knapplc Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 What's the advantage of The Wall versus the fence we currently have? Maybe we should just patch a few holes in that fence and call it a day? The current wall is only 700 miles long, only about 1/3 of the length of the border. The proposed wall would run the entire length on the US/Mexico border. In terms of cost, for comparison, last week France approved the construction of a $22 million "barrier" (What that mean, IDK, but that's the same term Hillary used when discussing her plans for the US/Mexico border) to run around the perimeter of the Eiffel Tower..... France is building a 2 mile long barrier for the same estimated price that the US is going to build a 1300 mile long wall/fence. Either their is a huge difference in the quality of wall and technologies used for both countries, or there is huge lie in terms of the cost from one or both countries. If the French barrier gets approved, it won't be two miles long. The base of the Eiffel Tower is 400 feet per side. There are streets very close to the base, so it can't be too far from the base. Four times 400 feet is 1,600 feet, or about 1/3 of a mile. The cost for the Eiffel Tower barrier is estimated to be 20 million euros, or about $21.3 million. Trump's wall is estimated to be between $12 and $15 billion. Trump's lowest estimate during his campaign was $4 billion. Clinton, specifically, didn't say she would build a wall. As a Senator she was among those who voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which caused sections of wall and fence to be built along the entire length of the border. That's done, at a cost of about $2.4 billion for a little more than 600 miles of new barrier. This kind of fence/barrier isn't what Trump is talking about, and why Trump's wall will cost a lot more. The wall Trump wants isn't really comparable to the existing fence/wall/barrier thing that's there now, nor is it comparable to the proposed glass barrier around the Eiffel Tower. EDIT - LOL, OK, I see we've already discussed this and it's been amended. Nevermind me. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Lol you're right. Thank you. Don't mind me, I'll just be over here eating popcorn.... Link to comment
Landlord Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 What's the advantage of The Wall versus the fence we currently have? Maybe we should just patch a few holes in that fence and call it a day? The current wall is only 700 miles long, only about 1/3 of the length of the border. The proposed wall would run the entire length on the US/Mexico border. Well this isn't true, because many parts of the border are in the middle of a river, or running through the middle of a town, or even through the middle of people's houses. Link to comment
Oade Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 What's the advantage of The Wall versus the fence we currently have? Maybe we should just patch a few holes in that fence and call it a day? The current wall is only 700 miles long, only about 1/3 of the length of the border. The proposed wall would run the entire length on the US/Mexico border. In terms of cost, for comparison, last week France approved the construction of a $22 million "barrier" (What that mean, IDK, but that's the same term Hillary used when discussing her plans for the US/Mexico border) to run around the perimeter of the Eiffel Tower..... France is building a 2 mile long barrier for the same estimated price that the US is going to build a 1300 mile long wall/fence. Either their is a huge difference in the quality of wall and technologies used for both countries, or there is huge lie in terms of the cost from one or both countries. Clinton, specifically, didn't say she would build a wall. As a Senator she was among those who voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which caused sections of wall and fence to be built along the entire length of the border. That's done, at a cost of about $2.4 billion for a little more than 600 miles of new barrier. You're right, I was using the "2 mile" term loosely, 2 miles being a rough estimated maximum on my part. I can imagine two or three levels of wall/security around the Tower. Just last year Clinton used the term "technology and barriers" when asked to describe her plan for securing the border. She definitely avoided using the specific wording of a Wall or Fence because she's a veteran politician, but its impossible to say what she wanted because I don't think she ever expanded upon her comment of a "barrier". That's all beside the point though. This wall will be more expensive than it should be, and a lot of people are going to hate it regardless of cost. 1 Link to comment
Oade Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 What's the advantage of The Wall versus the fence we currently have? Maybe we should just patch a few holes in that fence and call it a day? The current wall is only 700 miles long, only about 1/3 of the length of the border. The proposed wall would run the entire length on the US/Mexico border. Well this isn't true, because many parts of the border are in the middle of a river, or running through the middle of a town, or even through the middle of people's houses. What part isn't true? The current wall is only about 700 miles long, or 1/3 of the length of the US/Mexico border, regardless of other geographical barriers. How many houses are built directly upon the border? Do those home owners pay taxes to both countries? Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 There is actual barrier along the entire length of the border. Some is purely fencing which most children could climb over, some are only vehicle barriers (but not motorcycle barriers), some is actual factual wall. Here's what some of the vehicle barriers look like: Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 There is actual barrier along the entire length of the border. Some is purely fencing which most children could climb over, some are only vehicle barriers (but not motorcycle barriers), some is actual factual wall. I don't see anywhere in that link that the entire length of the border is covered. Actually, the final paragraph says even the 700 miles of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 was never completed: The Republican Party's 2012 platform highlighted the fact that the rest of the double fencing was never built and stated that "The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built."[7] The Washington Office on Latin America, claims on its Border Fact Check site that the extremely high cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate—estimated at US$4.1 billion, or more than the Border Patrol’s entire annual budget of US$3.55 billion—was the main reason that it was not fulfilled.[8] In short, Congress failed to continue to fund the project past the initial $1.2 billion procured, in order to finish building the fence[citation needed]. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 The Republicans don't think it's finished because it isn't a double-walled fence like they want. Obama thinks it's finished because there is some kind of barrier the length of the border. It's political, as always. Link to comment
Landlord Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/tomdispatch-operation-streamline-immigration-enforcement-donald-trump-wall Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 The Republicans don't think it's finished because it isn't a double-walled fence like they want. Obama thinks it's finished because there is some kind of barrier the length of the border. It's political, as always. No, that link shows that only a portion of the border has a barrier. From your link: Department of Homeland Security officials told us they have finished 649 out of 652 miles of fencing (99.5 percent), which includes 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 350 miles of pedestrian fence. The US-Mexico border is 1989 miles. So less than a third of the entire border has some sort of barrier. Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 The Republicans don't think it's finished because it isn't a double-walled fence like they want. Obama thinks it's finished because there is some kind of barrier the length of the border. It's political, as always. No, that link shows that only a portion of the border has a barrier. From your link: Department of Homeland Security officials told us they have finished 649 out of 652 miles of fencing (99.5 percent), which includes 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 350 miles of pedestrian fence. The US-Mexico border is 1989 miles. So less than a third of the entire border has some sort of barrier.How much of that is covered by the Rio Grande? Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 It doesn't say it doesn't have barrier. My understanding of the 2006 act was that it was supposed to put walls on the remaining part of the border that didn't already have them. That's why the figure is less than 700 miles. There have been fences/walls along the border in certain places for decades. Go to San Diego/Tijuana, Laredo/Nuevo Laredo, etc, and you'll find walls that predate the turn of the century. The 2006 act was written to fill in gaps in the wall, not build an entirely new wall across the border. There would be no need - there's already much wall. Link to comment
funhusker Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 NPR did a series of articles a while back about the border "barriers". After reading some of the articles, a "wall" the entire length of the border could be considered the more humane thing to do. The article talked about how the border patrol uses natural barriers such as desert and rough terrain to help catch illegals. It spoke about how the immigrants would be so weak and desperate by the time they reached civilization again they would actually give information in exchange for food and water. Not to mention the hundreds of bodies of young and old that could be found in the desert throughout the year. This isn't the article I was thinking of. But it is along the same lines... Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 It doesn't say it doesn't have barrier. My understanding of the 2006 act was that it was supposed to put walls on the remaining part of the border that didn't already have them. That's why the figure is less than 700 miles. There have been fences/walls along the border in certain places for decades. Go to San Diego/Tijuana, Laredo/Nuevo Laredo, etc, and you'll find walls that predate the turn of the century. The 2006 act was written to fill in gaps in the wall, not build an entirely new wall across the border. There would be no need - there's already much wall. The best wall, great wall really, the greatest wall. Wrong China and Matt Damond, wrong! America has the greatest wall. Link to comment
Recommended Posts