The First 100 days

mchammer said:
I see the cement added after the wall erection, but what is the structure for the wall underground pre-concrete? I don’t see that part being installed. Granted it may be a simple ditch with a long pre-fab rectangular frame that was done before the video started.
Click to expand...

I watched a video that looks like it's about a 6'-8' deep and about 6' wide trench dug, the fence put in, then concrete poured to secure it.
 
mchammer said:
They must have something in the ground to hold it up until the concrete sets.
Click to expand...

Not sure of the exact method, but this is what I found. Also looks like as they are building it they attach sections together which also help stabilize it until the concrete is poured.

us_border_wall_63621_c0-58-3000-1807_s885x516.jpg
 
iatrogenic said:
Educate us on the specifics if you have time. I read some of the TPP and it looked like gibberish to me.
Click to expand...

Monahorns said:
I admit it could have been a mistake. The problem was that all the details were made secret. Government opacity isn't a good formula for prosperity and freedom. There was reason to distrust it, even if it turned out a decent deal. Meaning, if politicians wanted it passed they could have proved how great it was by advertising the specifics.
Click to expand...

Here's a summary. As Monahorns points out, the specifics of these trade deals are often secret. However, at least if the summary and general consensus are accurate (and I've seen no evidence that they aren't), it reduced or eliminate trade barriers between the US and several countries in East Asia (not China) and South America. If that was in place, we'd have access to more markets for the products and services that China is now trying to hit with tariffs.
 
I would have to look at the possible effects on each industry in order to know how this affects the U.S. That government produced advertisement sounds bright and cheery, but somebody is getting a ******* with that deal. We just need to figure out who.
 
iatrogenic said:
I would have to look at the possible effects on each industry in order to know how this affects the U.S. That government produced advertisement sounds bright and cheery, but somebody is getting a ******* with that deal. We just need to figure out who.
Click to expand...

You may be right. All we can do is judge the deal based on the information we have.
 
What he actually said:

"Kim Jong Un, who I've gotten to know extremely well, the first lady has gotten to know, Kim Jong Un — and I think she'd agree with me — he is a man with a country that has tremendous potential."

Friends? Maybe, maybe not, but would you say this about two people who have never met? Probably not.
 
Trump only said the country has potential. I guess tho this is the kind of stuff you say to egomaniac dictators in hopes of them ever making a good decision for their country.and people.
 
Last edited:
Do I read it correctly? That previous legislation never did consider children born to Miltary overseas as "residing"in the US?
So this may be a way to change the current legislation which appears to penalize children born overseas.
Not sure how correcting this is an insult to military.


Edit to add this does not appear to affect any military or gov't employee serving overseas. But to people living outside the US with no residency in US. Hopefully more details will be coming soon.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it's not what first implied. Children born overseas of US citizens are still naturalized citizens. Just like my brother was (is) a citizen but born in Germany.
 
Horn6721 said:
Do I read it correctly? That previous legislation never did consider children born to Miltary overseas as "residing"in the US?
So this may be a way to change the current legislation which appears to penalize children born overseas.
Not sure how correcting this is an insult to military.


Edit to add this does not appear to affect any military or gov't employee serving overseas. But to people living outside the US with no residency in US. Hopefully more details will be coming soon.
Click to expand...

nashhorn said:
Yeah it's not what first implied. Children born overseas of US citizens are still naturalized citizens. Just like my brother was (is) a citizen but born in Germany.
Click to expand...

It's a clickbait headline. The change isn't going to impact the children of US citizens, which is obviously most of them. However, it will impact the children of Green Card holders and adopted children.

For example, Mrs. Deez and I are both US citizens. Deez Jr was born in Wiesbaden, Germany in a German hospital. He was born a US citizen. (@nashhorn , he was not naturalized. He is a natural born citizen. In other words, he could become President.) And that won't change from this.

Let's suppose we (or a military family) chose to adopt a child while overseas. No longer a US citizen from the adoption process. We'd have to apply for naturalization. Furthermore, for whatever reason they won't let civilian employees overseas on orders apply from overseas. We'd have to travel to the a United States on our own dime to do it. It would be an expensive process.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It's a clickbait headline. The change isn't going to impact the children of US citizens, which is obviously most of them. However, it will impact the children of Green Card holders and adopted children.

For example, Mrs. Deez and I are both US citizens. Deez Jr was born in Wiesbaden, Germany in a German hospital. He was born a US citizen. (@nashhorn , he was not naturalized. He is a natural born citizen. In other words, he could become President.) And that won't change from this.

Let's suppose we (or a military family) chose to adopt a child while overseas. No longer a US citizen from the adoption process. We'd have to apply for naturalization. Furthermore, for whatever reason they won't let civilian employees overseas on orders apply from overseas. We'd have to travel to the a United States on our own dime to do it. It would be an expensive process.
Click to expand...
So, how is not good for the military? Maybe a small percentage?
 
MrD
So if children born to military families serving overseas are still automatically citizens what expense and trouble do they go through?
 
? So previously military families who adopted a child overseas did NOT have to submit extra paperwork to get citizenship for an adopted child? I doubt that.

People here in the US have to go through extra paperwork and expense to get citizenship for children they adopt from another country.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Because needlessly making military personnel go to a lot of trouble and expense is bad for them? Seemed obvious to me.
Click to expand...
Mr. Deez said:
Because needlessly making military personnel go to a lot of trouble and expense is bad for them? Seemed obvious to me.
Click to expand...
Does it affect a great % of them? That's all I meant. You characterized it as Trump generally being good for the military but not in this matter. Not arguing, just wondering.

Is it a directive from Trump himself, or is this a case of career people in that department feeling the need for this policy change?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top