(January 7, 2017 at 2:23 pm)Napoléon Wrote:(January 7, 2017 at 1:59 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Well, you can't really pay 'back' money unless you borrow in the first place. I really don't see Mexico lending the US the money to build the wall. Also, if Mexico pays for the wall, doesn't that make it theirs?
As a side note, here's a secret about walls: they don't work.
What are you on about Mexico lending the US the money?
It's the other way around.The US will pay for it now and they'll get restitution from Mexico later.
Don't see what difference it makes who owns the wall.
And they do generally work a lot better than no wall at all.
Trump said the US would be 'paid back' by Mexico - money can't be 'paid back' unless it was lent in the first place (that's what 'paid back' means).
Trump - to my knowledge - didn't use the word 'restitution' as you did, but even that's not accurate. 'Restitution' in a financial sense means that you pay someone for injury or loss caused by you. Since Mexican immigration is a net boon to the US economy, stopping it wouldn't be an injury caused by Mexico.
Of course it makes a difference who owns the wall. The owner should be expected to pay for maintaining the wall, manning the wall, tending the wee shrubs and flowers around the wall that give it that quaint and homey appearance, etc. When your neighbour's fence falls down, it is your neighbor who is responsible for the repair, not you.
Funny thing about walls is that they don't work nearly as well as you'd expect. I know this from personal experience.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
