Intolerance can come in many forms: verbal, physical, emotional. This is important to understand when arguing this topic because it is not just centered around religious intolerance. The United States constitution was set in place to ensure that certain freedoms are protected. No matter how intolerant one may be with their speech or actions towards themselves it is not the governments place to interfere. Therefore being tolerant to such actions is a must. That being said, there are certain rights that should not be infringed upon. The only place the government should he allowed to step in is when the action of one directly causes physical or harassment related harm to another living being. I think that with this there should not be any exception. There are a wide variety of examples to look at but the one being used most on this forum is religion. If one group or individual following a religion is preaching what they believe or protesting in a civil manner than there is no problem. If they cause harm then actions are to be taken. So freedom is not something to be questioned because someones words are questionable. It is not intolerant to tolerate intolerance simply because as a free Nation we are entitled to our own opinions.
The argument at hand is not so much if we should build a wall, its should we tear down the current border wall and replace it with an "updated" version. Either way, the answer is no. The current border wall ,which was built between 1996 and 2006, took 6 billion dollars. 10 years and a large sum of money for a wall that thousands of people cross monthly. Taking a look at Trumps proposed wall, the cost ranges from 15 to 25 billion dollars. That is almost quadruple the cost of the current border. This does not add the cost of the annual maintenance that will be needed and the pay for the deconstruction of the current wall. The 20% tariff may seem like a good idea on the outside, but this will only hurt consumers in the long run. Mexico is one of the United States largest source of imports and exports. Imposing a 20% tax will increase the price on many goods. In terms of business, this will hurt many companies that rely on selling their goods. This will also hurt the average consumer by costing them more money for the items they use daily. This also brings in the question of how long the tariff is supposed to last. The current border took 10 years. How would a tax of that size impact the economy of the United Stated over the period of time taken to build it? Both of these questions are imperative when discussing the situation at hand. The wall will not benefit the United States in any way especially not economically. In conclusion, the border wall is not a good idea.
When looking at the Trans-Pacific Partnership,TPP, it is beneficial to give credit to all that it will do. 1) It will help the United States economically. The TPP will eliminate most tariffs and allow for faster trading with the other 11 member countries. In the U.S. alone 11.7 million jobs depend on trading. Opening up the trade routes with these other countries will allow for those people to export their goods and services more frequently and with less hassle. It is also estimated the the TPP could potentially bring in 178 billion dollars a year to the U.S. This can be mainly caused by the increase in money flow that will happen with the 11 member countries,especially Asia. Those against the TPP will say that it will be a financial burden because it will eliminate jobs for a large majority of consumers. This is not exactly the case. The TPP will bring in other jobs and allow for job specialization to increase. With automation already taking over thousands of jobs, the TPP will allow for a jump start in the creation of new technology.
2) The TPP will increase the alliances between the 12 involved countries. The spread of ideas and trust is beneficial to the future of the U.S. It will allow communication on foreign policies to increase as well as provide the best options at the best price for everyone.
