[Luis Gonzalez]

Not enough kelly.

A miniscule increase in the cost of harvesting lettuce and tomatoes alone will erase your $20 billion, I know that seems like a lot of money to you, but it isn't.

Then you'll deal with the increase in wages for the menial jobs of cleaning rooms in hotels, washing dishes, tending to the golf courses, and before you know it, saving the taxpayers $20 billion have cost the public $200 billion.

[kellynla]

"A miniscule increase in the cost of harvesting lettuce and tomatoes alone will erase your $20 billion, I know that seems like a lot of money to you, but it isn't.

Then you'll deal with the increase in wages for the menial jobs of cleaning rooms in hotels, washing dishes, tending to the golf courses, and before you know it, saving the taxpayers $20 billion have cost the public $200 billion."
And you have documentation? And just how do you think we managed before 1970??? American family farmers planted and harvested for hundreds of years without the help of illegals, thank you...I just don't know how we managed without??? ROFLMAO

[brownie]

Then you'll deal with the increase in wages for the menial jobs of cleaning rooms in hotels, washing dishes, tending to the golf courses, and before you know it, saving the taxpayers $20 billion have cost the public $200 billion.

This is pure, speculative, b.s. The rest of the country (not on the border states) fills those jobs with people legally in the country. If your argument had any validity, then why isn't it true up here in the north?

Moreover, if your argument someone turned out to be true, the market can take care of it. If we actually enforce our immigration laws, and find that our labor pool is insufficient, we can then allow for inreased legal immigration. The fact that pro-illegal immigration people do not want to allow for this solution demonstrates that they know their "expense" argument is b.s. If they were really confident of their argument, they would allow immigration laws to be enforced, which in turn would show the rest of us how wrong we are - allowing for increased legal immigration from Mexico. The fact that pro-illegal immigration people are never willing to test their theory shows they know their theory is not true. Moreover, if some increased cost of goods is the price America has to pay for increased border security, then I think most Americans are willing to pay that price. That is a market question. My lettuce becomes a little more expensive? Fine, I buy a little less lettuce. The farmers have to come up with more efficient ways to harvest. Etc. The market will solve those problems. The solution is not to allow more and more illegal immigration, which results in more and more drain on PUBLIC RESOURCES - i.e., public schools, medicare, welfare, WIC, public housing assistance, etc. All Bush's bill will do is give more incentive for Mexicans to enter the U.S. illegal therefore increasing illegal immigration, which leads to increase in crime and increased entitlement spending, not to mention more socialist democratic voters (let's not forget that Mexico is a failed 3rd world nation b/c it is communist/socialist - therefore, it's people are likely to vote for any and all socialist programs). If you really believe that enforcing immigration laws would harm the economy, you would want it to happen, b/c then the rest of us would come to our senses and want an open border.