised.

I have heard she's a nasty piece of work but I never heard that exact story. But there you go, if it is true then I have even more of a reason to not like or trust her.

[SuperScrab]

I prefer sanders the communist

[Lord Vhazen]

I prefer Bernie Sanders the Social Democrat.

Fixed.

[Manco]

My mistake, it seems the decision was made directly by the State Department (by then, led by Hillary Clinton). However, the State Deparmnet is part of our government's executive branch, putting them under presidential authority, i.e. Obama. So, for those 6 months, Obama was likely complicit.

Furthermore, the State Deparment enacted the ban in 2011, near the end of Obama’s first term. Meanwhile, Trump is attempting to meet his campaign promise to implement strict vetting of people from, or with nationalities from, unstable countries with severe terrorism problems, barely a week after being inaugurated. He doesn't yet have Rex Tillerson to lead the State Deparment, or John Kelly to lead the Department of Homeland Security. Therefore, an executive order was, really, his only option (not that he'd avoid the backlash were they in place).

You need to read the article again – the 2011 situation was not a ban. The updates at the end of the article set this out flatly. It was also a situation caused by necessity, as the administration at the time had to respond to an identified issue. In contrast, Trump’s ban has been put in place without good reason, was ordered without going through appropriate planning, and has caused chaos as a result.

It may have been a campaign promise, but I’m not arguing about that – I’m arguing whether it is a good policy, and it clearly is not.

And it was far from his only option – there was absolutely no reason to make this order so soon, and he wanted to wait for when he was in a more secure position he could have done.

Even the argument that this is about combating terrorism is plainly false – between 1975 and 2016 zero Americans were killed on US soil by a foreign national from any the countries identified on Trump’s list; and the probability of being killed by an immigrant in a terrorist attack is an astronomically low 1 in 3.6 million. Only 3 refugees have been arrested in the past 15 years for terrorist activities; only 0.00062% of refugees admitted into the country since 1975 ever attempted a terrorist act – and only 3 out of the 20 attempts were successful.

It may seem that way if President Nieto is unwilling to negotiate, but the reality is that we hold all the cards. One thing to remember is that we don't need Mexico to literally pay us, it's just that Trump promised that Mexico will "pay for" the wall. For instance, Trump just recently asked Congress to approve a 20% import tax on Mexican goods. Other potential solutions include driving up the price of visas and forbidding Mexican immigrants from sending money back home to their families (amounts to $24 billion a year).

The proposed tariff will not be paid for by Mexico, it would be paid for by Americans through increased prices to compensate for the tariff. Add to it that the US buys in more import from Mexico than vice versa – $316.4 billion versus $267.2 billion. This deal would hurt America more than Mexico; that is not ‘holding all the cards’. And tracking down money sent to Mexico by immigrants would be exceedingly difficult to manage; let’s not even get into the implications of holding hostage the money immigrant workers’ families depend on for support.

Meanwhile, Trump’s aggression is souring relations with the Mexican government, and the current wisdom is that the upcoming Mexican elections will see candidates vying to be as anti-Trump as possible to gain votes. President Nieto is already playing hardball, and it’s only going to get worse.

Saying that it's all about immigration vs xenophobia, and nothing else, is gross oversimplification.

For starters, immigrants may take up jobs that native-born citizens also need, but there's also the issue of outsourcing. Corporations will exploit low-wage labor, and will leave areas where workers will not accept such low salaries. Look at what outsourcing has done to places like Detroit; the jobs leave, the money leaves, and infrastructure and quality of life crumbles. Yet the United States is still a lucrative market to sell goods in, so these corporations, such as car manufacturers, still sell foreign-manufactured cars in the very places they left. They make more money because they pay the foreign workers less, while the common man and woman suffer.

You are confusing immigration and outsourcing into a single issue, but these are separate issues. Yes, manufacturing abroad is cheaper, and many businesses exploit the lower wages in countries such as China. But this is not something that can be blamed on immigrants or refugees within the country (many of whom immigrate for better wages), and it will not be solved by banning immigration or turning away refugees.

And immigrants raise wages.

This is no good for us, so Trump's solution is implementing a 35% tariff on American corporations who think they can outsource and get off easy by selling these foreign-made goods. At the same time, Trump plans to reduce the business tax to 15%, giving these corporations an even better reason to come back (as well as more money to give workers good salaries). You can already see it with various companies abandoning plans to build factories in Mexico, and investing in plants in Michigan.

Do you mean companies like Ford, where Trump falsely claimed credit for the Michigan investment (which is a fraction of the amount due to be invested in Mexico), or where Trump took credit for saving a plant that wasn’t even going to close?

Trump has threatened to implement his tariff, but the deals he’s struck have not come from the tariff – they’ve come from tax cuts. And any tariff would simply be costing Americans more tax money and damage international trade.

Actually, walls remain a very practical means of controlling movement of people. For instance, look at the results of Hungary's border wall.

In Hungary’s case, the fact is that refugees can take other routes around this border – so building the wall has simply redirected those people, not blocked them; they will seek the past of lesser resistance. For Trump and Mexico, the scenario is different – the size of the border is much larger, and there are no other routes around, so people would be more determined to find a way in.

But I am not concerned about the effectiveness of a hypothetical wall – of course putting a wall up will stop people. What worries me is the implication behind these walls; the ideology they represent. Let alone the prohibitive financial cost of such a wall would be quite possibly the largest waste of federal money on a vanity project the US has ever seen.

Hungary’s wall represents one part of the rising anti-refugee sentiment in Europe. Let’s recap: refugees are people fleeing war, seeking asylum, fleeing from terror. They risk life and limb abandoning their homes to travel across the world to find safety; but now instead they are finding themselves blocked, turned away, or penned in to despicable holding camps. The European Union is failing to support people desperately in need of help – is that the example the US wants to follow?

Hungary stands accused breaking Geneva Conventions by “escorting” refugees who cross the wall back to the other side; and Hungarian police are alleged to have used excessive force, while those who make it into the country are described by Amnesty International as being “treated like animals” in detention. It has not reduced refugee numbers; it has simply made life harder for them.

And if you question whether illegal aliens bring violent crime (which, in turn, a barrier to migration would indirectly stop), look no further than Israel's border fence.

I don’t even know where to begin with this claim. Israel’s border fence is designed to hem in Palestinians; it has spent decades illegally encroaching further and further into Palestinian territory, building illegal settlements and driving the Palestinians out. Thousands of Palestinians have been murdered by the Israeli government. Israel’s border control is little more than apartheid oppression; much like Trump’s racist wall, it is built on the back of hatred and xenophobia. Illegal aliens do not bring crime – violent oppression ensures retaliation.

It's mostly because it was a campaign promise.

I'm guessing public opinion is about 50-50 right now.

Trump’s approval rating has plummeted faster than any other US President in history, if that’s any indication of popularity.

How does that matter? Would it work differently for a left-leaning government building a wall? Can you give me an example of such a case?

A left-leaning government would not build a wall. Sybil’s point is that the walls you cited are by-products of dangerous xenophobia – conservative anti-refugee Hungary and oppressive Israeli occupation. These are not examples that the supposed “land of the free” should follow; not if it wishes to be seen as a nation fit to lead the world on humanitarian issues.

He could very well have not done anything to alleviate these concerns in the first place.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_55...b002d5c078b44c

Handing his businesses down to his children is very much an "anything." We can't just expect him to sell what he's spent his whole life to make in a fruitless gesture to appease people who will never cut him an inch of slack regardless. He knows a terrible deal when he sees one.

Trump has done as good as nothing – his proposals to leave his businesses in the hands of his children are not enough to satisfy the Office of Government Ethics, and they do not constitute a blind trust. And yes, we should expect Trump to divest – regardless of the work he put in building those assets, the fact of the matter is that the most powerful government position in the free world should be free of any conflict of interest, and every other. We have already seen Ivanka Trump’s jewelry promoted on the White House website, and the Trump Organization pressuring foreign diplomats to stay at his hotels. There are many more ways in which trump stands to abuse his power and influence to personally enrich himself and his family, and that is unacceptable.

The whole idea of propagating fight with fake news (the list, to little surprise, included platforms of other opinions, that were not really fake news) was being pushed by the far left during the election in order to get Hilary elected.

Yet now Trump brands any news story critical of him as fake news – we have his press secretary making up ‘facts’ to berate reporters with. Is that OK?

@UnderTheSun, I'm pretty sure Manco didn't mean Trump has to immediately get rid of his business.

He does.

@Manco, Where's the hipocrisy, exactly? Does the new solutions he presents have his business listed as an exception?

The hypocrisy comes from his businesses outsourcing abroad, with him then turning around and proclaiming that businesses outsourcing abroad are a problem, without doing anything to change his own business practices. Has he stopped his businesses from outsourcing? Has he implemented any actual policy about this yet? It is far from the only hypocritical thing he has done.

[Lord Vhazen]

*Giant F-ing explosion*

I honestly don't know what to say... This is one of the best walls I've ever seen.

The only real thing I think I can add on is that I also found that one comment about stopping immigrants from sending money to their families a bit worthy of raising an eyebrow at. And once again I ask the forums - Is a single dick worth 25 billion dollars to the people of the United States?

[Slog Bait]

There's a couple things I wanted to add to Manco's wall

Even the argument that this is about combating terrorism is plainly false – between 1975 and 2016 zero Americans were killed on US soil by a foreign national from any the countries identified on Trump’s list; and the probability of being killed by an immigrant in a terrorist attack is an astronomically low 1 in 3.6 million. Only 3 refugees have been arrested in the past 15 years for terrorist activities; only 0.00062% of refugees admitted into the country since 1975 ever attempted a terrorist act – and only 3 out of the 20 attempts were successful.

Let's not forget the fact that the countries he conveniently omitted from the ban are countries that have had links to terrorist activities that have occurred on US soil in the same timeframe (our most famous example, 9/11, was enacted by terrorists from Saudi Arabia and Egypt), but these same countries have Trump businesses set up within them.

In Hungary’s case, the fact is that refugees can take other routes around this border – so building the wall has simply redirected those people, not blocked them; they will seek the past of lesser resistance. For Trump and Mexico, the scenario is different – the size of the border is much larger, and there are no other routes around, so people would be more determined to find a way in.

And as a reminder, to anyone who thinks the wall would be at all effective, consider the fact that the US-Mexico border is surrounded by water on both sides. If someone's going to cross the border, a wall isn't going to stop them. People can dig. They can swim, boat, and fly in. In a crude reference, they can also climb. There is a reason there's so many jokes about Mexicans hopping fences really well.

This is after the wall's built. The wall, that will take approximately 10 years to build, and by the time it's done it will likely be more useless than it already is, since Mexican immigration is no longer an issue and hasn't been for at least a decade now, way after we had the mass illegal immigration and dealt with it. The wall is a massive waste of money and resources that could be going towards infrastructure, the exact thing Trump said he wanted to focus on time and time again when appealing to rural voters.

As an addendum to how stupid the wall is, I'm an American born citizen that's always lived ~4 hours or less from the US-Mexico border and grew up in an area effected heavily by the mass illegal immigration a while back. The wall is very wasteful and very stupid. The proper measures for dealing with the undocumented immigrants have already been made. The wall is a total waste

He does.

Also a very firm reminder, that once elected president, your duty is to The People. You officially serve The People. Everything you've built up off to the side is officially not of your concern, and you are not in that position for yourself. You are no longer an individual, you are the public figurehead for an entire country. The only people who would try to say otherwise are dictators and people who stand to profit by being in that position (not mutually exclusive), which is why you're supposed to immediately drop all conflicts of interest upon entering the White House, since the US loves to cling to the label of democracy and "freedom with liberty and justice for all".

[Nate]

As an addendum to other people's posts about The Wall; approximately 40% of Mexican illegal immigrants come by plane. A wall might slow things down (although as Slog Bait said, probably only a bit), but the there's plenty of people who are just going to fly over the top.