|
Post by darkchami on Nov 26, 2016 4:59:52 GMT
By withholding the $55 million per year we give to Mexico in aid So they will have it paid for in approximately 450 years. I'm pretty certain that really translates into us paying for the wall.
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Nov 26, 2016 5:09:43 GMT
I'd rather the money go towards the wall than to Mexico. So to me, it's fine.
|
|
|
Post by paperaddict on Nov 26, 2016 6:14:04 GMT
I am sorry but Lauren, you are the stereotype of a Trump voter...stop all social programs so the rich billionaire elect president can make more money. I usually stay out of discussion on politics but your previous post show how selfish you are and maybe you need to be more informed or have yourself or a loved one need these social programs before you can show empathy for people, who are going through a financial crisis, due to unexpected events. An example is medical expenses.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Nov 26, 2016 12:21:30 GMT
Really? We can't afford it? Seems to me that if we can afford all the social welfare programs, can afford to educate and provide medical care to illegals in this country, can afford grants and aid to any number of foreign countries and governments, then we can afford our President. And if we really cannot.afford.it, then let's get rid of all those other things first. You'd be amazed how much money we'd have if we weren't giving it away like drunken sailors. Seriously? You think it is reasonable to cut funding that helps millions of people in this country so that we can afford to secure 3 people for a couple of months? That is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Florida Cindy on Nov 26, 2016 15:25:58 GMT
So, is this the real reason he ran? To make more money and influence foreign governments and companies to work with him going forward (such as countries where hotel permits were denied)? Yes, I absolutely believe this. SaveSaveMy cousin told me American didn't vote for a president. America voted for the "Trump" brand name, no matter the cost. My cousin voted for Trump.
|
|
|
Post by 2peaornot2pea on Nov 26, 2016 18:02:34 GMT
Really? We can't afford it? Seems to me that if we can afford all the social welfare programs, can afford to educate and provide medical care to illegals in this country, can afford grants and aid to any number of foreign countries and governments, then we can afford our President. And if we really cannot.afford.it, then let's get rid of all those other things first. You'd be amazed how much money we'd have if we weren't giving it away like drunken sailors. I generally stay out of political arguments. However, I just can't let this one go. The way this post reads just makes my heart sink. I read it as the desire of the PEOTUS to have a second secured residence outweighs the basic needs of the less fortunate. I know I am not unbiased when it comes to social welfare programs. Many of my students rely on these programs to survive. So when you say we can afford to pay for an extra extravagance at the expense of my students' wellbeing, I get a little angry. I'm hoping I am just reading too much into what you wrote. You don't strike me as a cold or uncaring person. Have you met her? (figuratively speaking of course) Her opinion of social programs is pretty well known amongst the peas who discuss such things regularly. I find such opinions abhorrent but I'm a bleeding heart liberal.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 3:50:57 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2016 19:29:28 GMT
By withholding the $55 million per year we give to Mexico in aid Well, at that rate it would only take 454.5 years to recover the costs. But my actual question was where are we going to get the cash upfront to build the wall?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 3:50:57 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2016 19:32:36 GMT
No, I don't. The elderly paid all their lives into these "insurance" programs. They are not entitlements I am in total agreement with you that those should not be eliminated or cut. But reality is that those two programs are the federal budget busters. Which brings me back to my original point that we cannot afford to outfit two presidential residences on the vanity whims of the first family. Especially if we're going to come up with 25+ billion up front to build a wall, keep Medicare and Social Security, and somehow manage to reduce the federal deficit.
|
|
|
Post by darkchami on Nov 26, 2016 19:47:32 GMT
I generally stay out of political arguments. However, I just can't let this one go. The way this post reads just makes my heart sink. I read it as the desire of the PEOTUS to have a second secured residence outweighs the basic needs of the less fortunate. I know I am not unbiased when it comes to social welfare programs. Many of my students rely on these programs to survive. So when you say we can afford to pay for an extra extravagance at the expense of my students' wellbeing, I get a little angry. I'm hoping I am just reading too much into what you wrote. You don't strike me as a cold or uncaring person. Have you met her? (figuratively speaking of course) Her opinion of social programs is pretty well known amongst the peas who discuss such things regularly. I find such opinions abhorrent but I'm a bleeding heart liberal. I can understand being fiscally conservative. People don't want their money "wasted." Though I have a very different point of view, I can find common ground with fiscally conservative people. I generally think we want what is best for the residents of our country, but have two incredibly different pathways to get there. I find the willingness to spend billions on a wall and possibly hundreds of millions on a second residence at odds with the need to lower taxes. That doesn't make fiscal sense. Over the years, Lauren has posted her conservative views here. I appreciate reading about how others think and feel. It gives me better perspective, and forces me to challenge my own position. I have always thought she was passionate about her political views and being fiscally responsible. That is commendable. The posts on this thread have hit me hard. Half of my students live in poverty. They often don't have beds. Some have fled countries where they saw atrocities that I can't even imagine. They have survived hardships most of us will never face. Yet they come to school each day and give it their all. They haven't given up on themselves or the people around them. They are kind, courageous, and full of compassion. I can't fathom thinking that these children should go without food, a roof, or an education. It makes me so disheartened that others think to deprive them of necessities, not to save tax money, but to spend it on a billionaire and a wall. I know I won't change anyone's mind. So I am done beating this dead horse. Back to lurking.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 3:50:57 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2016 19:55:46 GMT
I hope you won't just lurk, darkchami. Even if you don't change minds, putting the facts out there is important.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Nov 26, 2016 20:14:56 GMT
Have you met her? (figuratively speaking of course) Her opinion of social programs is pretty well known amongst the peas who discuss such things regularly. I find such opinions abhorrent but I'm a bleeding heart liberal. I can understand being fiscally conservative. People don't want their money "wasted." Though I have a very different point of view, I can find common ground with fiscally conservative people. I generally think we want what is best for the residents of our country, but have two incredibly different pathways to get there. I find the willingness to spend billions on a wall and possibly hundreds of millions on a second residence at odds with the need to lower taxes. That doesn't make fiscal sense. Over the years, Lauren has posted her conservative views here. I appreciate reading about how others think and feel. It gives me better perspective, and forces me to challenge my own position. I have always thought she was passionate about her political views and being fiscally responsible. That is commendable. The posts on this thread have hit me hard. Half of my students live in poverty. They often don't have beds. Some have fled countries where they saw atrocities that I can't even imagine. They have survived hardships most of us will never face. Yet they come to school each day and give it their all. They haven't given up on themselves or the people around them. They are kind, courageous, and full of compassion. I can't fathom thinking that these children should go without food, a roof, or an education. It makes me so disheartened that others think to deprive them of necessities, not to save tax money, but to spend it on a billionaire and a wall. I know I won't change anyone's mind. So I am done beating this dead horse. Back to lurking. I think that there are way more who think like you, than with the very uncaring conservative bunch.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 3:50:57 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2016 23:21:18 GMT
the very uncaring conservative bunch. I feel the need to say that statements like this aren't going to get people to be receptive, or even listen to your point of view. You're stating your opinion as fact. And also overgeneralizing. Even though I may disagree with some "conservative" policies or opinions, there are points on which both sides agree. And on the ones where there isn't agreement, being factual and not overgeneralizing would help both sides in coming up with compromises that everyone can live with. Save
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Nov 27, 2016 1:46:59 GMT
the very uncaring conservative bunch. I feel the need to say that statements like this aren't going to get people to be receptive, or even listen to your point of view. You're stating your opinion as fact. And also overgeneralizing. Even though I may disagree with some "conservative" policies or opinions, there are points on which both sides agree. And on the ones where there isn't agreement, being factual and not overgeneralizing would help both sides in coming up with compromises that everyone can live with. SaveIt was my opinion that there are conservatives who are uncaring. Actually that could also be a fact. HOWEVER, I was certainly not saying that every conservative was uncaring. I'm of the opinion "if the shoe fits" theory. If you fall into that category then it's yours to live with it. If you don't fall into that category then you don't have to worry. I wasn't over-generalizing. That's another thing--those who assume that an opinion is labeling a collective group of people. Those who are uncaring know who they are--I was not lumping everyone into that group.
|
|