But a $5 billion wall DOESN'T secure the border.
Especially at the expense of smarter, MORE effective alternatives.
It's too much to spend on what is nothing but Trump's vanity project!
You have no business calling yourself a fiscal conservative if ur voting to fund it.
-
-
-
Massie is rated as one of the most fiscally conservative members of the US House next to the likes of
@justinamash. -
Yet, here he is willing to spend $5 billion on something that won't do a damn thing to secure any border. A Trump vanity project.
-
How would the wall not help border security? And what other "Smart alternatives" are there? Wow I just can't believe some people.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
Well in all fairness Afghani poppy fields wont grow themselves. They grow it and the open borders let it flood our streets. How else are they supposed to create a national addiction crisis for profit? What do you want them to do stop protecting opium producers? Silly congressman.
-
(obvious jest)
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
All I see there is $55 billion of security theater and perpetual war that should go back to the taxpayers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You don't have to know a person's identity to respond to his or her perfectly valid point. Look like you didn't have an intelligent counterpoint, so you attached the person instead of the argument. Very low brow for a congressman. You're not worthy of the position you hold.
-
You’re good with sending money and people to waste in Afghanistan?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
it's a very simple argument, really: $15k is a reasonable amount to buy a car for, but way too much for a candy bar. Different things deserve different amounts of money spent on them. I thought they covered this in kindergarten...
-
Except if you’re paying 15K for a clunker that doesn’t work, it’s a stupid amount to spend.
-
sure... I'm not making an argument for or against either, I'm just saying the argument that "you were okay paying $50B for this, why not $5B for that" is a bad argument that would justify spending money on pretty much everything.
-
It’s not a reasonable argument to say I’m willing to pay $50B for a war that kills civilians, causes suicide in our troops and does nothing for National Security, but not willing to pay a fraction of that for something that could arguably help sustain our border.
-
No, it wasn’t. Under that framework ANY amount of money is too much to pay for the war... why make the argument about relative price? And using that as a reference point for the wall doesn’t make sense, because there are infinite other things we could spend the savings on
-
Right, like, who is making the argument saying “we should spend 50B on Afghanistan because it [lists all the negatives you said]”
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.