Mayor of the top “sanctuary city”. The following quotes are from this ABC News article:
At a June 1994 press conference: “Some of the hardest-working and most productive people in this city are undocumented aliens. If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you’re one of the people who we want in this city. You’re somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being like a fugitive, which is really unfair.”
In 1996, defending New York’s “sanctuary city” policy, Giuliani said in a speech in Minneappolis, the policy ”protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the INS while they are using city services that are critical for their health and safety, and for the health and safety of the entire city.”
In 1996, Giuliani compared “the anti-immigration issue that’s now sweeping the country” to “the Chinese Exclusionary Act, or the Know-Nothing movement — these were movements that encouraged Americans to fear foreigners, to fear something that is different and to stop immigration.”
“The reality is that they are here, and they’re going to remain here. The choice becomes for a city what do you do? Allow them to stay on the streets or allow them to be educated? The preferred choice from the point of view of New York City is to be educated.”
Hmm, I thought Reagan Wing was supporting Mr. Tancredo, how come you are quoting Mr. Giulani’s strong words. I see nothing wrong with his words. It would be whole lot different game if he said the same thing now as millions entered illegally in last 10 years. The ones here during 94 were the hardworking ones (of course we have exceptions everywhere) and even NYC needed them badly.
Theres some things which are inevitable no matter we like it or not. Just see who’s crying against raiding illegal immigrants even now - http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/316330.html.
The only thing we need to do NOW is to send back criminal, fraud illegal immigrants and SEAL the border. Sending back hard working illegals or even talking on sending them back is not at all a feasible solution.
Phil,
The Reagan Wing supports conservatism and conservative candidates. Tom Tancredo is not the only acceptable candidate, he is just the most conservative.
There is no “different game.” The ‘86 amnesty was an attempt to apply YOUR solution to what had long been (eight years before Giuliani’s anarchist statements) a serious, acknowledged, problem. The only fundamental change, between then and now, is Giuliani’s perception of what is popular. The horrible McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill only would have CHANGED the law to favor past illegal activity. Giuliani, by contrast, openly endorsed BREAKING the law, and, in fact, his actions as Mayor literally DID break the law by aiding and abetting illegal activity. His only real respect for law is as a means to his own ends.
Now that grassroots citizens have overcome our corrupt elite political leadership (including McCain, Romney, Brownback AND Giuliani) and the corrupt “mainstream” media by shouting loud enough to demonstrate that Americans don’t support lawlessness, all the amnesty politicians are scrambling to re-write their past support of it.
The article was published to expose Giuliani’s hypocrisy.
All illegal aliens In the U.S. live by CONTINUALLY AND HABITUALLY breaking the law. Your race-based stereotype of “hard-working” is a false image created by anti-American propagandists. Your assertion that NY “needed them badly” is only true to the degree that New Yorkers needed a permanent underpaid underclass continually indentured to menial tasks by selfish materialists who transfer the burden of tens of thousands of dollars of government services for EACH WORKING ILLEGAL (BILLIONS IN AGGREGATE) to the taxpayers of America.
That corrupt New York, elitist, gay-rights subculture “needs badly” to move to Mexico or some other Central American Banana Republic where lawless, rich, spoiled, oppressive plantation or drug aristocrats can lord it over the peasants and be given the respect they think they’re due.
Just curious Mr. Parris, Reagan of course granted a form of amnesty to illegal immigrants even mentioning that those who have been in the country for a few years deserved to become citizens - I think it was a two year process at the time. At the same time he abhorred the Welfare Queen. So, the hard working illegal immigrant (of which there are many) is desired to be part of the country by Rudy, what’s the matter with that? I remember in my young college days I always thought, with the help of Reagan ideology, that the lazy welfare deadbeats were a drag on the economy and they should be deported and replaced by those hard working illegal immigrants.
Granted it’s illegal and unconstitutional, other than that what do you think of a thought process that says I’d rather have hard-working citizens making up our population than some of the lazy non-productive citizens we have now? I probably wouldn’t think badly of a candidate who acknowledged that.
Other Doug,
1. To understand the relationship of Illegal Immigration to Reagan you must read this: Reagan Would Not Repeat Amnesty Mistake
2. The way to separate “lazy” from “hard working” is to eliminate government giveaways. That is precisely what Giuliani was fighting AGAINST. He is not a conservative, in basic principle, on anything. Like most RINOs, though, he will use conservative rhetoric and even endorse a specific conservative measure (or oppose a liberal one) for temporal political gain. Liberals are unprincipled and to see them violating liberalism for gain is not unusual. “The end justifies the means,” they think.
As it sits, we have so many giveaways written into U.S. law, we need to limit immigration on economic grounds alone or we will swamp our economy. That should be reversed. We need to eliminate all socialistic programs from the country. That, by itself, as is being proved in Georgia right now, would send the majority of illegals home right away without any need to “round them up” as is pictured in the propaganda of Medved and other left-wingers on this subject.
3. Regarding your comment, “…hard working illegal immigrant (of which there are many) …”: please post a list of just three of them with their phone numbers so I can verify your assertion. Include the false identity through which they collect paychecks so I can find out if they are “hard working.” And please also include some method whereby I might confirm that they are not receiving government benefits through some other fraudulent identity… or two or three identities. I know HR people who have uncovered the same Mexican citizens getting as many as five checks under different identities, each one ostensibly “hard working.”
I think on reflection you’ll have to admit that the description “hard working” is pure prejudice. It is not based on any fact at all. The ONLY thing we know for certain is that they are habitual criminals. That IS a fact.
It makes no more sense to vouch for the character of the illegal alien community than it does for any other class of criminal.
Try these on for example:
“Other than grand theft, auto, most car burglars are hard working, like other Americans, and just want a better life for themselves and their family.”
“Aside from the fact of dealing in undocumented pharmaceuticals, most drug dealers are hard working, like other Americans, and just want a better life for themselves and their family.”
Absurd isn’t it?
>”All illegal aliens In the U.S. live by CONTINUALLY AND HABITUALLY breaking the law.”
>”burden of tens of thousands of dollars of government services for EACH WORKING ILLEGAL (BILLIONS IN AGGREGATE) to the taxpayers of America”
Such ridiculous statements are equal to saying ALL conservatives and ALL anti immigrants are racists. Sorry to mention, but both are equally idiotic statements deserving no respect.
Also, what’s your workable solution? Send each illegal immigrant back? I can guarantee you that American businesses will lobby more than the immigrants to overturn any such law (eg: http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/316330.html).
Phil,
Calling statements with which you disagree “idiotic,” “ridiculous,” or giving them “no respect” is not a substitute for actually doing research or thinking. You need to build your opinions on a stronger foundation than popular prejudice.
Let’s start with my first statement, “All illegal aliens in the U.S. live by CONTINUALLY AND HABITUALLY breaking the law” Idiotic or true?
As you have aparently not noticed, it is illegal for illegal aliens to work in the U.S.
So in order to survive they must either:
1. work under the table in repeated violation of BOTH State and Federal tax Law, (Every cash payment so received by an illegal is a multiple crime. If an employer colludes in this process, they both are criminals. Most of this takes place as “day labor” so the habit is daily.)
OR
2. work a traditional job by fabricating an identity and a social security number, (Every time the illegal cashes a paycheck he commits a new act of fraud, a habitual crime.)
OR
3. collect welfare benefits by the same process of identity fabrication (with which liberal States are in knowing collusion), (The process is not just illegal it is reprehensible. And, if it sustains them, habitual.)
OR
4. engage in direct theft or extortion of cash, or goods, or the sale of drugs or prostitution or such like in a pursuit of enterprise that would be illegal even if a U.S. Citizen did it.
PLEASE TELL ME OF ANY OTHER WAY THEY COULD LIVE IF YOU CAN THINK OF IT.
Now let’s take my second statement: ”… burden of tens of thousands of dollars of government services for EACH WORKING ILLEGAL (BILLIONS IN AGGREGATE) to the taxpayers of America”
Tell me Phil, what is the average yearly cost of government services received by an illegal and his dependents EVEN IF HE WORKS? Put your answer on a paper and call it line one.
What is the average amount of taxes he pays (if he actually works above the table)? Make it line two. I realize that some of these figures will reqire a little research, but, if you’re qualified to call my statements “idiotic” you’ve already done the research haven’t you?
Now subtract line two from line one and tell me the difference. We’ll call that line three.
Now multiply line three by the number of “employed” illegals you believe to be in the U.S. This is line four.
Now multiply line one (the average cost of government services received) by the number of illegals you think are working under the table or dealing drugs (and whatnot) and paying no taxes. This is line five.
Add line four and line five. (That would be the current yearly aggregate. We’ll call it line six.)
Is it a positive or negative figure?
Now, multiply it by the average illegal’s lifespan. (Line seven).
Now average lines four and five and multiply that figure by the number of that will come in via chain migration, then multiply that figure by line seven and call it line eight.
Now add lines seven and eight. This is now line NINE.
All we need to find out is if the weighted average of lines three and five is in the tens of thousands and if line nine is in the billions.
Oh, wait, the hard numbers have already been computed for you! Just read this article and click on the links:
The Back-Breaking Cost of McAmnesty
A workable solution? That is so obvious it makes me think you’ve been hypnotized. We merely need to begin to enforce existing law. Cutting off government benefits to illegals has already begun an exodus from places where it is enforced. The great draw is the welfare state. End it.
The smallest changes would (and have already begun) to generate voluntary departure. We could enhance that process with literally hundreds of options, none of which require Storm Troopers stuffing immigrants into train cars, but those options would not be necessary.
What’s your solution to speeding? Do you have any idea how many millions of motorists exceed the limit EVERY DAY?
It is simply not practical to round them all up and throw them in jail. We therefore have to abolish speed limits, don’t we? All they’re trying to do is get from one place to another. They can’t All be breaking the law can they? That would be an idiotic claim, wouldn’t it? Not worthy of respect?
PS. If you are careful to sign in with the exact same spelling, you won’t have to wait for your comments to be approved (after your first approval).
Mr. Doug Parris,
It is this kind of FUD by conservatives and also liberals causing any practical solution to illegal immigration problem to fail.
Yes, legally/technically all illegal immigrants are criminal by the virtue of being here and collecting pay (cash or check). But your initial statement gives an impression that all illegal immigrants are hardcore criminals committing hideous crimes. There is a difference b/w crime such as murder or rape and staying here illegally. Calling them equal definitely does not help towards finding a solution to the problem. I am not saying all illegal immigrants are just hard working people; there are criminals in that group who have committed hideous crimes and most likely in more percentage than American citizen criminals. I would support any punishment harsher than even death penalty for an illegal immigrant coming child rape or so, but placing all of them under the same umbrella as CRIMINALS is a FUD statement.
Secondly, regarding the Heritage report – I can see that they have put enormous effort. If that’s 100% true, why do we have many businesses crying about not having enough employees? I find it extremely hard to believe that ALL of them are just lying or greedy to have low waged employees. Here are few links from external sources –
1. Immigration debate: Firms warn of lack of workers -
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/316330.html
2. Immigration rules could hinder L.A. County garment industry -
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-garment11aug11,1,823528.story?ctrack=2&cset=true
3 - Farmers Call Crackdown on Illegal Workers Unfair - http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/us/11immig.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Either ALL these American business owners must be greedy liars or there is some flaw in Heritage foundation calculations. I do agree that eliminating a big chunk of illegals currently in our country might drive up the wages for Americans. This gain will only be short lived as companies would just stop producing anything here and would be importing each and every commodity/service. Even now it’s almost impossible to find any “Made in America” product at Walmart or other super stores.
>”Speeding - It is simply not practical to round them all up and throw them in jail. We therefore have to abolish speed limits, don’t we? All they’re trying to do is get from one place to another. They can’t All be breaking the law can they? That would be an idiotic claim, wouldn’t it? Not worthy of respect?”
Exactly, we don’t put all speeding motorists to jail. In our current US law and order system, we warn for minor speeding and rightfully slap a fine for bigger mistakes. We put to jail on outrageous/ repeat mistakes. It’s just not practical to put all speeders to jail. I know you will say that illegal immigrants are repeat offenders since they have been illegally collecting paycheck every 2 weeks. I am more practical and consider staying here illegally as one big offense and allow them to work here if businesses need them after appropriate measures are taken.
Mr. President’s CIR bill (however imperfect it was) did exactly that – Allow them to be here on Z visas after paying a fine. Unfortunately any solution of not sending illegals back is considered as amnesty by few non-practical organizations/citizens. No doubt they use our social services without paying any tax and that’s why we need to bring them to mainstream and collect taxes on they paycheck at least from now on. If you still say that all illegals are criminals, then what’s your answer for hundreds of military servicemen & women naturalized by USCIS in a painstakingly slow process - http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2947.htm. These folks are ready to give their life, fighting the evils, for the sake of our freedom.
Enforcing existing law to fight immigration problem – Absolutely, no question against it. I am just against any infeasible solutions such as “Seal the border and send’em back”. We should seal the border and send the hardcore criminals/fraud back and let the hard working illegals stay here as per American businesses’ necessity. Unfortunately the only thing I have seen in this whole immigration debate is FUD and extreme generalization by both pro and anti immigrants with only a few handfuls working on practical/feasible solution.
Phil,
I’m unfamiliar with the term “FUD.” I suspect it is something vulgar.
You have the unfortunate habit of inventing your opponent’s position and then debating with yourself. Mass deportation is just such a case. It is a straw man, a bit of deceptive propaganda invented by the radical left. You can help heal yourself of this by realizing that there are denotative meanings to words. Stick to that.
When someone speaks they do not mean whatever pops into your head. That’s you. You have to listen to the words and focus on their meanings, not the rush of images and emotions that crowd into your consciousness. For instance, whether or not the Heritage Foundation figures are accurate has nothing to do with the motivations of a small collection of employers who benefit, financially, from illegal immigration. In fact, in most discussions, you need to ignore the aparent motivation of both sides until AFTER you find out who is right, wrong, or simply mistaken on factual grounds.
Most of the solutions to things, including our illegal immigration problems, are things you obviously haven’t thought of. You need to listen more and talk less.
FUD: Short for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.
It’s nothing vulgar. A simple Google search would have yielded you the result.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLD%2CGGLD%3A2004-10%2CGGLD%3Aen&q=define%3A+FUD&btnG=Search
Perfect example. Rather than weigh the significance of an argument, you reflect the fear, uncertainty and doubt that it makes you feel.
That’s you. It is the feelings inside you, not the person speaking to whom your feelings are mere reactions.
Concentrate on the meanings of words and ignore your fear, uncertainty and doubt… and any other emotion that rises up within you, tempting you to depart from reason.
“That’s you. It is the feelings inside you, not the person speaking to whom your feelings are mere reactions.”
Yes, thats exactly what I meant when I said that your arguments are FUD arguments. Arguments from you or even some extreme liberals on other end are being used in this problem to propagate fear and uncertainty in the common folks of this country (like myself) by spreading generalized negative information.
I would rather see a practical, realistic solution to the issue even if that means one step backwards and two step forward later on!!! This is what I mentioned in my previous long post with examples.
1. Your accusation, that I am attempting to propagate fear and uncertainty, is simply false. A lie.
I do not doubt that you feel some, but, as I was explaining, it is a by-product of your internal make-up as it reacts to the truth, perhaps for the first time. It is entirely created within you.
2. “You say you want a
revolutionreal solution, well you know…”You have to begin by defining terms. What are the problems you feel need to be “solved”?
Cheap labor for corporations? Why should our government be the instrument of opression of working people?
Inconvenience for illegal invaders who broke the law to be here and, suddenly, find it is more beneficial to go back?
How are we responsible for the problems they willingly brought on themselves?
How long should a car thief be required to avoid capture before he gets to permanently keep the car he stole? And why do you call that “practical”?
Mr. Parris,
First, I find some of your argumenting sophmoric. To ask for social security numbers, phone numbers, etc. to prove Rudy and my statement that there are many hard working illegal immigrants here, is rather sophmoric. We could easily ask you to provide documentation, phone numbers, arrest reports, etc. for every 12 million illegal immigrants that are supposedly here in order to prove that number or any number whether it’s 12,000 illegal immigrants in our country, is a fact.
I will assume that some of the data out there pointing to us having millions of illegal immigrants working here is relatively accurate without having actual arrest documentation. I will also assume all those business that get caught in illegal immigrant stings wouldn’t have hired those immigrants if they didn’t feel they were sufficiently hard-working people in relation to the pay they received. No ridiculous proof is needed anywhere.
As for the current illegal immigration problem, I believe you, Tancredo, Michelle and every other person who believes the solution is to deport them all is wrong. I am a conservative who thinks we should hang car thieves, I also think illegal immigrants should suffer a misdemeanor sentence for a first offense. I do believe the offense of illegally entering our country is not nearly as horrific as driving while intoxicated, or stealing personal property. I also believe any immigrant who is convicted of entering our country illegally should NEVER be allowed to become a citizen. However, having a work permit is a different matter.
Our immigration policy has been a failure. We clearly have not been allowing anywhere near the amount of legal workers into our country that we need - supply/demand has shown that. The export of upwards of 10 to 12 million illegal immigrants would be a catastrophic shock to the economy, thus any congressman or President who doesn’t think out a way to counteract that before enacting is too shortsided to be President.
Here is a particular farming example dealing with immigrant workers: In our area during a 5 year period we had 20% of our farmers declare bankruptcy, most losing their farms. Why? During that time the state and Fed. govt. instituted environmental reforms that cost our farmers approx. half of the value of their farms to implement and they had to do that or would be breaking the new law. During that time there was a decrease of about 70% in the per-unit value of the commodity. This is being brought about because the Wal-Marts, large grocery chains, etc. have really gone after creating their own brands. They then use that monopolistic power (monopolistic not in the sense of one company, but the value-added sector having power over the commodity sector) in order to drive down the commodity price to a point where it is marginally unprofitable but enough that the farmers still can offset some fixed costs - basically losing money right and left.
Additionally, the high-labor farmers have seen the minimum wage skyrocket during that time and a severe tightening of school-age labor laws, making the labor too expensive for the price of the commodity. This state has also created more regulation making farm expansion a time delaying occurance so the farmers have not been able to expand to gain economy of scale.
Bush, in his infinite wisdom, realizes that the massive increase in regulation and the ridiculous increases in minimum wages have utterly destroyed the family farmers. Only large business that can hire the immigrants (illegal or otherwise) can survive, unless the government can offset the regulations they instituted by subsidizing the farmers are allowing them to find cheap labor.
Solution: make sure the number of legal immigrant workforce satisfies the demand. Workers pay all taxes, but Social Security/Medicare benefits are only paid to citizens. Legal immigrant workers can earn citizenship based on the number we allow to join as citizens. All illegal immigrants given X amount of time to register. After that anyone entering the country illegally shall be prosecuted and fined and deported until they can get the paperwork to enter the country workforce legally. Multiple offenders can be given a temp. status just they could serve longer sentences. No one here illegally or enters illegally can ever become a citizen. Current illegal immigrants who register will be given temporary workers visas unless they are convicted felons (that would revoke any immigrants ability to ever enter the country legally again and would be automatic deportation). The current illegals will also have to pay a fine and serve jail time in accordance to a misdemeanor offense. They would have to pay estimated back taxes as well, taken out of their paychecks over time.
It’s just pretty obvious that with our supply/demand situation the market has realized we don’t have enough legal immigrant workers in this country.
Mr. Doug Parris,
I just went over your comments in few other topics too and I have observed a point in your replies both above and elsewhere - After initial few points/arguments you tend to attack the opposite person instead of his/her arguments. I think this is because your counter arguments either lack in substance or you tend to not give respect to others.
Also please get in the habit or referring to other person as Mr. or Mrs. or Ms when they refer you the same. Its one the basic rules of reciprocating respect.
Being a conservative, I would rather spend my time on other conservative blogs where arguments are based on ideas instead of personal and also where people don’t offer free unsolicited advice.
Regards.
Dear Mr. Phil Mueller, or is it “Mr. Phill Mueller (at 7), or is it Mr. Phil Mueler? (at 14)
1. I am happy to refer to you any (reasonable) way you prefer if you simply let me know what that is (and settle on a spelling). I had no idea you were offended by my use of the name, “Phil.” I don’t know why you let it go so long without mentioning it.
2. You say, “…you tend to attack the opposite person instead of his/her arguments.” I disagree. Perhaps you could provide some example with that accusation? Or is yours a hit-and-run operation?
3. You say, “…your counter arguments… lack in substance…” Again, please demonstrate this in some (substantive) way, if you can.
4. “…the basic rules of reciprocating respect.” Is falsely accusing me of spreading “Fear, uncertainty and doubt” one of your ways of showing respect?
I must point out that, although you attacked me personally, I did not do the same to you. On the other hand, you have a point about free advice… I shouldn’t give it out. If you come back I promise to charge you for it next time.
Mr. Other,
Your quotes and my responses:
“…I find some of your argumenting sophmoric.”
I’m sure the insult you intended, here, is “I find some of your arguments sophomoric.”
I actually agree with you. That’s because I was demonstrating the utterly sophomoric nature of your claim of many “hard working” (and, presumably, honest) illegals. You cannot demonstrate that claim for even three of them, much less millions. We know for a fact that they are all criminals, repeat criminals. The rest is sheer speculation and propaganda. I regularly correspond with human resource professionals who have been virtually forced into trafficking in illegals by GOVERNMENT policy. They see hundreds of them weekly. It is their assessment that the average work ethic of illegals is much worse than our native workforce, but they can work for much, much less because their paycheck is subsidised by government assistance checks; free housing, free medical care, free education for their children, food stamps. All it requires is to repeat the magic trick that got them the job to begin with: falsified identification.
We cannot make policy based on blind assumptions about a group of people whose only common denominator is that they are all criminals. Probably many of them are hard working, just as very many of them are drug dealers and murderers and, more than a few, rapists of pre-pubescent children. But we are not talking, here about their labors, drugs, or rapes, we are talking about their immigration and all of it is against the law, and unless we don’t want to have immigration law at all any more, we need to enforce our laws instead of capitulating to the will of criminals. Who, then, would respect our laws? Every nation in the world has immigration law. Mexico has some of the harshest.
“…We could easily ask you to provide documentation…for…12 million illegal immigrants…”
I’ve never tried to establish number. Estimates (and seriously documented ones) run as high as 30 million. But it is usually the Open Borders/Amnesty crowd, like McCain, Giuliani and Romney, that make something of the numbers- to suggest that the sheer size makes law enforcement impractical –all without reason or argument.
We do not need arrest records to know that illegal immigrants are law breakers because they are by definition. If they are not then they are not illegal immigrants and they may stay with my blessing.
“…if they didn’t feel they were sufficiently hard-working people in relation to the pay they received.”
Businesses hire illegal immigrants because they can pay them less than legal Americans for the same work. That is not “need” to which you refer. It is greed: “An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth” - American Heritage
I am not aware of any “illegal immigrant stings.” It is not necessary to set up a “sting,” because Illegals and employers both flaunt the law openly as a direct result of almost two decades of willful nonfeasance in office by American Presidents.
“…any immigrant who is convicted of entering our country illegally should NEVER be allowed to become a citizen. However, having a work permit is a different matter.”
Why would they care if they can become a citizen or not if they get virtually all the benefits of citizenship anyway?
If you believe in the rule of law, then you must believe that a punishment must be adequate to deter the crime. If thieves can steal $100 and only be fined $50, it is the same as legalizing theft (but taxing it to benefit government). If you make illegal entry a fined misdemeanor and make the reward for it residency, there will, shortly, be 100 million unskilled Mexicans on our welfare rolls. That will sink the economy. Period.
“Our immigration policy has been a failure.”
Our laws are not the problem. Our executive branch’s extreme irresponsibility has been the problem. Our executive foreign policy for North America has been designed, not by Congress, but entirely outside of law, by the same people in each administration since Reagan, the ones now pushing amnesty.
“We clearly have not been allowing anywhere near the amount of legal workers into our country that we need - supply/demand has shown that.”
You betray a certain economic ignorance here. If wages in any market are $10 (per hour) for a certain skill and workers suddenly are available at $7, how much demand is there? Enough to make each worker who gets $10 unemployed. If, then, there come workers who can provide that skill at $5, how much demand is there? The $7 workers will ALL be displaced. Does that process prove that the $5 or the $7 were “needed”? Of course not! No more than the desire of the $10 worker to get $20 means supply and demand have proven he “needs” it.
The wild card of this argument is the socialist giveaways to illegals. As long as we open the doors to our social programs to any who wish to come they will come without end. As long as they come and will work for less than our current workforce, there will be “demand.” If we could sustain such a program we could empty out Africa into the U.S. They would come for $2 an hour or $1. Does “supply and demand,” then prove we need them? Already, in the south, they are closing down hospitals who cannot supply all the government-mandated giveaways and we have only begun to tap into the Western hemisphere.
“The export of upwards of 10 to 12 million illegal immigrants would be a catastrophic shock to the economy…”
It would, obviously, be no more catastrophic than the importing of them has been. But this time it would be a beneficial shock. Every American would get richer. Read this: 14 Reasons to deport illegal aliens
Your example, claiming to illustrate the “need” for an illegal workforce, instead, demonsrates the real problem: Socialist Wage Laws, unfair multilateral trade agreements that violate American Sovereignty (empowering defacto cartels) and, perhaps most egregiously, The despots who have created the great Environmentalist Scams to seize our nation, our wealth and our freedom.
It is strange to me that, rather than address those causes, you suggest the disenfranchisement of our own workforce and our own taxpayers, by importing a subsidised class of foreign criminals.