Tariffs won’t solve our border crisis. But Democrats denied Trump the tools he needs.

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
President Trump is understandably frustrated by the crisis at the border. Anyone who watched the video of more than 1,000 illegal migrants sneaking through a hole in a fence near El Paso, Tex. — the largest single breach of our border ever recorded — and still says we don’t need a border wall is in denial.

There were more than 109,000 apprehensions at or near the southern border in April — the highest level since 2007. But unlike past border surges, when most of the illegal migrants were single men, the vast majority today are either families with children (58,474 in April) or unaccompanied minors (8,897). Our Border Patrol is not equipped to handle it.

Tariffs are the wrong tool to address this crisis. But Congress has denied Trump the right tools. On May 1, the president asked Congress for $4.5 billion in emergency border security funding — a request that included $3.3 billion for humanitarian assistance at the border but no money for a border wall. It’s been more than a month now, and what has Congress done? Absolutely nothing. So, if Demcrats in Congress won’t give him the instruments he needs, Trump feels he has to act with the one he has — even if it is the blunt instrument of a tariff.




We need to de-incentivize border crosser's
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
That would involve no social safety nets and no welfare in this country.
No It Does not .... IMHO keeping any Illegal Immigrant from receiving any services ..... no food, no housing, no medical assistance prosecuting businesses for employing them
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Giving Trump the tools he needs would result in success. Democrats wouldn't stand for that.
"Success", in the minds of the establishment politicians, IS massive illegal immigration. This is clearly true, or the issue would have been resolved some time in the last four decades.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
No It Does not .... IMHO keeping any Illegal Immigrant from receiving any services ..... no food, no housing, no medical assistance prosecuting businesses for employing them
Sure it does. As Friedman said, it levels the playing field for eveyone.

Where do I sign up for that? Who do I elect to make that happen? I am 100% in favor.
Good luck finding any politician willing to do away with Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, etc. :lol:
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Tariffs are the wrong tool to address this crisis. But Congress has denied Trump the right tools.
And that's the whole story, there.
Given the right tools, tariffs wouldn't have been necessary. Or possibly much less necessary.
Despite what the NYT said this weekend - that Trump is bragging about a deal that had been made
already - that turned out to be crap. The threat of tariffs got results.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
And that's the whole story, there.
Given the right tools, tariffs wouldn't have been necessary. Or possibly much less necessary.
Despite what the NYT said this weekend - that Trump is bragging about a deal that had been made
already - that turned out to be crap. The threat of tariffs got results.
Would you agree that there are 3 branches of govt. and that the Executive Branch should not wield an excess in power?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Would you agree that there are 3 branches of govt. and that the Executive Branch should not wield an excess in power?
(I'm not sure if the first part of your question is supposed to be funny or not, since you should know me
by now).

Explain that to the members of Congress, who in recent days have said that the Legislative Branch
is designed by the Constitution to have complete oversight over the other two - not a balance -
but utter oversight. It is - I'll have to find a quote - intended to be the most powerful branch, according
to them.

Right now the Congress is trying to prevent him from doing ANYTHING. To tie him up.
And that IS an excess of power, by a branch of government.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
who in recent days have said that the Legislative Branch
is designed by the Constitution to have complete oversight over the other two

Only When Progressives are in Charge and a Republican is in the White House
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
(I'm not sure if the first part of your question is supposed to be funny or not, since you should know me
by now).

Explain that to the members of Congress, who in recent days have said that the Legislative Branch
is designed by the Constitution to have complete oversight over the other two - not a balance -
but utter oversight. It is - I'll have to find a quote - intended to be the most powerful branch, according
to them.

Right now the Congress is trying to prevent him from doing ANYTHING. To tie him up.
And that IS an excess of power, by a branch of government.
I would say Congress is tasked with funding immigration enforcement and it's a shame that Trump waited until he lost party majority in Congress to do anything about it.

Congress is doing everything within their power, they are not excessive about it. I don't have to like, nor do you, or Trump, but it is what it is and as long as Congress bickers about Trump's actions, impeachment, LGBTQ, or whatever else the issue of the day is, the lwess time they spend on drafting legislation that will certainly limit the rights of all Americans.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Only When Progressives are in Charge and a Republican is in the White House
Oh please. The Republican-majority Congress certainly didn't hold back when Obama was in office. Anyone who thinks otherwise has a very short memory.

Both sides do it. The left says on the right does it. The right says it's only the left. This forum, in particluar, blames EVERYTHING on the left.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
How about just limiting it to Soc Sec only goes to those who paid in, food stamps only goes to verifiable citizens and for limited time, etc.?
It's got to be everything. Get rid of one program and the next one will explode with waste, fraud, and abuse.

Would you agree that the legislative has tasked the executive, and then not funded the executive to do it's job?
And who is tasked with funding the govt. (i.e. immigration enforcement)?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
It's got to be everything. Get rid of one program and the next one will explode with waste, fraud, and abuse.
Only if we let it. It is not a given.

And who is tasked with funding the govt. (i.e. immigration enforcement)?
The legislative and executive, together. One must pass and the other sign the appropriations bills into laws. Thus, to complete the task, the executive has asked the legislative for additional funds due to new situation (as you may have noted, the border had been hit with record-high illegal crossers over the last several months).

By the way, you never answered me previously:
Is it the responsibility of the United States to solve their problems? Is it the responsibility of the United States to absorb the folks who "want to" leave there to come here illegally?

What exactly is your point? I mean, why is their "want to" my concern?
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Only if we let it. It is not a given.



The legislative and executive, together. One must pass and the other sign the appropriations bills into laws. Thus, to complete the task, the executive has asked the legislative for additional funds due to new situation (as you may have noted, the border had been hit with record-high illegal crossers over the last several months).

By the way, you never answered me previously:
What govt. program hasn't? What program hasn't been expanded beyond its original intent? Govt. is metasticizing and always will be.

I answered your question when replied to Sam.

Congress has no obligation to agree to any and all spending requestes by the executive and they denied Trump's proposal. They are doing their job and applying oversight to the Executive. Do I wish they'd apply that same level of 'umpf' to other fiscal issues? Damn right, but again, it is what it is.
 
Top