>It's November 2016. Trump wins with landslide. He kicks in the oval office, headbutts Obama. "The wall". "we NEED the wall". "RIGHT NOW!"
>The madman is actually gonna do it.
What companies are able to build the mexican wall? Who has the knowledge to it? The capacity? The resources? Who will manufacture the pieces? Will there be mines opened? Will it be a concrete wall or a metal fence?
This wall is a Multi billion dollar business. I want to know which companies I can buy stock from.
Other urls found in this thread:
marketwatch.com
twitter.com
>cemex
LUL
this is a pointless question because as it stands now Trump is going to lose badly
>NEET and their unasked opinions
Can you keep your bullshit assumptions for yourself? This thread is not about politics or personal opinions, this is about companies that can supply the demand of such a huge structure.
bump
>muh rigged polls
I can pretty much guarantee you the only way he'll get the wall built is to make sure the contract is exclusive to Unionized labor. So look into unionized construction companies located in border states.
Jacobs Engineering or some similar Prime Contractor will likely get the project.
It'll have to go out to bid, and you can bet they won't be letting any little businesses bid on it.
That said, this is not a particularly huge project. On a par with paving an interstate across the nation or something. The sort of work we routinely accomplish hundreds of times over every year.
Perhaps worth billions, but if you think billions is a lot for a construction contractor or the contracting market you're in for a surprise.
Lol, the lib media loved to paint that picture that he would never win the Republican nomination when he first started campaigning.
Just wait till the debates, he is gonna expose Hillary's lies and it's gonna be yuge.
neither candidate will win with a landslide
you're delusional if you think this election wasn't a slugfest from the beginning
LA Times has him leading by two points. Fucking LA Times, they're probably oversampling Ds by at least 5, and there's also people that won't admit to voting for him. Trump is probably up 5+ percent. Also, Hillary has terrible health issues. Triggered yet, libtard?
Triggered my funny bone, ya
Invest in SWHC as we build the wall from the bodies of dead spics
Tutor Or, Skanska, Mott and McDonald, kewit, cdm Smith, us concrete, too many to name but in the world of big infrastructure there is no shortage of qualified companies
the wall will be built in sections using sub contractors.. Its a good time to get in the building industry if he wins
You know the wall idea still needs to go through congress, right?
The president has very little effect on a country in the 1st world.
The interesting thing about the wall that no one is talking about is this; the wall isn't going to be built on the border; it's going to be built on the US side, well back from the actual border.
He is effectively ceding territory to Mexico. Many ranches and small towns will be isolated from the US, and ready for annexation by Mexico.
In the event of a 2016 victory Trump will likely have enough political capital to force the wall through (republican controlled) Congress. Very little of his other campaign promises will see fruit.
Also, the United States has one of the stronger executive branches of the first world nations.
The United States government was created with lots of checks and balances just for this very thing.
The president doesn't just get elected and change the whole country like in Iraq or something
We just ignoring executive orders and the vacant seats in the supreme court?
Clearly a giant wall would need to be run through congress, but saying the president has little effect is not true. The next president is going to set the tone for the nation for years to come.
Anyone interested on this list?
marketwatch.com
>but saying the president has little effect is not true
Watch the freakonomics podcast titled "How much does the president really matter" or something like that
>for this very thing
For what very thing? He wants to build a border wall. It's hardly M1s rolling down Wall Street, or shutting down Congress.
>The president doesn't just get elected and change the whole country like in Iraq or something
No, but winning the election by itself will give either candidate that wins a large amount of political cachet. Trump's party is in control of the legislative. Why do you think this border wall idea is so impossible? It's been rolled around by Republicans before Trump during the Bush admin. And it's hardly "changing the whole country". It's building a border wall.
Watch the supreme court appointments
>Why do you think this border wall idea is so impossible?
>It's building a border wall.
Building an enormous wall that costs billions and billions of dollars of tax payer money and apparently "forcing mexico to pay for it" seems a little ludicrous to me.
Those billion dollars will not dissapear if it's done by Americans because the money flows back in the American pockets.
What would you think is a better solution to keep Mexicans out of the country?
>What would you think is a better solution to keep Mexicans out of the country?
I have no clue, I don't have any deep knowledge in economics and politics. But the whole idea seems a little bit far.
similar to bernie's plan of "Making college and healthcare free", I don't believe neither Bernies ideas nor Trump's will go through.
I don't think this wall thing will go through to be honest. But I do think measurements will be made. Perhaps making a big pit out of the border would be a far more (cost) efficient way to go.
Make another Panama Canal, I like it. But really, would take just as much if not more concrete to do it. Easier just to put those metal poles in. Then he needs to occupy the border by putting housing on it for Veterans.
>Building an enormous wall that costs billions and billions of dollars of tax payer money and apparently "forcing mexico to pay for it" seems a little ludicrous to me.
Here's the underlying logic as I understand it:
- The wall would be built by American labor with American parts and on American soil. This would, by definition, just be a big spend by the U.S. Government into the economy, which arguably would create jobs/demand/etc. Same mentality as high speed rail investments.
- The savings from lowered illegal immigration, in combination with a series of extreme tariffs/penalties on Mexico, would help counterbalance the cost. Illegal immigrants are expensive, less of them would be a "recovery" of the cost going forward. Similarly, tariffs on Mexico would make them actually give a flying shit about unlawful immigration and their relationship with the U.S. while simultaneously (arguably) benefiting the U.S. economy.
The basic idea: Trump wants to spend a shit ton of money and he's probably going to budget it by punishing the shit out of Mexico and by counting lowered illegal immigration burden as a "recovery." Not a bad thing, just a thing.
>Those billion dollars will not dissapear if it's done by Americans
>He doesn't know 99% of construction labor in the West is Mexican Nationals.
>He doesn't know that they all send their paychecks back to Mexico.
Mexico isn't going to pay for Trump's wall, we're going to pay them to build it. And then let them keep right on living here when they're done. Because Big Construction isn't going to let us deport their cheap labor.
And when the American economy fully collapses, you guys couldn't flee to Mexico because there is a a wall, lol.
The wall doesn't address the issue, since actual border jumpers are a tiny minority of illegal immigrants, the overwhelming majority of the problem comes from people who arrive with visas and don't leave.
In saying that having a wall on the border isn't a bad idea.