The Cost Shift of Illegal Immigration: Which would you prefer?

Edit for clarification: Illegal immigrants are an exploited underclass that derive their benefits from the public sector treasury rather than from the private sector. This is the exact opposite of the citizenry, which acrues wealth and benefits from their employers or from self-employment while as a group taking less in public assistance benefits such as medicare, welfare, food stamps, prisons, and schools.

In other words, whether we deport them or legalize them, we will feel the economic impact either way. Legalized immigrants will demand higher wages and benefits and will consequently diminish their own value as unfairly cheap labor. They will thus become irrelevent to the unscrupulous employer, who will subsequently fire them and higher illegal migrant labor in their place. This shows, more than anything else, that the argument is about employers, not race nor the legal status of migrant workers.

There is an economic cost and value of an exploited underclass. Should we choose to prosecute employers, we will terminate the exploitation. The result will be a shift in economic costs to the individual American. We will pay for labor via public funds or via private funds.

By eliminating illegal immigration we would likely see an increase in certain agricultural products and labor services. On the other hand, we would also see a dramatic increase in the quality of education, a decrease in traffic congestion, a decrease in crime, a decrease in medical costs, etc.

So which do you prefer: Option (a) or option (b)?

Option (a): I prefer lower costs in: Vegetables and fruit, restaurant prices, housekeeping, janitorial services, landscaping, home construction, and other unskilled/lowskilled labor. I believe that the increased cost of these products and services would contribute towards inflation and also make the United States less competitive in the global economy. I am willing to accept higher crime rates, crowded prisons, crowded classrooms, congested freeways, higher taxes to support increased demand for social services, and drastically higher medical costs due to the tendency for the poor to go uninsured.

Option (b): I prefer less-congested roadways, lower crime, less gang violence, uncrowded prisons, classrooms with 20 students each instead of 30, lower taxes due to reduced social services, and drastically reduced medical costs. I believe that the inflation will not rise dramatically since competition in the capitalist economy will force employers to keep prices down and companies will either take the hit in profits somewhat to stay competitive or they will innovate (such as new farm equipment) to reduce costs. Even if inflation does occur, I am willing to pay more for fruits and vegetables, restaurant dinners, fast food, housekeeping, landscaping, and see a general increase in the price of all goods in the United States.

Good options, not at all loaded or presumptious, it's good with an objective and openminded debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sjakihata

Good options, not at all loaded or presumptious, it's good with an objective and openminded debate.

---

Are you serious or sarcastic? I honestly can't tell. I reworded a couple things slightly to ensure I wasn't being too jaded. I have an obvious bias, but I am attempting to present an objective question here.

These options are based on the economic relationship of unskilled/lowskilled workers to costs in both the public and private sectors.

I like the typo in the poll question ~:)

Would you mind if I try to correct it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ser Clegane

I like the typo in the poll question ~:)

Would you mind if I try to correct it?

---

Whoops! lol! Thanks.

Very neutral question, phrased diplomatically. Well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Very neutral question, phrased diplomatically. Well done.

---

When Lemur and Sjakihata are praising my poll options, than it must be sarcasm. How would you guys suggest I rephrase it? Or do you disagree with the economic impacts of millions of illegal immigrants?


edit #2: moved the clarification to the first post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinus Arma

Are you serious or sarcastic?

---

Im the same as Lemur, you figure it out.

Seems like two reasonable options to me. I choose B.

I choose B, if for no other reason than the implication that follows where we have lawful immigration and make at least an honest attempt at controlling who enters our country.

I think you've done a good job of nailing down the illegal immigration dilemna. Right now, we're all subsidizing companies that make use of illegal labor. I'd rather pay a few bucks more at the grocery store- or otoh, if certain businesses arent competitive enough to get by without a national labor subsidy, maybe they should just go out of business. :wink: