vintovka said1. If an illegal alien is simply using the social security number of an actual citizen, the money is then held by the social security administration in a 'mismatch' fund, so this is actually a net revenue benefit for the feds.
2. Our economy relies on the cheap labour of illegal aliens to give us cheap produce. Does anyone want to pay $12 for a head of lettuce?
3. Recent waves of immigration have largely been fueled by NAFTA and economic restructuring in Mexico, which brought free-market discipline to formerly state-subsidized industries and US competition to the agricultural sector. The leadership of the US pushed for this in an effort to increase free trade across the Americas and to open Mexico to US businesses. Part of the understanding at the time was that this would result in a period of economic hardship and unemployment in Mexico and increased pressure for immigration--this was considered part of the trade off for promoting free trade (look in the congressional records and hearings on NAFTA).
4. While this (item 3) is a lose/lose proposition for both US and Mexican workers it presented a windfall to corporations and their stockholders, so Yeah for them!
5. It is a little ironic that many who decry illegal immigration applaud the practice of union busting and act as cheerleaders for a completely free market. NEWSFLASH: the object of a free market HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO HAVE A WORLDWIDE FREE MARKET, so the real game is to make workers here compete with workers there. That can be done by allowing illegals into the country, but much more commonly it's done by moving the factories there. Eventually, they would like to move importation there, which would break the back of the longshoreman's union. (Goods could be offloaded in Mexico and trucked north).
6. the idea that everyone will apply for citizenship legally is great, but there is only one consulate in Mexico where such an application can be filed and the fee (last time I looked) was around $500 US. Approval is not guaranteed and can take over a decade. If the people we are talking about are young and poor, is it realistic to think
a. that they have the money?
b. that they are willing to wager it?
c.that they can afford to wait?
When we are talking about people who have been uprooted from their communities by economic factors it is unlikely that such a process is a real option for them. This doesn't make the law any less valid, the law is the law, but it's a little naive to suggest that it's a real option for many of the people in question.
OK, I'm done. haha.
oh please, one consulate in Mexico? There is a consulate in every large city. The U.S. let's more Mexican citizens immigrate than any other country, and allows more people to legally immigrate than the rest of the world combined. We are and continue to be a nation of immigrants with an extremely liberal immigration policy.
Farm laborers earn .05 per head of lettuce they pick. You could double their salary and only increase the price of a head of lettuce by 5 fucking cents. Labor does not drive produce prices... it's the middleman
Illegal immigration predated NAFTA. While I agree, NAFTA has done nothing but line the pockets of bigwig corporations, it is not the cause of illegal immigration.
While I admit, addressing the causes of illegal immigration will go more towards solving the problem, you can't ignore the affects.
I'm sure the people of AZ would be willing to pay more for a carwash to have their relative or friend back who was killed by an illegal alien.