Sorry, but lol at underclass. You need to lay off the Marx for a bitTurquoise wrote:
Oh, I'm not suggesting we will go the deportation route. Quite the contrary, actually. I totally agree that amnesty and these in-state for illegals policies will likely become more common.JohnG@lt wrote:
As was said previously, unless we're planning on deporting millions of people any law enacted will be viewed as nothing more than a scofflaw (the same as our current immigration policies are). Face it, the children of illegals, the ones that are here legally, and those that have become naturalized over time are a huge voting bloc and only growing bigger. Do you really think a politician will put prudence before his own election concerns? Good luck with that.
What I was saying is that it is possible to do the deportation. It can be done, and in the long run, it would be the best move. Securing our borders is a good idea, but the problem is that the upfront costs are so high and the political collateral is so heavy that yes, no politician would bother supporting it. That doesn't mean it's impossible to implement, however. It also doesn't mean that it wouldn't work.
In all likelihood, this issue will become a moot point in about 20 to 30 years, when the underclass is so large that it will be difficult to call ourselves First World anymore.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat