Trump's Wall: Before They Were Against It, Democrats Were For It!
- Thread starter wkmac
- Start date
oldngray
nowhere special
Eh, sort of. As the article makes clear the plan that a lot of dems were in favor was for 700 miles of fencing, which is a little different than a 2000 mile wall. The big draw for Trump's plan was that it wasn't going to cost US tax payers a dime because he was going to make Mexico pay for it somehow and that's actually the source of most of the opposition to it, folks don't believe that he can really do that and that US taxpayers are going to get the bill which is projected to be considerable. The larger point the article is making is that the whole concept of building the wall is a misguided appeal to tribalism, a point I agree with.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
How will "Mexicans" working in the USA end up paying for the wall when the wall keeps "Mexicans" out of the USA to begin with? The wall costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $16 million per mile (times 1300 miles) so how many "Mexicans" would we need to tax to pay for the wall?
And what happened to the "Mexicans don't pay their taxes" argument?
In all this wall discussion, I've yet to hear anyone address the fact that farmers put up fences not to keep livestock out but moreso to keep their own livestock in. Prisons also come to mind.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Slap a 10% fee on remittances .
Mexico's GNP is dependent upon money flowing home from workers working in the USA ( last reported amount was around $26B US .
$2.6B US / yr would more than cover any costs .
The point of not paying taxes is moot, since taxes will not be involved here .
More than just Mexicans remit money back home , a straight 10% fee on all transactions should be used .
We wouldn't want the left to think that only one group is being picked on .
OK. currently is the only place that has imposed such a fee and no one seems to mind .
Mexico's GNP is dependent upon money flowing home from workers working in the USA ( last reported amount was around $26B US .
$2.6B US / yr would more than cover any costs .
The point of not paying taxes is moot, since taxes will not be involved here .
More than just Mexicans remit money back home , a straight 10% fee on all transactions should be used .
We wouldn't want the left to think that only one group is being picked on .
OK. currently is the only place that has imposed such a fee and no one seems to mind .
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
How would a plan like that be administered? How would we determine what is a remittance and what is a fee for a service? What's to stop people from putting cash in an envelope and mailing it? I've heard the idea proposed but never an explanation of the logistics involved.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
#AlternativeMath
wkmac
Well-Known Member
I'm waiting for him to explain how all these fees and taxes he speaks of will get paid by all those non existent "Mexicans" that is claimed the wall will get rid of. Or is his claim of all this money being made off these "Mexicans" an admission that the wall will not work? If so, why build it in the first place?
Babagounj
Strength through joy
A fee to send funds out of this country is easy to do .
The state of Oklahoma charges a one percent fee on all personal wire transfers of cash to accounts outside the state. The state treats the fee as withholding from state income tax, so any Oklahoma resident who files taxes eventually gets the money back. Those in the country illegally obviously don’t file state income taxes, so they never get the money back or have it credited against a state tax debt. The “wire transmitter fee” brought in $9.7 million in 2013, $10.5 million in 2014 and in 2016 $12.6 million .
Now consider that on a national scale .
Now if someone could only stop the email scammers from asking for payments on gift cards.
The state of Oklahoma charges a one percent fee on all personal wire transfers of cash to accounts outside the state. The state treats the fee as withholding from state income tax, so any Oklahoma resident who files taxes eventually gets the money back. Those in the country illegally obviously don’t file state income taxes, so they never get the money back or have it credited against a state tax debt. The “wire transmitter fee” brought in $9.7 million in 2013, $10.5 million in 2014 and in 2016 $12.6 million .
Now consider that on a national scale .
Now if someone could only stop the email scammers from asking for payments on gift cards.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
So using your example, it's obviously not enough money to build a wall.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
But if the point of building the wall is to keep said persons from being here in the first place to send the wire transfers, how are you going to raise tax revenue from persons and their actions that don't exist to begin with?
The vested interest of taxing something in order to raise revenue is for that something to grow in order to arrive at more tax revenue.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
The whole idea is to make Mexico pay for the wall .
Once that is completed those non citizens will be faced with a new challenge to stay or go home , knowing that getting passed the wall easily is no longer an option .
Or they may not even have that option if the gov't uses the info they write down on the paperwork to send a wire transfer is used to find and deport them .
if each state did the same, how much would that be??
I mean, there's only 3.9 million people in OK
try that example with TX or Ca
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
I dunno man I'm not a statistician. I know you're not going to get 20+ billion dollars from taxing the wire transfers of illegal immigrants, the suggestion is a total distraction.
Last edited:
it doesn't happen overnight.
my town is getting a new library, it's going to cost the locals 20 years of increased taxes to pay for it
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
Do you actually believe, in opposition to all factual and rational evidence, that Trump will 'make' Mexico pay for a wall?
I doubt this 'wall' will ever be built.
Talk about distractions.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
The "wall" will be built.
That is because it's physical and electronic structure have never been defined.
One thing I learned while working in the Corporate arena for a couple decades is that "success" is defined by the people in power.
Whatever is in place by the next Presidential election will be "success" and the "wall" will be declared built but not quite finished yet. You must elect Trump for four more years to finish the job YOU started.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Wait I thought Mexico was going to pay for it... lmao.
I guess the difference of opinion here comes down to ideology. I'm not a "liberal"(lol) so I tend to oppose new taxes.
