The "Wall" - 21.6 Bil, 3.5 Years

[djsunyc]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15O2ZN

the "wall" will cost $21.6 bil and take 3.5 years to build.

[msongs]

1. gee if all the white racist christian republicans want it so much they should volunteer to build it

using materials donated by the koch brother

[Hoyt]

3. Yep, rather than Carter's Habitat for Humanity, we can have Trump's Border Klan.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

6. Polls just came out that most people against it. Duh - "we didn't think we had to pay.." Yes, if

you want the effin wall - chip in. I don't want my taxes going there.

On the other hand, drug dealers ARE an issue. But, how do you keep one out and others in?

[Foo Fighter]

8. A wall won't keep the drugs out.

The cartels are smarter than that. Sure, some drugs are smuggled across the border but that's done by small-timers bringing over relatively small amounts. The cartels have much better ways to smuggle their wares:

• after NAFTA passed, they bought manufacturing plants and shipped the drugs right across the border with the merchandise. They would, for example, pack washing machines with the drugs and truck them across the border. Or they would buy a cannery and "can" the drugs, making sure the shipments went to select grocery stores. Border agents are often paid (or threatened, or both) to look the other way. They can't inspect every vehicle and they are told in advance which ones not to inspect.
  
• they buy submarines, yachts and planes and send the drugs up the coast that way.
  
• they clear plots in state parks in CA (and probably other states) and just grow the marijuana right here. Much easier that way. No need to smuggle when they can grow it right here!
  

Those are but a few examples of a very long list of how they smuggle the drugs. The cartels have been doing this a LONG time and they have the system down. They're always at least three steps ahead of the government (both ours and Mexico's).

The rampant government corruption has also made it easy for them to continue their operations. The PRI had what can be described as a symbiotic relationship with the cartels. In 1997, the PRI lost the majority in the government and, as a result, lost the power to control them. The cartels knew that they had to militarize in order to a.) protect themselves from the government, b.) protect their territories that had previously been doled out to them by the government and c.) protect themselves from other cartels that might try to take over their territories. In order to arm themselves, they would ship, say a planeload of drugs here and instead of returning with an empty plane, they would load it with weapons for the return trip. But that was small potatoes. The violence escalated exponentially following the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban here in 2004. After that, the militarization of the cartels went to a whole new level. Between the billions upon billions the drug trade was bringing in, the weapons they had access to, and the continued rampant government corruption, it's not an exaggeration to say they now had the upper hand on the government. Violence escalated exponentially, as it tends to do when money, drugs and assault weapons are involved, and it's been downhill since then.

What all of that means is there isn't a good way to keep the drugs and/or drug dealers out. Even if the Mexican government got rid of all of their corruption tomorrow, drug trafficking is such a huge part of their economy that they can't get rid of it overnight. As you can probably tell, it's a very complicated problem that will take a long time to unravel. Experts differ on how to solve it, with good reason. It's not simple and whichever route they would choose, the outcome is unpredictable. Whatever the solution is, it won't be simple, it won't be quick and it won't be without its own set of problems.

At any rate, building a wall won't do shit. It won't stop the drug trafficking and it won't stop the people that fly here and overstay their visas.

That's the danger of having a simpleton in the WH. Complicated problems can't be solved with simple solutions. We know it. The rest of the world knows it. But unfortunately for everyone involved, Trump doesn't.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

10. Good info - thanks FF. Small time dealers at wall probably true. But violent none the same. I live

in Texas and know a banker who recently went down to border to inspect some collateral. While he was there, touring property with owner, some guys were spotted, obviously dealing drugs. They stopped the truck and the guys shot at them. Miraculously, the bullets went through their truck cab but missed them. the drug guys only ran away after the owner shot back with a shotgun.

I know, this is just a small, anecdotal case, and the issue is so much larger.

[Foo Fighter]

12. Oh absolutely.

Wow. I'm really sorry to hear that. Glad to hear that your friends are OK. It could have very easily turned out much worse. And I didn't mean to downplay the small time dealers in my previous post. They're violent as all hell. They want to make a name for themselves and establish their reputation. And, for most of them, they feel like they don't have anything to lose.

Here's a bit more background on the cartels and, in particular, the small time dealers. As the cartels grew, and as they lost (some) of their government protection, they needed more recruits. Between the widespread poverty in Mexico and the money the cartels pay, there was never a shortage of people willing to work for them, something that is still true today. The increased militarization of the cartels trickled down to the "entry level" workers on the street, many of whom are high school age kids trapped in poverty that couldn't see another way out. They would rather die young (and many of them do) working for the cartel than live in poverty for the rest of their life. With the abundance of assault weapons flowing over the border, they can afford to arm themselves to the teeth. A "hit" that used to involve a pistol and the lone target is now a spray of bullets that takes out the intended victim and anyone within shooting distance.

I should note that not all of the cartel bosses are OK with this. El Chapo, for instance, is from the "old guard" and tried to convince the other cartel leaders to go back to the old ways -- cartel members were fair game (for example, if they violated an agreement or tried to take over another cartel's territory) but killing innocent civilians was verboten. Unfortunately, the cartels had become so large and the violence had become so out of hand by then that they couldn't put the genie back in the bottle. The violence on the streets these days isn't always due to an order for a "hit" coming from the cartel bosses. A lot of it is the "entry level" guys acting on their own and going after other "entry level" rivals for customers or territory or just to prove how powerful they are and make a name for themselves.

Backing up a bit, at some point, the cartels decided to pay their workers with drugs instead of cash. This helped the cartels unload some of their drugs and saved them the hassle of smuggling it across the border. Prior to this, drug usage in Mexico was very low but that's not longer true. The "entry level" cartel members working the streets sell their drugs to the locals in their territories or smuggle it across the border. (Many also have "territories" just across the border in the US.)

So, the people that shot at your friends could very well have been "entry level" cartel members peddling their wares. That wouldn't surprise me one bit. They most likely weren't armed to the hilt because they weren't going on a "hit." It was just a normal transaction like they have probably done many times before so no need for the big guns. Small weapons suffice for something like that.

Yeah, it's a pretty bad situation all around. And with the power vacuum left by El Chapo's extradition, expect a spike in violence as internal factions fight for control of the Sinaloa Cartel.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. Very interesting! You sound so well versed on the subject. How realistic was Breaking Bad

to you?

The whole subject of US and Mexico is so complex - with so many moving parts. Way too complex for our simpleton in charge. Probably way too complex for anyone to solve.

Since I moved to TX from CT, I was totally amazed at how so many, including my wingnut FIL, employed undocumented workers. These are mini-sanctuary towns and ranches. These people are incredibly hard workers. I have seen them work dawn to dusk - manual labor - stopping for only 10 min for a sandwich or a sip of water. Augustine, has been here (walked 8 days to San Antonio) for 20 years. They pay him $25 a day and he sends most home to his family. He has only seen them a couple times since I have known him. He has grandkids he has never seen. Very hard for me to understand. Bottom line, these people are welcome in the community, have drivers licenses, NO ONE ever tries to send them back.

I don't get it - the right wing saying "kick them all out" when the elephant in the room is that they employ many.

[Foo Fighter]

20. LOL! I'm probably the only person in the world that hasn't seen Breaking Bad.

Well, at least until now. Your post made me check and Netflix has it so I started watching it this weekend. I'm no expert but from what I have seen so far, it would appear that the people behind the show really did their research. I'll know more once I have seen the whole series but so far, I haven't come across anything that's inconsistent with how the cartels operate. In fact, it's the exact opposite. They're ticking a lot of the boxes. BTW, it's a fascinating show that seems to be very well done so I really need to thank you for bringing it to my attention.

I know a little (very little, LOL!) about the subject because I wrote a research paper awhile back based on the hypothesis that the (Mexican government's) militarization of the drug war has made things worse. As it turns out, that was one of the factors but not the only one. It's kind of like a perfect storm of a few different things that combined to cause the huge escalation in the violence that still plagues Mexico today. Anyway, in attempting to prove (or disprove) this hypothesis, I dug into pretty much anything I could get my hands on -- books, papers, videos, etc. Some of the things I came across, well, let's just say it wasn't always easy. Between the brutality of the cartels, the rampant government corruption, and the horrendous human rights abuses (and that's putting it mildly) inflicted on completely innocent civilians by the Mexican police (municipal and federal) and military forces, it's easy to understand why the people living there are willing to risk their lives to come here. (Note: please don't take that as "Mexico sucks and America is great." as that's not how I intend it. Not at all. )

And you're definitely right about the undocumented workers. The right-wingers say "kick them out" but what they really mean is "kick them out, except for the ones working for me." Case in point: the CA farmers that voted for Trump because they thought his threat to crack down in immigration was "just talk" and now they're upset because they might lose their farm workers. Undocumented workers are a right-wingers wet dream -- they're hard workers, work for next to nothing, and have absolutely zero rights. The slave-like conditions of tomato pickers in Florida that has come to light in the past year (?) or so is but one example of the horrible exploitation of undocumented workers in this country. And that's just how the right-wingers like it.

$25 a day for 10-12 hours of manual labor. That makes my blood boil. I just don't understand how people can treat their fellow human beings like that. And I never will.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Gee, how'd we get rid of all the gangsters who sprung up around the illegal alcohol trade during

prohibition?


Verily, it's a conundrum. You don't see many tommygun wielding Al Capone types peddling possibly-poisonous bathtub gin anymore, do you.

Why not?

[logosoco]

14. I don't think they can use "drugs" as an issue when

we are having so many deaths from the drugs people are getting at the local Walgreens.

[pangaia]

2. That is a fantasy.... triple that and three times as long to build..

[struggle4progress]

19. +

[Charles Bukowski]

4. Yeah, and the Iraq war will only cost $60 million.

Ain't that right, Mr. Rumseld?

[Skittles]

5. you need to add maintenance costs

which would be substantial

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. DHS may have to go to court - Oops add 5 years

BARRIERS TO CONSTRUCTION


It also does not account for major physical barriers, like mountains, in areas where it would not be feasible to build.

A source familiar with the plans said DHS may have to go to court to seek eminent domain in order to acquire some of the private land needed to cover the final and most ambitious phase.

[politicat]

9. And doesn't account for any of the eminent domain costs or court challenges.

Lots of eminent domain necessary to get this. El Paso will fight it, because their drinking water is all Rio Grande water, and they can't give that up. Then there's the T'ohono O'odham, who are sovereign and have 75 miles of border, are adapted to a desert climate and have a quarter million Native allies within a short drive likely willing to set aside tribal spats in the interest of preserving sovreignity.

If the bill is less than $50B after including legal costs and land purchase, I'm due for a DNA and gender swap. Because I'll be a monkey's uncle.

[McCamy Taylor]

13. I wonder how much cash Trump collected from the preselected builder?

[Initech]

15. If you build a 25 foot wall, someone is going to build a 26 foot ladder.

We should be living under a dome by Trump's logic.

[ProudLib72]

16. There will never be a wall

PERIOD (al a Spicer)

They will get a month into construction and realize it's too daunting a task (a la tRump) and give up.

The only thing tRump wants now is to begin construction so that he can show his supporters he keeps his promises. It doesn't matter that there is no physical way to build some parts of the wall.

[briv1016]

17. They won't even be done with the eminent domain cases in 3.5 years.