Equally interesting that you and others aren't.

I have grown accustomed to waiting for a bill to pass, then we can really dig in to see what the costs are. Excuse me, but Nancy Pelosi is trying to call me.......something about me plagerising her ideas?

Interesting that you and others all of a sudden concerned about the cost of anything.

 

:lol:

The Trump administration just needs to come up with a misleading name for the bill that will fund the wall and require the government to compel the reimbursement of costs from Mexico. There is a precedent for this: the unaffordable "Affordable Care Act." Better yet, include the words "Affordable" and "Stimulus" in the bill's name and some Democrats will mistake it for one of their own. Something like:

 

Affordable Borders Economic Stimulus Act

 

The mexican immigration protection act.

Can someone tell me when I'm supposed to say "free trade" is a good thing and when I'm supposed to say "free trade" is a bad thing?

 

When we don't trade at a 50 billion dollar deficit you can say free trade is good.

I believe in free trade any Tariff I am not for. I will say there are countries right now who have a form of a Tariff against us. I would not be against returning the favor. The Tariff is a bad idea. But I do think with all of the criminals and drugs Mexico allows to cross our border withholding aid to pay for the wall seems like a smart move.

 

Also they are highering 5k new Border agents. The wall will not be worthless. How in a time of terrorism and Drug cartels how anyone could be against a wall seems outrageous.

 

The two main things the government should spend money on is Infrastructure and National Defense. This falls under both.

Wall stillnot started. The same wall, yes a real wall, that whats his name would be up and paid for by Mexico.

I really think he lied about who was paying for it.

 

I've always been for tightening up the boarders.

Indirectly, we could make them pay for it by not sending them aid anymore, so instead of money pouring out of this country, it would stay here, while also decreasing government money spent on illegal aliens.

 

Sounds pretty smart to me and yet people call him hateful for it.

 

The guy is hateful for keeping hard-earned American money in America and in the hands of legal citizens, while also keeping illegal aliens out?

 

Also, a lot of illegal drugs come from Mexico (I've seen where most heroin comes from Mexico), but he's wrong for wanting to stop that?!

Companies not moving jobs to Mexico is costing them money and it's staying home. Maybe that's the money.

 

Also, the things I mentioned above, plus there's more ways that money stays here that I'm not even thinking about right now.

 

When there are no homeless, no veterans in need. No starving citizen's of the USA, we can discuss your agenda.

When there are no homeless, no veterans in need. No starving citizen's of the USA, we can discuss your agenda.

 

Ironically, people continue to call for the end of government programs like welfare, medicaid, unemployment benefits etc, that do help provide help for the groups you mention. In reality it seems like a lot of people don't really want to help anyone.

 

When you invite someone to your table, would you make sure they would do no harm to your family?

Ironically, people continue to call for the end of government programs like welfare, medicaid, unemployment benefits etc, that do help provide help for the groups you mention. In reality it seems like a lot of people don't really want to help anyone.

 

We are wealthy enough to help home. I am against handouts to the rest of the world.

We are wealthy enough to help home. I am against handouts to the rest of the world.

 

i don't disagree with the statement about our wealth as a country. My point was people talk out of both sides of their mouths on the issue of helping those in need in our own country. On one hand, we say we should help our own out, but then on the other, people want the programs that do help them shut down or reduced. Can't have it both ways.