To be fair, while Fox and the right are demonizing Sanctuary cities (I live in one btw), the left is just as off base by claiming that such cities are simply treating illegals like human beings. They are not. The truth, as usual, lies somewhere in the middle.

Letting someone go who has committed an immigration crime is unheard of in many countries. You are actually releasing the people you want to deport out of your country and, in most cases, you are doing it simply to be sympathetic to your voting base (in Austin, extremely liberal).

@Mordhaus

Except that the United States has for many decades relied on undocumented immigrants as a source of low-wage labor to do the jobs most Americans don't want. Now all of a sudden, after using their cheap labor to keep failing American agriculture and manufacturing alive you just want to yank the carpet out from under them?

Most of the people now up in arms about the "scourge" of illegal immigrants have HIRED illegals at one time or another (in the case of Trump, I'm sure he still employs dozens of hundreds). The US Government could simply have issued more work visas and enforced the rules more closely, but why do that when your buddies can charge sub-minimum wage and stiff their employees on the paycheck whenever they feel like it without fear of repercussion? Instead they wink and nod, punishing the immigrants occasionally, but rarely (if ever) touching the businesses who KNEW they were employing illegals.

It's like ignoring the drug dealers and traffickers for decades, then suddenly deciding drug USERS are a scourge who must be punished.

If we are going to start pointing fingers at countries, almost every single country in the world has used immigrant labor to keep itself functional. You can't single out the USA for relying on it, and as I mentioned, the USA is far from being the only country starting to realize that illegal immigration has more negatives than positives.

I have never hired an illegal. It is possible that they US government should increase work visas, I would not care as long as people were here legally. This also isn't 'The Jungle', I am pretty sure that Upton Sinclair would laugh if you compared the living conditions and quality of life that our current immigrants have compared to then.

I disagree with your example, this is not a situation where the people did not have other options. They could have applied to come here legally, choosing not to do so because it is far easier to ignore the law does not make them addicts to a chemical substance.

You conflate illegal immigrants with immigrants.

Learn the difference and your first paragraph is pure nonsense. Also, what support do you have for the conclusion that illegal immigration has more negatives than positives? Illegal immigrants in general have a lower crime rate, support businesses, they work hard and pay taxes (which is more than can be said for Trump). Give me some data, ANY data to support your claim.

They "could" have come legally, you say. Well, no, that's the thing, most of them couldn't have. So that's a straight-up lie on your part. Couple that with the incentives the US government gives them to come illegally and why wouldn't they come? Yes, incentives, if the govt doesn't want them they need to take away the jobs, instead they pass rules to protect businesses that hire illegal immigrants.

The rest of your "argument" is mostly nonsense, so I won't even bother with it. WTF does Upton Sinclair have to do with it?

I hate to say it, but @Drachen_Jager has a point. Most countries do rely on immigrant labor, but we specifically and intentionally rely on illegal immigrant labor. Legal immigrants have the protection of labor laws, you can't work them 14 hours a day for $3 an hour with no overtime then stiff them if you feel like it, but you can do that to illegals, it's still better than what they can get at home usually.

While you haven't hired illegals, you have benefited from their cheap labor if you've bought agricultural products from America. I'm afraid we have not decided the cheap labor isn't worth the risk yet.....at best about 45% of us voted that way, which is as good a measure as any. I think if we do eliminate illegal laborers we'll see a backlash over the price hikes that must follow from many of the same people screaming for a wall today.

While some do use border jumping as an alternative to a difficult, long application process doesn't mean that most border jumpers would be accepted...criminal records, illiteracy, homelessness, and desperation can make that process impossible or many. Some have other options, many don't.

Not sure what you mean about being addicts. Addiction is not the only motivation out there, you know....nor is it the only excuse tolerated for inappropriate behavior.

The addicts comment was in refute to his original comment. Since I am Texas, most of the produce I get is from Mexico anyway. It's far cheaper to source it from there.

No, I didn't confuse anything. Almost every single country benefits from 'illegal' immigrants as well as regular ones. France, for example, has thousands of illegal immigrants from mostly Islamic countries that provide services to it's mostly aging native population. We benefit no more and no less than any other nation from illegal immigration, as @newtboy mentioned, if you import food products or grow them locally you probably are benefiting from illegal immigration.

As far as your evidence, I hope this will suffice as 'some':

Steven A. Camarota, PhD, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, in a Jan. 6, 2015 article, "Unskilled Workers Lose Out to Immigrants," available at nytimes.com, stated:

"There are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country and we also admit over a million permanent legal immigrants each year, leading to enormous implications for the U.S. labor market. Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that there are some 58 million working-age (16 to 65) native-born Americans not working — unemployed or out of the labor market entirely. This is roughly 16 million more than in 2000. Equally troubling, wages have stagnated or declined for most American workers. This is especially true for the least educated, who are most likely to compete with immigrants (legal and illegal).

Anyone who has any doubt about how bad things are can see for themselves at the bureau's website, which shows that, as of November, there were 1.5 million fewer native-born Americans working than in November 2007, while 2 million more immigrants (legal and illegal) were working. Thus, all net employment gains since November 2007 have gone to immigrants."

Jan. 6, 2015 - Steven A. Camarota, PhD

George J. Borjas, PhD, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University, in a Sep./Oct. 2016 article, "Yes, Immigration Hurts American Workers," available at politico.com, stated:

"[A]nyone who tells you that immigration doesn't have any negative effects doesn't understand how it really works. When the supply of workers goes up, the price that firms have to pay to hire workers goes down. Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10 percent increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3 percent. Even after the economy has fully adjusted, those skill groups that received the most immigrants will still offer lower pay relative to those that received fewer immigrants.

Both low- and high-skilled natives are affected by the influx of immigrants. But because a disproportionate percentage of immigrants have few skills, it is low-skilled American workers, including many blacks and Hispanics, who have suffered most from this wage dip. The monetary loss is sizable...

We don't need to rely on complex statistical calculations to see the harm being done to some workers. Simply look at how employers have reacted. A decade ago, Crider Inc., a chicken processing plant in Georgia, was raided by immigration agents, and 75 percent of its workforce vanished over a single weekend. Shortly after, Crider placed an ad in the local newspaper announcing job openings at higher wages."

Sep./Oct. 2016 - George J. Borjas, PhD

Vernon M. Briggs, Jr., PhD, Emeritus Professor of Labor Economics at Cornell University, in an Oct. 14, 2010 briefing Report to the US Commission on Civil Rights, "The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers," available at usccr.gov, stated:

"Because most illegal immigrants overwhelmingly seek work in the low skilled labor market and because the black American labor force is so disproportionately concentrated in this same low wage sector, there is little doubt that there is significant overlap in competition for jobs in this sector of the labor market. Given the inordinately high unemployment rates for low skilled black workers (the highest for all racial and ethnic groups for whom data is collected), it is obvious that the major looser [sic] in this competition are low skilled black workers…

It is not just that the availability of massive numbers of illegal immigrants depress wages, it is the fact that their sheer numbers keep wages from rising over time, and that is the real harm experienced by citizen workers in the low skilled labor market."

Oct. 14, 2010 - Vernon M. Briggs Jr., PhD

There are more educated people than I that hold the same opinion, but let me give you an easier to understand, and absolutely true, example. How do I know it is true? When I was a much younger man, I worked for a roofing company. So I lived it.

The company I worked for was owned by a family friend, who had worked for most of his life in the field and had an excellent reputation. However, in the 90's around the time NAFTA was passed and (not related, I hope) illegal immigration spiked in Texas, he began to lose out to other companies. He did some snooping around and found out they were often charging hundreds of dollars less in their estimates than he could possibly offer, at least while still making a profit. He also found out that the two companies that were taking most of his business were staffed with illegal workers, being paid much lower wages than he could give to his legal employees.

Fast forward a year and he was close to declaring bankruptcy. Just like any type of labor where you pay your employees little to nothing comparatively to their compatriots in the same field, you cannot compete fairly. Net result, he was forced to let us go one by one, replacing us with illegals.

Obviously, I moved on, learned a different skill and began to make far more than I would have as a simple laborer. But the fact remains that an entire industry was undermined and radically changed by the inclusion of cheap illegal labor. This will not change if we simply ignore illegal immigration because it is the 'nice' thing to do. What it will accomplish is that young people will slowly find that certain jobs are out of their selection. It also will get worse the more accepted and commonplace illegal immigration becomes. I know for a fact that while I worked at Apple there were entry level support techs that were illegally here. Perhaps you will say that it is a benefit because it would prevent offshoring, but I disagree. What it does is make the working class poorer and doesn't solve the other issues brought about by illegal immigration, such as Emergency Rooms being flooded by people who can't afford insurance. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that it is common to go to the ER and see people stacked like cordwood because they can't refuse patients unless they are a private hospital.

As far as The Jungle, and my statement about it and it's author, I was merely pointing out that as much as you try to put forth that illegal immigrants have a bad life here in the USA, the fact is that we used to treat legal immigrants far worse. Perhaps it was a reach on my part, but it seemed logical at the time.

I doubt we will agree on any of this, but I respect your opinion. I live in a state that has a very large proportion of illegal immigrants, and while you are correct that they are generally not a criminal negative to society, they do have severe effects which I think you are overlooking. I do think that legal immigration policy needs massive change and businesses that exploit the almost slave like labor of illegals to make more profit should be punished severely. In the meantime, when we do catch illegals, they should be deported, not protected by a sympathetic politically motivated law enforcement group.

Honestly @Mordhaus, you can't even make up your own mind.

You start off saying "Almost every single country benefits from 'illegal' immigrants" Then you go on to list a bunch of reasons why they hurt the labor market.

True, immigrants drive wages down, especially illegal immigrants. That's part of the point, Right-wing politicians have protected businesses from the fallout, now they want to turn around and pretend to be the "good guys" protecting American jobs.

Americans complain when their McDonalds costs too much and complain when they can't get decent pay for working at McDonalds. Which do you want?

Still, none of that is the immigrants fault. It's the government and the businesses. Punish them.

I'm not sure if I am saying it clearly, so let me attempt to break it down. When I say that a country benefits, I mean the businesses of that country benefit. The economy overall does not.

I don't really care about right wing vs left wing, other than that the left currently doesn't really seem to care about illegal immigration. I don't know why, perhaps they see a large number of possible voters if they can simply legalize everyone. But that is speculation on my part.

As far as Mcdonalds, or other fast food locations, I don't really have an issue if they need to charge a few cents more so that they can pay a living wage. I do care if they hire illegals to keep their prices low.

While it isn't the illegal immigrants fault, they are breaking the law and should be returned to their home countries until such time as either the immigration laws change, or until they apply properly according to the law. Businesses should be held accountable as well. It isn't an either/or equation, you shouldn't get to ignore the law so you can benefit, no matter who you are.

@Mordhaus

The whole benefit thing is a side-track.

To the issue.

They were encouraged to come. They're in the country now. It's cruel and unnecessary to remove them AND probably harmful to business as they're now a part of the operating environment.

So, instead of picking on the poor, helpless people, why not do the sane thing. Offer amnesty, increase penalties and enforcement against companies which employ illegal (non-amnesty) immigrants to discourage future illegal entry. This is a far more elegant solution which doesn't rip families apart or risk seriously damaging the business environment. Also, some of the incentive to hire will fade as the new status quo will be all LEGAL and employers will have to offer benefits and legal wages to all.

That is pretty much the sticking point we will disagree upon. I do not believe they were forced to come, they came to fill a vacuum and because they were looking for a place they saw as a better country to live in. I do not and will not support amnesty for those currently here illegally. They must be returned to their country of origin and apply to live here as per the laws of our country.

Businesses that have profited off the equivalent of sharecropper labor should be punished legally, but the mere removal of their illegal work force will hit them where it hurts, in the pocketbook. I have no sympathy at all for businesses that have exploited illegal labor to run other businesses into the ground, then increased their own profits afterwards.

I do understand your points, but we really are at an impasse on our feelings regarding the issue.

You're extremely disingenuous, you drift into logical fallacies regularly (and apparently by accident). If you're not going to address the meat of the issue honestly, there's just no point.

Nobody ever said they were "forced" this is called the "straw man" fallacy.

American business took advantage of their labor, YOU took advantage of their labor, now that you're done, you just want to throw them away.

I do agree on one point though, there is no further point in debating with you.

I'm not a professional debater, everything I have said has been my honest point of view, and at least I have been fairly civil during our discourse.

In almost every post, you accuse me of trying to spread falsehoods, make claims about my intelligence, and generally come off as accusatory towards me as a person. Like I said, I don't do this professionally and I never took debate in school, so perhaps this is what people do when they are discussing an issue they disagree upon. I simply do not know.

Perhaps I should have referred to encouraged instead of forced, I do not believe they were encouraged specifically to come here. If they had access to a similar country, with a similar standard of living, and with a porous border they might have went there. Again, I don't know.

Yes, businesses in the United States took advantage of their labor to make more profits. How is that my fault? I don't own a business, I don't employ illegals, and I am a common middle class citizen. I can't pick and choose where I shop, where I eat, or other daily lifestyle choices based off of what people businesses are hiring. I am comfortable in my savings, but only the truly upper class elite can try to spend extraordinary amounts of their discretionary income to avoid getting products sourced from places they might disagree with. The sad thing is, at least in my experience, is that those people are far more likely to directly exploit the labor of illegals as nannies, builders, or lawnscapers.

In any case, as I mentioned earlier, I respect your opinions even if I don't share them. Have a wonderful weekend.

What about those illegals escaping certain death or indoctrination into drug gangs before they're 10 years old? Because they entered illegally, you would send them back to near certain death (because leaving was snubbing the drug gangs, and they don't like that)? While most migrate for economic reasons, many also do so for survival.

I do think the issue will continue until employers pay the price instead of just the disposable immigrants.

It's horrible that the conditions are that way. We are at fault also due to our drug policy being what it is. However, until the law changes, I can't support them coming. Now, once they are here, if they can prove that it is almost certain death for them to return, I think they could qualify for refugee status. It is a hard question to answer. I'm not a sociopath, I do have emotions. I believe the law should be blind, though, and should not be influenced by emotion.