If you don't like the estimated cost of the wall, tell where you're going to save money on it.
The MX MPS program would have spent 75% of its budget on pouring concrete--in other words, on the same basic task that would be performed in building a nice high wall along the border. The Office of Technology assessment gave a total figure for the concrete needed for the planned MX MPS program, and some basic mathematics shows that your wall would need roughly 3 times as much concrete. Inflation since 1980 is calculable. I assumed that pouring 2,100 miles of concrete would pose no significant additional cost drivers.
The OTA report also gave a range of cost overrun figures from historical experience--and public works projects are, as a group, the worst offenders for going over budget.
I even gave you a break on the price tag--I simply assumed that Uncle Sam owned all of the land along the border and didn't have to exercise eminent domain. (The MX MPS program would have used government land exclusively--much of the proposed basing area for the missile is now the Great Basin National Park.)
If you have a problem with the price tag, tell me where it's wrong.
The problem I have with your numbers Poohbah is it works out to something like $70 million dollars per mile. Isn't that right? That's around $14,000 a linear foot?
I've seen some pretty substancial walls around guarded subdivisions that I don't believe cost anywhere near that much.
What do those pre-fabricated walls that you see along the highways cost per foot?
Any recent road construction projects cost that much?
Any idea how much it's costing Israel to build their wall?
That concrete doesn't have to be poured to a density capable of withstanding the launch force of a freakin', inter-continental, ballistic missile either, Poohbah. It just has to be substantial enough to be a barrier to climbers.
Merry Christmas guys!