Who do you prefer in the Republican and Democrat camp?

May I ask why building a wall is "nutty"?

Evidence?



Evidence?

People have already given appropriate reasons.

Essentially though it would be much easier simply to employ more border control officers and arm them. It's also a far better plan to break the cartels.

One understands his motivation but it's a too simplistic idea designed to appeal to simplistic people.

Mexico: What Trump has stated is that Mexico will pay "one way or another" - what he means by that is that the US would take the payment for the wall out of the billions of dollars of state aid that the US gives Mexico every year.

Walls: Walls work, and they always have done. Look at Israel at how walls help to keep people out of a certain area. These are not garden walls, they are walls that can go deep deep underground with a variety of apparatus that checks and listens for digging.

I don't see how withholding aid is the same as 'making Mexico pay for it' -- sounds like empty rhetoric.



Israel's most recent war in Gaza was (officially) the reaction to an elaborate tunnel system dug under the walls by Hamas, who were apparently using them to launch terrorist attacks in Israel. If you're going to argue that walls work, that's hardly the example to use.

May I ask why building a wall is "nutty"?

Clinton is cancer.

There's an article which costed Trump's wall as a wall not a fence and the raw materials cost approximately 1 year of NASA or 34 of Planned Parenthood. This was fairly rudimentary materials costing and the actual cost is likely to far exceed the $18Bn estimated there.

Here's another to tell you why it's a terrible idea: http://www.nationalmemo.com/an-engineer-explains-why-trumps-wall-is-so-implausible/

There's no way Mexico will pay for it, it's for USA's benefit so the bill would be theirs to pay even if they tried to sanction Mexico to fund it with increased visa fees etc. the US economy would pay for it and in a way that made the wall even more expensive.

It would also get tunnelled the crap out of by cartels because their US drug money is important to them and no wall will stem that flow. El Chapo tunnelled out of prison for heavens sake. A wall with foundations of >8 feet? Pffft.

In the Republican camp, it used to be Rand Paul by a mile, as he's by far the most level headed, intelligent and rational of all candidates on either side. His proposals would by far be the best for America going forward. Now that he's dropped out, I'd stand with Trump; while he does have some kooky ideas, he generally tends to be more moderate than most of the hard right war hawk Bible thumpers (and will likely move more to the centre if he gets the nom and has to get Democrats onboard).

Among Democrats, I'd pick Sanders over Clinton. Though some of his dumb socialist ideas are the last thing America needs, I admire his honesty and integrity, and most of his far left proposals will be blocked by Congress. In other areas apart from the economic aspect, he is quite sensible on the whole. Clinton is cancer.

I explained how Mexico would pay for the wall above. Mexico would most likely pay by having money withdrawn from annual state aid.

Mexico recieved less than $600M in foreign aid in 2013. I don't have figures for more recent times but at $600M assuming the US provides Mexico's entire foreign aid budget using the $18bn raw materials costs that's 30 years of Mexico receiving no foreign aid budget, in the meantime the USA will have to make up the substantial deficit. I've already said that raw materials cost is primitive and the actual cost is likely to be higher. That said, the amount of Foreign Aid Mexico receives is also likely to increase so a minimum of 30 years may not be a bad estimate for the amount of time it would take for Mexico to pay for the wall. That doesn't represent value to anyone involved, particularly the US taxpayer.

Wall debunked as a fantasy thought up by a lunatic.

EDIT: You just called Trump a moderate? Just because he's not an evangelical Christian does not make him a moderate! He's at least partly responsible for driving the establishment candidates in the field to take up ultra right-wing positions.

Mexico recieved less than $600M in foreign aid in 2013. I don't have figures for more recent times but at $600M assuming the US provides Mexico's entire foreign aid budget using the $18bn raw materials costs that's 30 years of Mexico receiving no foreign aid budget, in the meantime the USA will have to make up the substantial deficit.

You have made up the £18 billion figure, no price has been agreed upon yet, it would be a lot less than that.

It seems that you are some what unaware of what and how traditional GOP members behave and the policies they believe in. Trump does not represent a traditional Republican, his recent calls on the Iraq War evidence that. You need to remember that traditionally GOP members believe in small government etc. however Trump, if you listen to him, does not particularly believe in small government, he states that the government is just stupid at what it does, not that the government should not be involved.

Mexico receives a heck of a lot more than $600 million a year (if you add up official aid and a host of additional programmes that are not classified as aid as they fall under different programmes but act in a similar fashion.) Trump himself has quoted a price of $8 billion, less than half of your stated figure (although nobody can say for sure what the price would be).

Time will tell.

A structural engineer costed the wall in materials. There's no way a wall can be cheaper than the cost of its materials. A fence would be but Trump said he wanted a wall so it's a wall that's been budgeted for. Using Gofre's figures which are the correct ones for US aid the wall gets paid off in over 100 years. That sort of time isn't viable. I'll say nothing more on the issue, you, like Trump, think it's okay to pluck numbers from the sky.

Here's the cost calculations http://m.imgur.com/gallery/KVdSb