Trump's Plan to Make Mexico Pay For the Wall

TheComebackKid

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
49,276
Reaction score
2,462
Here is Trump's plan to make Mexico pay for the wall from his website....

Introduction: The provision of the Patriot Act, Section 326 - the "know your customer" provision, compelling financial institutions to demand identity documents before opening accounts or conducting financial transactions is a fundamental element of the outline below. That section authorized the executive branch to issue detailed regulations on the subject, found at 31 CFR 130.120-121. It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year. There are several ways to compel Mexico to pay for the wall including the following:

  • On day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31 CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to include wire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.
  • On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
  • On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
  • Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States, in addition to revenue from any tariffs themselves. Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation. By definition, if you have a large trade deficit with a nation, it means they are selling far more to you than the reverse - thus they, not you, stand to lose from enforcing trade rules through tariffs (as has been done to save many U.S. industries in the past).
  • Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points. We also have leverage through business and tourist visas for important people in the Mexican economy. Keep in mind, the United States has already taken in 4X more migrants than any other country on planet earth, producing lower wages and higher unemployment for our own citizens and recent migrants.
  • Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year. The border-crossing card is also one of the greatest sources of illegal immigration into the United States, via overstays. Mexico is also the single largest recipient of U.S. green cards, which confer a path to U.S. citizenship. Again, we have the leverage so Mexico will back down.
Conclusion: Mexico has taken advantage of us in another way as well: gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States. The United States has borne the extraordinary daily cost of this criminal activity, including the cost of trials and incarcerations. Not to mention the even greater human cost. We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage. It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again.

I'm always hearing about how Trump never offers details...this seems pretty detailed to me. What does the war room think...would any of this work?
 
The answer is gonna be..."thats Racist."
 


I can, thanks for asking.

n day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31 CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to include wire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.

So a background check on every wore transfer. That will certainly be easy and cost nothing.

  • On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
Wish he would have sourced this, bit he didnt. I havent read the rest, but feel like it will be really stupid.

  • On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
Ok.... publicly threatening a government. Thats always worked out before. Politicians would never work against the interest of the people to score nationalist points like........ Trump.

  • Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States, in addition to revenue from any tariffs themselves. Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation. By definition, if you have a large trade deficit with a nation, it means they are selling far more to you than the reverse - thus they, not you, stand to lose from enforcing trade rules through tariffs (as has been done to save many U.S. industries in the past).
This is another source moment, I havent seen anything to say Mexico is unfairly subisidising their industry. Unlike what can be said about Trump.

  • Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points. We also have leverage through business and tourist visas for important people in the Mexican economy. Keep in mind, the United States has already taken in 4X more migrants than any other country on planet earth, producing lower wages and higher unemployment for our own citizens and recent migrants.
Mexico is not totally dependant on the USA for their poverty issues. That is a moronic argument all the way through. Mexico sucks because they are a third world country, not because the USA somehow fixes them but still leaves it a total shit hole.

  • Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year. The border-crossing card is also one of the greatest sources of illegal immigration into the United States, via overstays. Mexico is also the single largest recipient of U.S. green cards, which confer a path to U.S. citizenship. Again, we have the leverage so Mexico will back down.
This is less absurd. No criticism, I agree with him here.
 
When I first read this a month or 2 ago, it only mentioned the remittances and I thought it made sense from a negotiating perspective. I think cancelling visas is another great tool. Additionally, I'd gamble that places like Tijuana and Cancun would get very upset if the flow of Americans started drying up.
 
I can, thanks for asking.

So a background check on every wore transfer. That will certainly be easy and cost nothing.

Is it really that hard to search for a name in a database to ensure legal residence?

Wish he would have sourced this, bit he didnt. I havent read the rest, but feel like it will be really stupid.

Kneejerk reaction with no thought behind it...got it

Ok.... publicly threatening a government. Thats always worked out before. Politicians would never work against the interest of the people to score nationalist points like........ Trump.

I think there is a large portion of the American population that is absolutely terrified to flex our muscle in anyway because of how others might respond. And since it is possible that another country will bulk and push back we must just endure being taken advantage of. We must...do nothing.

The hypothetical choice that Trump would offer Mexico would be one thats in their best interest and one that's a win-win for us. If they take the deal..sweet...they pay for our wall. If they reject the deal...sweet...we'll keep however many billions inside the country each year and pay for the wall that way. Will that upset them? Sure. Should we care? Hell no.

This is another source moment, I havent seen anything to say Mexico is unfairly subisidising their industry. Unlike what can be said about Trump.

Fair enough...i haven't seen a source for this either

Mexico is not totally dependant on the USA for their poverty issues. That is a moronic argument all the way through. Mexico sucks because they are a third world country, not because the USA somehow fixes them but still leaves it a total shit hole.

Well I dunno...I seen many people over the years argue that Mexico is depending on us to take care of their poor. So maybe it's not "total" but there are MANY who would argue, and argue convincingly, that it's at the very least significant.

It seems to me this entire response is one big kneejerk reaction coming from a position of dug in opposition to anything Trump and anything outside of the box. There's too many of you in this country and your do nothing team is killing us.
 
I was looking at this a while ago.
As far as I can tell, it's not actually a bad plan. The 'bullying' portion of it appeals to the nationalist desire for 'strong' leadership and he's right about the value of remittances that flow from the US into Mexico (though not that it's all coming from illegals). It's a solid negotiating position to take, and the strength of America's position over your Southern neighbour means that, at the very least, Mexico will have to come to the table on this issue. I don't like that he's, in essence, threatening the Mexican poor, but you want your president to care more about the poor in his own country so...

Also, I might be wrong, but the proposed increase to the cost of greencards could replace the rest of the proposal in its entirety as a source of funding for the wall. it sounds less badass though, so maybe that's why he's presented all of it - appeal to the fervent patriots and the pragmatists all at once.
Pretty creative problem-solving.
That's the impression I got anyway.
 
Why doesn't the plan contain a contingency where the executive can order the harvesting of body parts from those classified as 'illegal'?
 
A wall is a great symbolic gesture for the hard right to jizz over, but wouldn't it possibly be cheaper to fund the current border protection much better and upgrade their resources? That way they continue to employee people for years where as contracting out building the wall is a short term job investment.

It would also look less isolationist and have less chance of creating a trade war. I would have faith in a well funded border security team handling everyone. Aren't the current statistics down anyway because they've zoned in on the hot spot crossing areas?
 
Day 1 will not work. Can you send money to another company but not Mexico or all foreign countries off limit. YOu could send the money to Chile then on to Mexico. Also this creates a black market of US citizens sending money to Mexico for a fee. Companies like Western Union will not appreciate the loss of revenue, and since we live in a democracy this stuff has to go to Congress. YOu think Obama was obstructed, wait for Trump when both parties hate you.
Day 2 depends on day 1.
1 million green cards taxed is not enough.
The rest is talking trade and all the other BS.
There are plenty of companies in the US that make money off of Mexico. We live in a democracy, so Trumps wall has to go through Congress and has no shot of getting passed.
The last thing, his plan does not include fining companies that hire illegals, so its a failure in my eyes. The reason no one includes that part of stemming illegal immigration is due to donors, or in Trumps case he would be fining his own company.
Last thing Mexico is not going to pay for it, and has been on record saying so.
Also because you don't like this, it is not knee Jerk.
 
You will find people defending illegals beyond comprehension.
 
Day 1 will not work. Can you send money to another company but not Mexico or all foreign countries off limit. YOu could send the money to Chile then on to Mexico. Also this creates a black market of US citizens sending money to Mexico for a fee. Companies like Western Union will not appreciate the loss of revenue, and since we live in a democracy this stuff has to go to Congress. YOu think Obama was obstructed, wait for Trump when both parties hate you.
Day 2 depends on day 1.
1 million green cards taxed is not enough.
The rest is talking trade and all the other BS.
There are plenty of companies in the US that make money off of Mexico. We live in a democracy, so Trumps wall has to go through Congress and has no shot of getting passed.
The last thing, his plan does not include fining companies that hire illegals, so its a failure in my eyes. The reason no one includes that part of stemming illegal immigration is due to donors, or in Trumps case he would be fining his own company.
Last thing Mexico is not going to pay for it, and has been on record saying so.
Also because you don't like this, it is not knee Jerk.

The country is losing money from an illegal group sending money out of the country on a damaging level.
 
Here is Trump's plan to make Mexico pay for the wall from his website....



I'm always hearing about how Trump never offers details...this seems pretty detailed to me. What does the war room think...would any of this work?

It's detail; I'll admit, it just happens to be wrong on many levels.

1-
  • Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.
How do you think illegals get jobs in the US??? Employers are required to obtain documents establishing lawful presence in the US. It called the I9 https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/form/i-9.pdf



2-
  • On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
That's both conjecture as to how they will react and wrong in detail - Mexico has a safety net:

https://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/swe/2013/swe1302e.pdf

http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/1047195/fanrr6fm.pdf0.pdf



3-
  • On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
Again that assumes you knew what you were talking about when you mentioned day 2.



4-
  • Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States,
Trade tariffs would increase the cost of good on American consumers - it's also illegal and we would have to take a case to the WTO. The president doesn't just get to decide that someone is cheating.




5-
  • Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points.

Does the person that wrote this have any functioning brain cells? Their whole argument for the need for a wall is that Mexicans are sneaking across an un-walled border.



6-
  • Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year.
We issue 11million visas to Mexico each year - and I'll assume the 1 mil border cards is correct. So that small increase that Trump is talking about is actually $2000 per. While that may seem small to Trump, those people using the border cards are working menial jobs and don't have an extra 2 grand to pay that fee, so instead they'll just "sneak across that un-walled border" and stay here permanently.
 
It seems like a lot of those policies will actually exacerbate the need for a wall
 
Is it really that hard to search for a name in a database to ensure legal residence?


.


You realize that we could do that right now with the illegals that are here and have their employer fire them which would be about billions cheaper than building a wall?
 
Day 1 will not work. Can you send money to another company but not Mexico or all foreign countries off limit. YOu could send the money to Chile then on to Mexico. Also this creates a black market of US citizens sending money to Mexico for a fee. Companies like Western Union will not appreciate the loss of revenue, and since we live in a democracy this stuff has to go to Congress. YOu think Obama was obstructed, wait for Trump when both parties hate you.
Day 2 depends on day 1.
1 million green cards taxed is not enough.
The rest is talking trade and all the other BS.
There are plenty of companies in the US that make money off of Mexico. We live in a democracy, so Trumps wall has to go through Congress and has no shot of getting passed.
The last thing, his plan does not include fining companies that hire illegals, so its a failure in my eyes. The reason no one includes that part of stemming illegal immigration is due to donors, or in Trumps case he would be fining his own company.
Last thing Mexico is not going to pay for it, and has been on record saying so.
Also because you don't like this, it is not knee Jerk.

Well, its not kneejerk. You have presented what appear to be legit challenges but you then take the leap when you suggest none of that could be addressed.

Would Trump have to go through congress to build a wall? Sure. But if Trump wins on the platform of building a wall it will behoove republican and some purple state democrats to back that platform. So he very well could use his potential success and bully pit to push through the wall.

Could people find other ways to send money back to mexico? Sure. But it would make it a lot tougher and perhaps people could offer ideas to address how to stop it. Far from "will not work".

And as far as fining companies who hire illegals that is covered under his immigration plan. This is his "make mexico pay for the wall" plan that we are talking about.

But you see...none of your objections, which some are legit, are deal killers. They just have to be addressed when it comes time to draft legislation.
 
You realize that we could do that right now with the illegals that are here and have their employer fire them which would be about billions cheaper than building a wall?

Stop talking to me about money. We waste and give away billions a year. All of the sudden we have to be frugal when it comes to our border.

Just a bunch of do nothing naysayers with petty complaints and objections.
 
Stop talking to me about money. We waste and give away billions a year. All of the sudden we have to be frugal when it comes to our border.

Just a bunch of do nothing naysayers with petty complaints and objections.


I'm not saying don't defend the border - I'm saying; and have said repeatedly, that a wall isn't needed.

Crack down on the employers and the jobs will stop going to illegals and they'll go home. We already have the data bases to accomplish it and it would cost pennies compared to confiscating thousands of miles of land from land owners and building a $20b wall.

But since you bring it up, yes damn it; it's time to be frugal with something and to quit acting like the govt has an endless supply of money to waste on everything that strikes their fancy.
 
Back
Top