Posted on 09/05/2016 6:06:56 AM PDT by Kaslin
Mirror, mirror on Donald Trump’s 2,000-mile wall! Who will pay $25 billion for you to be built long and tall? “Mexico. Yes, Mexico, will pay for the wall,” whispers the mirror.
Last Wednesday, Trump accepted a meeting invitation that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, turned down. A meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.
Proving himself to have the thick skin necessary of America’s top executive, Trump flew to Mexico to meet Peña Nieto on his home turf, despite the fact that Peña Nieto had previously compared Trump to vile German dictator Adolf Hitler and his Italian ally, despot Benito Mussolini.
Flip-flopper! Wavering! and Photo-Op King! Such insults were hurled at Trump after he met with Mexico’s president.
Why? Because Trump supposedly reneged on his long-standing campaign promise to make Mexico pay for the wall that he plans to build along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Reality check: Trump didn’t flip-flop. Mexico will pay for the wall if Trump becomes president. Furthermore, the wall’s cost and payment are negligible in the big picture. Here’s how, and why.
November 8, 2016: America’s Big Payday
Election Day (Tuesday, Nov. 8) will be America’s big payday if Trump is elected president. Not because Mexico will literally write us a check for $25 billion with Border Wall Project on the memo line.
Every savvy businessperson knows there is more than one way in which to collect proper payment from a debtor. Banks, for example, place liens against homes for which they offer mortgages. If a bank’s customer fails to make payments, the bank will enforce the lien by initiating foreclosure procedures and seizing the home.
Every year, Mexicans working in the U.S. send at least $20 billion back to Mexico in the form of remittances, placing a huge drain on our economy. Through a combination of legal and procedural challenges, Trump could impound such remittances.
Tune into your local Spanish TV or radio network on any given day and—if you’re fluent in Spanish—you’re bound to catch frequent advertisements from organizations promising to help you send money home to Mexico. Trump’s administration could have the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) enforce large fines on networks that air such commercials.
Mexico’s government, unsurprisingly, threatens that if the U.S. impounds remittances, it will feel harsh consequences—like an uptick in money laundering. But the U.S. could easily push back even harder—legalizing drugs and effectively snuffing out Mexico’s drug cartels and crime rings overnight.
Besides cracking down on remittances, “visa fees,” “visa cancellations,” and the enforcement or enactment of “trade tariffs” are three additional ways in which Trump proposes to make Mexico pay for the wall.
Stopping Sneaking Syrians
Securing the U.S.-Mexico border is necessary because it will help safeguard our country from terrorists who originate far beyond Mexico. USA Today and many other major news outlets have confirmed that refugees originating from the terror hotbed of Syria are using our porous border with Mexico to slip into the United States without detection.
A 2016 study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs indicates that nearly two in three Americans do not support accepting Syrian refugees into the United States. Hillary, meanwhile, has voiced a willingness to outdo President Obama’s recklessness by welcoming around 550 percent more (65,000) incompletely vetted Syrian refugees into America.
Anyone who tells you that Trump’s immigration views are “hardline” or “alt-right” is disingenuous. It is Clinton’s immigration policy that is “alt-left” and far outside the realm of what most Americans desire in terms of national security.
It’s Not the Money, Honey
If you still doubt Trump’s ability to compel Mexico to pay for the wall, stop focusing on the cost. The cost of building the wall—estimated to range between $10 and $25 billion—is negligible in comparison to the billions we routinely squander on programs that set back our national security.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has an annual budget of $2 billion. For this expenditure, we the taxpayers receive a TSA that corrals us like cattle every time we fly—only to have a 96 percent fail rate at catching weapons and explosives.
Trump could ask America to cover every penny of building his “tall, physical, impenetrable, beautiful wall along the southern border to stop the influx of illegal immigration” and our country would be far more secure than after dumping billions down the TSA Toilet.
1st-Timer vs. 4th-Timer
Don’t buy into claims that Trump is a flip-flopper because he went from claiming to be “softening” to “hardening” his immigration stance within a matter of days. We can’t forget that this is Trump’s first rodeo. Hillary has run for president four times if you include her husband’s two runs. She has been a politician for at least 20 years whereas Trump has been a politician for barely one year.
Hillary has scripted her views to the point where even she sometimes forgets her “lines,”—like when she said she would increase taxes on the middle class. Trump, in contrast, has to force himself to use a teleprompter to organize his naturally free-flowing communication style. It takes time to convert strong ideologies and values like those Trump espouses into public policies that are applicable in the real world. Trump isn’t wavering on immigration. He’s refining.
So give Trump a chance, especially when he insists Mexico will pay for the wall. As I’ve shown above, even if Mexico didn’t pay for the wall—which it will, one way or another—the wall’s cost is negligible. And Hillary’s alternative immigration plan will compel you to house and clothe improperly vetted refugees and immigrants.
It only takes one criminal crossing our border to succumb your son or daughter to the tragic fate of Kate Steinle and Sarah Root. Build it tall. Build the wall.
You want Mexico to pay for the wall? Put a 50% remitance tax on all money sent to Mexico from the USA.
That photo looks Sistine-chapelish. Dude’s almost bowing to The Donald.
The cost of building the wall—estimated to range between $10 and $25 billion—is negligible in comparison to the billions we routinely squander on programs that set back our national security.
And the best part, it’s a shovel ready project that will boost the local economy and provide needed infrastructure (kinda like the depression era Hoover Dam)
We want it in US Dollars and not MExican Peso,too. Thanks and have a nice day.
You want to stop it altogether?
Make it 90.
that would pay for the wall in no time- the costs could be financed with guaranteed payback.
Or just charge Mexicans coming back and forth....
Much of the money wired back is accumulated through govt fraud.....the use of multiple identities to ripoff govt agencies.
western Union and other wire-transfer outfits could be charged w/ govt fraud, money laundering, and aiding and abetting tax evasion.
Not only that, Pena is looking away from Trump; looking chastised, beaten. Mr Trump is definitely in charge at the moment of the photo.
Mexico owes the states that have to pay for the education and care of Mexico’s children. A huge chunk of the bottom of its society is encouraged to go to the US and Uncle Sap will pay for everything. Millions of Mexicans are on our welfare rolls. In Texas we see them come across with US EBT cards to buy their groceries. We are stupid.
As others note, the ‘remittance’ scam must be interrupted. A new ‘path’ must be installed where electronic wiring of dollars must pass through a screen to verify legality of the sender and to assess tax liability.
...That photo looks Sistine-chapelish. Dude’s almost bowing to The Donald....
Almost like he wants to kiss the ring. He knows Trump will accomplish what he says he will do.
I have asked this question before...never got a answer, I know reality is a hard thing...
A lot of these remittances are legit and legally made by Mexicans here legally and actually US citizens...
What mechanism do you use to separate the ill gotten remittances from illegals sent to Mexico from the legal and legitimate ones...?
The government can't simply impound a legal transaction...
simply impound a legal transaction = a tax.
I don't get what you mean with Sistine chapelish. I know you're talking about the Sistine Chapel in Vatican City.
I assume you are meaning taxing a legal transaction verses impounding it...
Huge difference...
I have no issue taxing/fee a remittance to fund the wall.
I have a serious constitutional question about impounding a remittance to keep a campaign promise...
You do still believe in the constitution...don't you ?
I can't even begin to imagine the legal challenges that move will cause....One huge class action suit...paid for by the US taxpayer...and stuck down by SCOTUS in about 10 years...without collecting a penny.
What is the rush. A few percent of the remittances will do it. It may take twenty years to hit the break even point, but they still would have paid for it in installments.
“...the best part, it’s a shovel ready project that will boost the local economy and provide needed infrastructure (kinda like the depression era Hoover Dam)”.....
I was just imagining the amount of security needed to accomplish the task of construction, the stealing and/or destruction of equipment, supplies and manpower. An entire “army” will be needed along the in-process construction phases. However, if Trump is elected we can damn well believe it will be solidly addressed. BUILD THE WALL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
