Donald Trump the president of the united states of america is absolutely right

nicko wrote:"Word twisting dickface"    YOU don't agree with some ones opinion so you have to insult them,   You lefties are all the same, Your opinion overrides every one else.  

And you righties are the same.  You haven't got the reasoning capacity that god gave a little, green apple.

The wall is as absurd as the Pentabon budget.  Here Republicans are complaining about the cost of Obamacare, and proposing to spend $25-billion to build a wall that a child could breach.

Speaking of the Pentagon budget...we could cut it in half and have full, single-payer healthcare in the USA.  We have no need for these foolhardy foreign adventures...it's wasted money on pointless, group hard-on's.

I expected something like that reply Quill , just shows your never wrong are you? Just like the other lefties on here. I thought you were better than that, None of you respect other posters if their opinions clash with yours.

nicko wrote:I expected something like that reply Quill ,   just shows your never wrong are you?

You, on the other hand, admit you are wrong...what? 50% of the time?  70% of the time?

Don't be foolish, nicko.  If you think you are wrong, the antidote is to not push "send".  If you are in the habit of publishing untruths, you are wrong before you start.

Of course I don't publish things I think are wrong.  Ergo, I am never wrong, unless someone points out a mistake...then I admit it.

nicko wrote:Just like the other lefties on here.   I thought you were better than that, None of you respect other posters if their opinions clash with yours.

Nicko, spare me the we were once friends... routine.  The times I have defended you, or your position, it was because of reason.  I am friends with everyone on the site, you included.  But friendship does not make me alter my opinion, on whatever subject.  If it did, I feel I wouldn't be much of a friend, would I?  I would just be playing you.

You've long known my thinking on RW reasoning power, or lack thereof.  John Stuart Mill once said, "I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant that stupid persons are generally Conservative."  I believe he hit on something, and I have faithfully followed that position.

Conservatives are not intentionally irrational.  It is my belief that they are lazy.  They do not take the time or energy to exercise their abilities.  Over time, those abilities atrophy like any unused muscle or organ.  Their laziness is brought about a devotion to an over-simplistic theory of life: selfishness.  Just as they believe that everyone lies (like them), they also believe that everyone is selfish (like them), and hence they fall into a pattern of not thinking.

When they come back to the real world, they find that the lefties have been figuring out the answers, and implementing them.  They are jealous and want to join, but they have atrophied talents from being asleep so long.  So, they do what they think is the same: speak in jingles, rhymes, memes, catch-phrases and make up things like "alternate facts".  They are too lazy to do the real work of research and implementation.  Rather than retrain their minds to think, they try for appearances...they mimic the lefties, only with selfish answers.  For example, Keynesian economics becomes tax-breaks for the rich, etc., etc.

When they are through building their mimic-world, the become a whole population of stupid people, and conceive of themselves as a voter block.  They select a candidate like Donald Trump or Nigel Farage and sway a bunch of other lazy sheeple to follow their lead.

Now that's what I'm commenting on.

Here in uk, our NHS costs just over £100 billion a year... for a population of just over 60 million...


It would be great for the US to start their own US NHS over there... but as the US population is about 5 times as many people, somewhere around just over 300 million people, it would cost more than £500 billion a year in running costs as well as however many billions more in initial start up costs!


And if such a US NHS service was introduced, it would be all the more necessary to have increased border security infrastructure in place to prevent non US citizens from trying to get into the country to try to use the health system that they were not entitled to.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Here in uk, our NHS costs just over £100 billion a year... for a population of just over 60 million...

It would be great for the US to start their own US NHS over there... but as the US population is about 5 times as many people, somewhere around just over 300 million people, it would cost more than £500 billion a year in running costs as well as however many billions more in initial start up costs!

And if such a US NHS service was introduced, it would be all the more necessary to have increased border security infrastructure in place to prevent non US citizens from trying to get into the country to try to use the health system that they were not entitled to.

I'm happy to say that the numbers look favorable, tommy.  In 2015, the US had a declared military and defense budget of $601 billion, which is more than the next 7 highest spending countries combined.

We need two things to happen: 1) that the US stop undertaking all these foreign adventures, that only reap hatred for us anyway, and cut it's defense budget by 50%; and 2) that the US implements a comprehensive, single-payer healthcare program with the residual $300-billion.

If we have learned anything by the gratuitous war in Iraq, if is that we are buying worldwide loathing from the rest of the world for our $600-billion.  That's a bad bargain.

Alternatively, Republicans in Congress are bemoaning the high cost of Obamacare, and want to replace it with what?  Nothing!  If the Defense Department exists for national security, what would be more in keeping with national security than to produce national superior health??

It's a win-win situation.  We take half the defense budget and devote it to the other area needing defense: national healthcare.  We build good will and popularity by not invading nations and killing their women and children (a no-brainer); and we help our citizens live longer (said being what we purport to do by war, but fail so miserably) which, by any definition, is good defense.

How many people were covered by Obama care...?


And how much did it cost per year...?

Tommy Monk wrote:How many people were covered by Obama care...?

And how much did it cost per year...?

Obamacare is not supported by the government.  It is a market-based system, not tax based.  The government only imposes restrictions, like no pre-existing condition exclusion, and no policy limit cap.  

Thus the only way to cost it is by premiums, which figure in the profit of the policy.  Due to the insurance-related provisions, 6 in 10 Americans can get covered for $100 or less on the Health Insurance Marketplace, with the average plan costing just $82 after Premium Tax Credits in 2014.

The problem with any market-based system is it can always be manipulated through supply if the player is big enough.  You remember...we saw this with OPEC, back in 1973.  By withholding supply, OPEC drove the price of petrol through the sky.  

Now, with Obamacare, suppliers like Humana, Aetna and Anthem are withholding policies, and consequently prices are shooting through the sky.  All of this proves that a market-based system will not work.  Indeed, Obamacare isn't working, but not because it costs the government too much.  It doesn't work because the big players are manipulating the prices.

The answer is to abandon the market as the basis of the system.  The US needs to break through the barrier, and come up with a National Health Service such as the UK, Canada and Australia have.  People in America are afraid of a government-run entity, when they should be terrified of a market run by profiteers in body parts...insurance companies and pharmas.

I have suggested a perfectly feasible way of funding it.  Here we spend much too much on killing babies, and get nothing but hatred for it.  Is there anything worse than the waste and tragedy of war?  All we need to do is to cut in half our military budget and devote the loose half to healthcare.  Indeed, we in the US can leave the money with the generals, and simply incorporate the mission of healthcare into the Department of Defense...call it Department of Defense and Healthcare, or DODH.  The Defense Department is already a huge socialized operation; just incorporate medicine into the mission.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Here in uk, our NHS costs just over £100 billion a year... for a population of just over 60 million...


It would be great for the US to start their own US NHS over there... but as the US population is about 5 times as many people, somewhere around just over 300 million people, it would cost more than £500 billion a year in running costs as well as however many billions more in initial start up costs!


And if such a US NHS service was introduced, it would be all the more necessary to have increased border security infrastructure in place to prevent non US citizens from trying to get into the country to try to use the health system that they were not entitled to.

that has the presumption that they are as inefficient as the UK is

19 billion in our money so about 14 billion in yours for 25 million people down here.
with US low minimum wage and foreign nurses it could be lower.

British system is the most inefficient but that is not the fault of health care

Tommy Monk wrote:

Here in uk, our NHS costs just over £100 billion a year... for a population of just over 60 million...


It would be great for the US to start their own US NHS over there... but as the US population is about 5 times as many people, somewhere around just over 300 million people, it would cost more than £500 billion a year in running costs as well as however many billions more in initial start up costs!


And if such a US NHS service was introduced, it would be all the more necessary to have increased border security infrastructure in place to prevent non US citizens from trying to get into the country to try to use the health system that they were not entitled to.

Hahaha, you think that's a lot of money for the U.S.? We spend a good deal more just on our military!

Let me ask you this, Tommy -- how many people do you think illegally cross the Mexican border per year?

If it's such a small amount and easy to find... why no nhs in the US...?


And Vera... our nhs has been saddled with a bill of £500 billion for £50 billion worth of new hospitals under labours dodgy PFI deals... and labour also massively increased the levels of bureaucracy by bloating out the numbers of middle management bean counters and those at the top on eye watering salaries... could be a big part of the problem...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:If it's such a small amount and easy to find... why no nhs in the US...?

We've discussed this before, tommy.  Cost is often used as an excuse, as it is with any program one dislikes...however, it is rarely the only reason.  In America, the aversion for an NHS-like institution is because it is billed as "socialized" medicine...it carries the anathema of the dreaded term "socialism".  

America never went through a socialist phase because it never felt the economic pressures that Europe experienced.  Americans today cannot even distinguish between socialism and communism...that's how alien the term is.  During the Cold War the US was in the vanguard of anti-communism, and as a result socialism today is the anti-christ.  All Americans have ever known is hostility toward anything remotely socialistic.

Now it has become ingrained in RW ideology to hate the 'socialist' word...and they don't remember why.  Notice that proponents of healthcare have switched to the term 'single-payer' healthcare?  We all know who the single payer is, but it is a way of avoiding terms like 'National" or "government' or 'socialized'.

Incidentally, one of the neatest tricks that the RW ever pulled off was hiding from the American public the fact that the beloved military is one of the largest socialist organizations in the world.  They implanted the word 'Defense', thus obscuring the fact that it is really an offensive tool, and indeed, that it is socialistic.

Tommy Monk wrote:If it's such a small amount and easy to find... why no nhs in the US...?


And Vera... our nhs has been saddled with a bill of £500 billion for £50 billion worth of new hospitals under labours dodgy PFI deals... and labour also massively increased the levels of bureaucracy by bloating out the numbers of middle management bean counters and those at the top on eye watering salaries... could be a big part of the problem...!?

Here is the thing timmy
out side the UK,
NO ONE CARES which party made it inefficient
and whining about it is not fixing it.

Rather than putting energy into trying to deny migration, Why not put it into making the NHS accountable again
Cause that is what outside observers sees, you'd prefer to keep it crap and just blame migrants or some scapegoat, than FIX IT.

Also
the system in the USA means it will never be like the UK, Australian or NZ system
the best they can hope for is a Canadian style system.

We OWN the hospitals, from the ground up they are fundamentally public assets. (there are privately owned hospitals too but they are separate)
In Canada (like the USA) hospitals are owned by Private companies and the Government pays the Hospital owners to subsides the costs to the public.

another HUGE difference is that even Private health insurance here can only affect the cost of coverage on a few approved measures (like age and smoking status etc.) Once insured they cannot cancel you health insurance, as long as you pay.

Vera... highlighting causes of problems is key to instigating changes for the better...


And we are happy to have immigration... but we want a much tighter system of control on it all and much stricter limits on numbers allowed entry and only those where there is a proven need of skills shortages here that are offered by potential applicants wanting to come here...


How many times do I have to tell you that we want a system that you in Australia have, without you saying this is racist...!!!???

LOL but its' not the cause
as shown many times you don't even have high levels of immigration
You have a fuck tonne of Brits and promote Britishness and THAT has caused more problems..

the REAL cause was the laziness of the British during the 80's and 90's that let your infrastructure decay and become substandard for the expectations of the British.

You are not moving towards our system at all, if you where you'd have 3 times the total immigration. yes we have rules and you can have rules too BUT NONE of the rules are about race, all 100% skills oriented and YOU also whine about keeping Jobs for the British, Our system is entirely geared to importing workers and wealthy!!! So you are not looking to our system at all you are just seeing that we have controls BUT we don't for NZ which we have an EU like arrangement with.. So You should never have had issue with that EU policy, Like Aussies don't have issue with the NZ policy.

You can't compare a huge empty continent with a tiny and already over crowded island vera...

Except your not over crowded, Mommy Tonk

like 52nd most crowded that pretty far down the list, you just build poorly and don't upgrade things.

it is funny that You say Cant say what it's like without travelling WELL travel Asia Your not even close to full.
You just need to build up.... even though you have plenty of room to build out as well.

Singapore is just better than the UK
they have far higher density and don't whine about it they just built the infrastructure (in only 50 years) to deal with it!!!
YES the UK HAS to change to deal with things!!!

Your whole argument is based on the falsehood that you cant change.. Your just being lazy

And Go live in the desert see how long you live

You have more than enough fresh water to support 5 times the population.
there is far more than space required.

There's a whole world out there... and everyone has their own countries to live in...


The overwhelming vast majority of foreigners wanting to come here, don't want to come here because it is worse here than where they already are...!!!


They need to stop being lazy and start building up their own countries/infrastructure etc and stay where they are...!!!


Then when they have built up enough stuff and sorted out their systems etc... let them start to have 100s of thousands of foreigners flood in each year with demands for housing and benefits and school places and nhs treatment while cloging up all the othed public services and transport networks etc...


Let's see how they like it...!?


Also... they musf pay translation costs so all the immigrants can have the best/fairest/equal opportunities of accessing all the newly built stuff that they just turned up to take advantage of...

Tommy Monk wrote:There's a whole world out there... and everyone has their own countries to live in...


The overwhelming vast majority of foreigners wanting to come here, don't want to come here because it is worse here than where they already are...!!!


They need to stop being lazy and start building up their own countries/infrastructure etc and stay where they are...!!!

Then when they have built up enough stuff and sorted out their systems etc... let them start to have 100s of thousands of foreigners flood in each year with demands for housing and benefits and school places and nhs treatment while cloging up all the othed public services and transport networks etc...

Let's see how they like it...!?

Also... they musf pay translation costs so all the immigrants can have the best/fairest/equal opportunities of accessing all the newly built stuff that they just turned up to take advantage of...

Strange reversal of attitude for a citizen of a nation who for centuries fanned out into the world and colonized other peoples' lands.

You are talking about a totally different time Quill... where the world was a totally different place... and totally different context to points I make about now!

Tommy Monk wrote:

You are talking about a totally different time Quill... where the world was a totally different place... and totally different context to points I make about now!

Still, it's a reversal, you admit.  This is the world you built.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  You wanted an empire, and now that you have it you don't like the downside?  Cry me a river.  I have no sympathy.

You Brits brought this on yourselves, now live with it. Pay your debts, you welchers.

Tommy wants those countries with little resources left to build themselves up...

Like Britain did, Tommy  ???


After exhausting most of your resources over the previous 1500 years, you than invaded dozens of other countries, ripping off $$trillions $$  of natural resources over 400 years...

All to be squandered, "pissed up against the wall" -- supporting a layabout aristocracy, a useless royal family, a larger military than necessary once the days of 'Empire' had passed..


Where has all that wealth gone, then, Tommy --  for you to be crying so poor these days ?

Britain owes $billions$ in reparations to various African nations, Pacific and Caribbean islands, Canadian, Aussie and Kiwi 'first nations' --  monies that we all know you are unable to pay..

So why don't you take your own advice, Tommy -- STFU with your endless whinging snd whining, pull up your socks, stop being so lazy, go out and rebuild your little island over there  !?!        

Yawn, again Yawn.

nicko wrote:Yawn, again Yawn.

Why do you even bother?

I think that myself !

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

You are talking about a totally different time Quill... where the world was a totally different place... and totally different context to points I make about now!

Still, it's a reversal, you admit.  This is the world you built.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  You wanted an empire, and now that you have it you don't like the downside?  Cry me a river.  I have no sympathy.

You Brits brought this on yourselves, now live with it.  Pay your debts, you welchers.

No its a bullshit load of bullshit and nothing to do with us already having plenty of immigrants here from all over the world and that we don't want or need any more... we're full!!!

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Tommy wants those countries with little resources left to build themselves up...

Like Britain did, Tommy  ???


After exhausting most of your resources over the previous 1500 years, you than invaded dozens of other countries, ripping off $$trillions $$  of natural resources over 400 years...

All to be squandered, "pissed up against the wall" -- supporting a layabout aristocracy, a useless royal family, a larger military than necessary once the days of 'Empire' had passed..


Where has all that wealth gone, then, Tommy --  for you to be crying so poor these days ?

Britain owes $billions$ in reparations to various African nations, Pacific and Caribbean islands, Canadian, Aussie and Kiwi 'first nations' --  monies that we all know you are unable to pay..

So why don't you take your own advice, Tommy -- STFU with your endless whinging snd whining, pull up your socks, stop being so lazy, go out and rebuild your little island over there  !?!        

Have you ever been to the UK...!?

Or have you always just stayed in the country your ancestors stole from the natives...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Still, it's a reversal, you admit.  This is the world you built.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  You wanted an empire, and now that you have it you don't like the downside?  Cry me a river.  I have no sympathy.

You Brits brought this on yourselves, now live with it.  Pay your debts, you welchers.

No its a bullshit load of bullshit and nothing to do with us already having plenty of immigrants here from all over the world and that we don't want or need any more... we're full!!!

A "bullshit load of bullshit?"  Not convincing, tommy.  It's because you are not logical.

You--the British--owe a debt.  Say I went to my banker, from whom I borrowed $xx-amount.  When he comes to collect, I say Oh, I don't owe it because that was yesterday.  You can't slip out of it that easily...ask any banker.

For centuries y'all went about building a colonial empire.  Immigration was all right them, because you were the immigrants.  But now when the tide has changed, you suddenly whine and cry...and try to convince others you are being treated unfairly.  You know what we call that?  A welsher:

Free Dictionary wrote:welsher - someone who swindles you by not repaying a debt or wager. welcher. chiseler, chiseller, defrauder, grifter, scammer, swindler, gouger - a person who swindles you by means of deception or fraud.

Not a good reputation to have.

Tommy is full of crap...

The immigration levels/rates into the UK are only one third of those for the likes of Australia, NZ, Canada..    Even the USA would easily be double, these days.

Even though the UK blew most of their natural resources over the last 2,000 years, they still have one thing going for them --  they actually have more good quality rich deep agriculural soils, compared to the likes of Australia, NZ, Argentina and Chile. (As do other Euro' places such as France, Germany and Poland..).

By Asian and African standards, the UK is still far off being "full"..

Tommy does have that habit of not bothering to check the facts before making his next silly little idiotic claims.

More bullshit...

Tommy Monk wrote:

More bullshit...

The usual mind numbing response from the drooling cabbage of Newsfix.

I can't be bothered to argue against the stupid nonsense that fleakeeper comes out with.



And Quill tries to claim it has only been one way traffic historically... while Didge and other lefties constantly tells us how we have had immigrants coming here for centuries...


One minute we get the argument that the uk is just a piece of land that we don't own and everyone should be able to have a piece of it... then we hear how the British stole all the land that belonged to others!!!


And the biggest hypocrites are the ones living on the stolen American and Australian land!!!


You couldn't make it up!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:I can't be bothered to argue against the stupid nonsense that fleakeeper comes out with.



And Quill tries to claim it has only been one way traffic historically... while Didge and other lefties constantly tells us how we have had immigrants coming here for centuries...


One minute we get the argument that the uk is just a piece of land that we don't own and everyone should be able to have a piece of it... then we hear how the British stole all the land that belonged to others!!!


And the biggest hypocrites are the ones living on the stolen American and Australian land!!!


You couldn't make it up!!!

You need to learn the difference between immigration and invasion, apparently.

Wasn't the US and Australia a colonist invasion...!?

Just watched a program about Custer, Told how the early Americans stole the land that belonged to the Native Indians, killed thousands of them and put them in land that was totally unsuited to their way of life, and deliberately infected them with Smallpox by giving them infected Blanket, and Quill and others have the bloody cheek to accuse us of stealing land.

Tommy Monk wrote:I can't be bothered to argue against the stupid nonsense that fleakeeper comes out with.



And Quill tries to claim it has only been one way traffic historically... while Didge and other lefties constantly tells us how we have had immigrants coming here for centuries...


One minute we get the argument that the uk is just a piece of land that we don't own and everyone should be able to have a piece of it... then we hear how the British stole all the land that belonged to others!!!


And the biggest hypocrites are the ones living on the stolen American and Australian land!!!


You couldn't make it up!!!

Well considering I am the son of immigrants and know British and English history far better than you, to the point of embarrassing for you.

How do you think the first people came to British Isles?

Immigration?

How did it then later adapt to a Celtic culture?

Immigration?

How did it adapt to Romano culture?

Initial invasion, immigration. then integration.

How did it adapt to Anglo Saxon Culture?

Initial invasion, immigration. then integration.

How did it adapt to Viking cultures?

Initial invasion, immigration. then integration.

How did it adapt to Norman cultures?

Initial invasion, immigration. then integration.

After this, there has been many influxes of immigration from the Dutch and French Protestants, to Africans, even Yemen Muslims.

@Nicko, makes the better point.

Since 1776, and the creation of the United States of America. The US advanced westwards with mass immigration. They were invited as immigrants to Texas and turned on the Mexican Government. The land grab off the Indians and Spanish territories. Is next to nothing short of a successful American form of Lebensraum. Ethically cleansing numerous Native Indian Tribes.

However, after this when the US was formed, the country then proceeded to have mass immigration from Europe, immigration of Asia etc. Showing, through a united identity (American), no matter that there was mass immigration, it can work and unify a mass ethnic groups.

nicko wrote:Just watched a program about Custer,   Told how the early Americans stole the land that belonged to the Native Indians, killed thousands of them and put them in land that was totally unsuited to their way of life, and deliberately infected them with Smallpox by giving them infected Blanket, and Quill and others have the bloody cheek to accuse us of stealing land.

The British did steal land though, far more than any other Empire Nicko, to the tune of a Quarter of the earths nations. Its the biggest Empire in history. So compared to the American Lebensraum, the British did pull out of many of these nations and thus cannot be compared. Compared to robbing and subjugating countless people to profit from their suffering and oppression. Well the British Empire is up their in the top 20 for most appalling. So you might want to take a step back on trying to compare apples and oranges here. Where clearly, they are both in this case falling off neighboring intermingled trees.

Tommy Monk wrote:



And Quill tries to claim it has only been one way traffic historically... while Didge and other lefties constantly tells us how we have had immigrants coming here for centuries...


One minute we get the argument that the uk is just a piece of land that we don't own and everyone should be able to have a piece of it... then we hear how the British stole all the land that belonged to others!!!


You couldn't make it up!!!

You cannot make up your stupidity here.

I should of added to my last post to further prove how utterly dim you are Tommy

If the British do not own the land they live in, as it should be shared by everyone and then claim they do own the land they live in. To then invade and conquer other lands, that is for everyone to share. Is that not stealing land meant for everyone, that they have annexed for themselves?

Thus the British then stole land for themselves.l


Now clearly, you were not born dumb or unintelligent, but why on earth do you continue to post up such dumb contradicting statements, that then actually prove you wrong?

Is it only uk land that belongs to everyone but all other land belongs to the locals there...!?


I thought everywhere else had independence and the control over their own countries...!?

And control over their borders and who they allow in to visit/live/work...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:Is it only uk land that belongs to everyone but all other land belongs to the locals there...!?


I thought everywhere else had independence and the control over their own countries...!?

And control over their borders and who they allow in to visit/live/work...!?

The concept of the land belonging to everyone, means it belongs to everyone.
Thus if a group of people claim a land for themselves and then take other land meant for everyone.
Then that is stealing.

Now if you want to talk about self determination that is a different concept.

I support the first concept first and foremost, but the later is needed when the very threat of extinction of a people is in question. Hence self determination is needed for the Jews. Those longest in history to have suffered persecution. Thus they need at present a land for themselves to thwarts threats to their existence. The land size is minuscule to say the least, the land of Israel and I also support and Independent Palestine. So every nation that claims to hold land is stealing, including Israel, but they have a better right to do so, than anyone else, based on the very existence as a people.

The English or British are not in threat of extinction and if the threat no longer exists towards the Jews, then the concept of land for everyone takes precedence.

veya_victaous wrote:well most people seem to think open boarders with in the EU were good,
Only ever heard Cowardly hill shepherds and incompetents say otherwise.

there might be for complaints about the openness of the EUs external border but that is caused by the same losers that whine about the removal of the internal borders and their failure to embrace the EU system and work with and fund the external border.

a recent terrorist attacker in france loved open borders as he passed through at least 3 before he was shot by italians.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Open borders in eu has created far more problems than there would be by the borders remaining in place...


Do you really think that an open and uncontrolled US/Mexico border is a good thing...!?

I never said anything about "uncontrolled," you word-twisting dickface. I said that two countries that aren't hostile toward one another have no need of walls or even fences. And despite whatever your hate-addled peanut brain might assert to the contrary, the U.S. and Mexico are not enemies.

are you suggesting that all the illegals in america that come from mexico go through a border post?

Phil shiner wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Yes they do...

No they don't.  The answer to a 30' wall is a 31' foot ladder.

In fact, 90% of the undocumented are arriving legally on tourist visas, and overstaying their tenure.  The old picture of Mexicans swimming the Rio Grande and hiking across the border is ancient (circa 1930's, from a Woody Guthrie song).  Get up to date.

and whats the answer to 50000 volts at the top of a wall?

The Devil, You Know wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:well most people seem to think open boarders with in the EU were good,
Only ever heard Cowardly hill shepherds and incompetents say otherwise.

there might be for complaints about the openness of the EUs external border but that is caused by the same losers that whine about the removal of the internal borders and their failure to embrace the EU system and work with and fund the external border.

a recent terrorist attacker in france loved open borders as he passed through at least 3 before he was shot by italians.

How would have secure borders stopped him?

You might want to back out now on that own goal

veya_victaous wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Yes they do...

LOL
but the English channel doesn't

Of course a wall is a waste of time
a few hundred miles of treacherous ocean does stop illegal migration (Australia's border)

The wall is just a distraction for pea brained hill shepherds    
the only ones that it Might stop cause they are so lacking in capability  


And as Quill points our most illegal migrants arrive on tourist visas and just over stay them        

australia sends its illegals to an entirely different country

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

I never said anything about "uncontrolled," you word-twisting dickface. I said that two countries that aren't hostile toward one another have no need of walls or even fences. And despite whatever your hate-addled peanut brain might assert to the contrary, the U.S. and Mexico are not enemies.

are you suggesting that all the illegals in america that come from mexico go through a border post?

The majority enter legally

We have been through this before and shows how ineffective such a wall policy is.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

LOL
but the English channel doesn't

Of course a wall is a waste of time
a few hundred miles of treacherous ocean does stop illegal migration (Australia's border)

The wall is just a distraction for pea brained hill shepherds    
the only ones that it Might stop cause they are so lacking in capability  

And as Quill points our most illegal migrants arrive on tourist visas and just over stay them        

I reckon we should invite Tommy, nicko, DYKface and company to build a wall or fence along the Australian/Indonesian border...

I just hope they can swim  !!!

you mean the ocean isn't a good enough barrier to open migration? you aren't that bright are you.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

LOL
but the English channel doesn't

Of course a wall is a waste of time
a few hundred miles of treacherous ocean does stop illegal migration (Australia's border)

The wall is just a distraction for pea brained hill shepherds    
the only ones that it Might stop cause they are so lacking in capability  


And as Quill points our most illegal migrants arrive on tourist visas and just over stay them        

australia sends its illegals to an entirely different country

Misdirection, as Australia is just as bad.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:"Word twisting dickface"    YOU don't agree with some ones opinion so you have to insult them,   You lefties are all the same, Your opinion overrides every one else.  

And you righties are the same.  You haven't got the reasoning capacity that god gave a little, green apple.

The wall is as absurd as the Pentabon budget.  Here Republicans are complaining about the cost of Obamacare, and proposing to spend $25-billion to build a wall that a child could breach.

Speaking of the Pentagon budget...we could cut it in half and have full, single-payer healthcare in the USA.  We have no need for these foolhardy foreign adventures...it's wasted money on pointless, group hard-on's.

I guess you see your whole free ride collapsing around your ears it is understandable why you are getting a little testy these days.