I think the wall is rather...counter-productive. Considering that 60 percent of illegal immigrants that crossed the border in the year 2016-2017 were people who overstayed their visas, accompanied by a decrease in border crossings in the past several years I'm failing to see the need for a wall. Anyways, what do the Dems have to trade since Trump decided to unilaterally declare a state of emergency circumventing the legislative branch anyway? I guess I tend to be a bit softer on the immigration issue because I have seen the immigration court system and it is a big old unfunded dumpster-fire, and just building a wall and chucking people back over it will not fix the problem at all. Is there some non-wall based immigration policy that can be agreed upon?
Regarding taxes, New York state and New Jersey pays more in taxes than it receives in benefits from the federal government. I don't think this project will break the bank, but as I said before the 20 billion dollar price tag is uncomfortably high. I will concede that price needs to get knocked down since European countries can somehow build mass transit infrastructure without breaking the bank.
Well the size scope and power of the Federal government has changed, especially with the Eisenhower interstate system with the highway act of 1956 where the feds changed their formula from 60-40 federal state to 90-10 to build the interstate highway system, etc. We can argue wither or not it should be expanded like it has, but the reality is it's here to stay.Tadman wrote:More importantly, the federal government has grown in scope and size in the last 100 years, companies have not shrunk. There's a reason we didn't have federal income tax at one time. We didn't need it.
I'm so happy the Center City Commuter Connection was built when it was, it would have never gotten off the ground in this political climate.