I
Ituyu
Guest
.
To me the issue has more to do with being “Poor” than being “legal” or “illegal”. What would change in terms of our costs if those in the “illegal” category were moved to the “legal” category? This is a burden that society must undertake as our economic system is not perfect. That is why we need to have sane policies that allow us to permit those we need into the country. That will serve the purpose of reducing our costs related to “illegal” entry because most people concerned with survival and the needs of their families would opt for the legal option IF IT WERE AVAILABLE, an option denied for no good reason… It is the safest and least expensive route for those on BOTH sides of the border. It should have been available for MOST and should not have been available for SOME. It would be much more effective to spend our enforcement resources on the “SOME” who would represent those who we do not want here. If we fill our needs with the people we WANT then the demand for their labor will decline dramatically as the laws of Supply and Demand have always worked. Once natural market forces are in balance, most of those coming here for a better life and without legal recourse would have no incentive to come here for jobs and that would allow us to zero in on the real threat along our border. However, I’m not naive enough to think that our efforts along the Mexican border, even if it were 100% effective, would make a terrorist threat any less likely because national security and “illegal immigration” do not have a cause an effect relationship. Terrorists do not come here to have a better life or to better support their children. They are not concerned with medical care. For the most part they have the resources to meet their needs and to gain “LEGAL” entry. For the most part they are educated or have the financing to meet all of their needs. And, if there are those who can’t afford to come “legally”, our northern border is far safer to cross, more porous and therefore a greater terrorist concern than our southern border.
To me the issue has more to do with being “Poor” than being “legal” or “illegal”. What would change in terms of our costs if those in the “illegal” category were moved to the “legal” category? This is a burden that society must undertake as our economic system is not perfect. That is why we need to have sane policies that allow us to permit those we need into the country. That will serve the purpose of reducing our costs related to “illegal” entry because most people concerned with survival and the needs of their families would opt for the legal option IF IT WERE AVAILABLE, an option denied for no good reason… It is the safest and least expensive route for those on BOTH sides of the border. It should have been available for MOST and should not have been available for SOME. It would be much more effective to spend our enforcement resources on the “SOME” who would represent those who we do not want here. If we fill our needs with the people we WANT then the demand for their labor will decline dramatically as the laws of Supply and Demand have always worked. Once natural market forces are in balance, most of those coming here for a better life and without legal recourse would have no incentive to come here for jobs and that would allow us to zero in on the real threat along our border. However, I’m not naive enough to think that our efforts along the Mexican border, even if it were 100% effective, would make a terrorist threat any less likely because national security and “illegal immigration” do not have a cause an effect relationship. Terrorists do not come here to have a better life or to better support their children. They are not concerned with medical care. For the most part they have the resources to meet their needs and to gain “LEGAL” entry. For the most part they are educated or have the financing to meet all of their needs. And, if there are those who can’t afford to come “legally”, our northern border is far safer to cross, more porous and therefore a greater terrorist concern than our southern border.