[Plutarch]

It's interesting that the WSJ would go public and admit this. Sort of pulls the rug out from under the pro-illegal lobby.

Not really. The WSJ is using Borjas to reaffirm that illegals help transfer billions of dollars from lowly hicks to WSJ readers. The WSJ says: "See, illegals are good for us!"

[Sam the Sham]

In the days since this article appeared on the editorial page of the WSJ, no less, I have been waiting for the WSJ to emerge with an editorial explaining how low income American workers actually benefit from 'wage restraint' and how glutting a labor market really has no effect on the price of labor.

None has appeared so far.

Has the WSJ realized that when elites behave like pigs the response is populism ? That a populist third party on immigration and trade could actually emerge on this issue ? Have they realized that shafting Joe Sixpack is a political non starter and this simply will not stand ?