SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Fred Reed's mathematical analysis of Trump's Wall proves that Trump is insincere, proves that Trump is mathematically incompetent, and earns Fred Reed an honorary nerd card:
https://fredoneverything.org/the-wall-the-sound-and-the-fury-and-not-much-else/
More math!
~childo
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Trump's Wall Is Mathematically Unlikely
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 91 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 07 2018, @01:28PM (9 children)
Wow. I'd have to write a short thesis to point out all of your inanity.
Go read the specs for the wall. And go look at the terrain for the entire length of the border - especially the large swaths without roads (not even dirt roads) or even level ground. Oh, and don't forget that pesky river.
A 30 foot high wall isn't going to be received with open arms by all of the land owners so be sure to bring your legal team. These folks are not going to roll over just to please you or the government (Texans are like that). SCOUTS isn't going to expedite your eminent domain demands so you better be prepared to slog through the federal court system.
If you honestly think "pour in place" is feasible in that environment then you are as delusional as you assert Reed is. In fact, many of these obstacles are going to prevent "the wall" no matter how they intended to build it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday January 07 2018, @01:52PM (7 children)
Uhhhh, how many years do you have in construction? And, maybe you have a few years of logging behind you. And, bridge building? Yes, pour in place in feasible, almost everywhere along that 2000 miles. Those places where it is infeasible, few if any illegal aliens are crossing the border.
BTW - if it's not possible to pour in place, then how in hell are those prefab pieces going to get there? Are we back to helicopters? If the terrain is THAT damned rough, then you can be very sure that very, very, VERY few illegal aliens are crossing in that spot.
Inane, you say? WTF does the river have to do with anything? Did you think that we were going to just damn the river with the wall? Heh - farmers and ranchers in the Salton sea wouldn't be very happy about that. I don't remember offhand how high the river would have to be dammed, but it isn't much. There goes millions of acres of fertile farmland, because we added a few cubic miles of water to the dry sea.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 07 2018, @02:09PM (6 children)
Actually, I've been doing work for construction related companies for decades.
Pour in place is feasible in many environments, but not along that 2,000 mile border.
You'll have to build roads robust enough to handle all of the heavy truck traffic and decades of ongoing maintenance. That is going to add time and cost.
That is the exact argument being made by many government officials - Republicans among them - in the border states who think this wall is a fool's errand, and just another monument Trump wants to put his name on.
They have to build the wall along the river, not damn the river. That will remove direct access to the US side of the Rio Grande. And that is going to be a problem.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday January 07 2018, @03:06PM (4 children)
Oh, THAT river. The wall doesn't have to be right there, at the river. A common practice in farm country, is to set your fence back a couple of feet. We can do the same with the wall - a setback of half a mile, or even two miles. No big deal. It still stops free access of pedestrians, and channels everyone to a border patrol checkpoint.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08 2018, @03:27PM (3 children)
Why are you defending this wall idea??
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 08 2018, @04:47PM (2 children)
Because scofflaws are routinely breaking the law, and I'd like to see the law enforced. The wall won't stop ALL of the scofflaws, but it will cut the flood to a trickle. That, and it's an engineering feat that I'd like to see. Build the wall. America needs the jobs. Everybody wins. We create more jobs, at the same time cutting down on the illegal competition for those jobs. And then, we enforce everify for ALL employers. An employer caught using illegal aliens is put out of business, his earnings confiscated, and sent to prison for a good long while. When he leaves prison, he is barred for life from running a business. Everybody wins - except the lawbreakers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 09 2018, @01:17AM (1 child)
If your best argument is that building a wall will create jobs, why not employ people to make something useful. Channel the money in to improving roads, or the railways, or some other form of infrastructure that is actually useful for the economy.
And enforcing laws, are there not other laws that it would be more beneficial to improve enforcement of? If you think illegals are a serious problem that needs to be dealt with better, then more punishment for employing them and more enforcement of such laws against employing them will surely be much more cost effective than building a wall, and those actions don't require a wall to be in place.
Economically, is the wall really worth building?
If building it isn't economically worth while, then does it provide significant extra security to the USA?
I think the answer to both those questions is "no". So what are the benefits of building this wall?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 09 2018, @02:56AM
The wall is useful. The wall is economically useful, because it will help to stabilize our economy. It does increase security. The fact that you think the answers to your questions is "no" doesn't make it so. Bring on the punishment for employers, that's great. I love the idea. Meanwhile, build the wall.
Again, the Chinese accomplished a comparable feat, thousands of years ago, using only grunt labor and millenia old technology. Are we such wimps, that a wall challenges us? Just build the wall. The wall will mess with the flow of drugs, probably to a greater extent than all of the DEA's other misguided efforts. That alone justifies the wall.
National pride has something to do with all of this. If you have none, then you see no point in the wall. I have such pride. This country belongs to us, and we don't owe it, or any part of it, to outsiders. Those Mexicans, and everyone else, can just stay out, unless they ASK politely to come in, and we eventually grant permission.
Do you leave your doors at home hanging open, and allow anyone and everyone to come in, as they wish? I didn't think so. Why are our doors hanging open at the border? Close the doors. Control immigration, and stop allowing immigration to control us.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 09 2018, @03:20AM
I had to come back to this one. You say that it's feasible to build roads to remote locations, so that you can truck in those sections - and at the same time deny that it is feasible to mix and pour concrete on site. How, exactly, do you justify that claim? The very same roads that you are willing to build for sectional building will serve to set up the mixing equipment, and allow the cement trucks access to the same areas that your sections need to go. And, of the 2000 miles of border, MOST of it is accessible without building any kind of roads at all. Farmers and ranchers drive along those borders on a daily basis, in their 4x4 pickups. In fact, more than half of the border is accessible to vehicles without four wheel drive. Any pickup can drive along it, or cars, or motorcycles, or even tractors. Once away from the mountains in California, you can walk the border, if you like, without any special gear or equipment.
I insist, unless you are resorting to helicopters to place your sections, then anywhere that you can erect prefab sections, I can pour on site. Note that I haven't claimed that it will be "easy" to do. I am saying that it can be done. Some places, roads will have to be built, but you've already noted that you'll have to build roads to get your sections in.
I leave it up to you to demonstrate how and why it would be possible to erect prefab sections, where it is impossible to our on site. Helicopters are out, as you have already stated that you're going to build roads.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 07 2018, @06:11PM
No, most Texans be like: "You wanna build a wall to stop them illegals? Darn tootin'!"
Tip: Most Texans don't live in Austin.