Less than a majority, but still a significant portion have desirable skills and characteristics. They are prepared to contribute to a hard working moral society. We do not necessarily improve the country by excluding them arbitrarily while admitting less desirable candidates simply because they stood in line.
Close the boarders so that the population of illegals is a controlled set, then determine those that will be invited to stay based on a strict set of requirements. Those that are invited to stay are done so with the knowledge that they are not eligible for handouts or any benefits other than those they earn going forward.
Such as breaking our laws and displacing our workers?
They are prepared to contribute to a hard working moral society.
By breaking our laws and displacing our workers?
We do not necessarily improve the country by excluding them arbitrarily.
I know its out of vogue but what is arbitrary about enforcing of immigration laws?
Those that are invited to stay are done so with the knowledge that they are not eligible for handouts or any benefits other than those they earn going forward.
But they are eligible, thats the point.
Tell you what, control the border, get unemployment down to 4%, get every municipality, town, city, every state and the federal government to stop giving them benefits and then we can have a actual discussion of granting them legal status.
Habitual law-breakers contribute to the moral breakdown of a society.
We do not necessarily improve the country by excluding them arbitrarily while admitting less desirable candidates simply because they stood in line.
Hogwash. What, pray tell, makes law abiding applicants less desirable than those who ignore the law?
Close the boarders so that the population of illegals is a controlled set, then determine those that will be invited to stay based on a strict set of requirements.
By party registration perhaps? What makes you think that you would be able to come up with criteria that won't get you sued for discrimination? You're out to lunch.