JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
nk.net...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"jerryl" wrote in message
news:MnhIh.5146$B7.3412@bigfe9...

Well, my ancestors came over in the late 1800's and early 1900's and had
to jump through all of those hoops before they were allowed in. They had
to have someone here sponsor them. They had to have a place to live and
a job, BEFORE THEY WERE ALLOWED IN. They were not allowed to go on any
welfare or relief systems. If they couldn't support themselves then
their sponsors had to.

Luckily, nothing about the U.S. or Mexico has changed at all since the
late 1800s, so it should be simple to apply identical solutions.
If anything, what has changed ought to make us *more* restrictive than in
the past, not less.


What about our population and the resulting demand for services?

What about it? Demand for services isn't static. Many
services currently done by people could and would be
done by machines. In the 1970s, during an earlier wave
of illegal immigration, I saw formerly fully automated
carwashes from which the washing machinery had been
stripped, and a line of Hispanic workers stood in their
place. It had become cheaper to use people than
machinery. If the labor supply tightened up due to
enforcement of immigration laws, the machinery would
come back.

There are undoubtedly some agricultural functions that
can be achieved either mechanically or by hand labor.
If the labor costs rise a little, from their current
artificially depressed lows, machinery would move in.

Demand for current services does not mean those
services must always be provided. Up through the first
third of the last century, even decidedly "middle"
families in the middle class made extensive use nearly
full-time domestic servants, e.g. maids and cooks. As
better paying opportunities in industry and then
commercial services arose, people abandoned those jobs,
and today only extremely rich families have that kind
of domestic help (even if lots of middle income
families have an occasional cleaner and/or gardener
come to the house.) The country did not tank when the
middle class could no longer afford domestic servants.


I'm not
justifying the situation, just suggesting reasons.

What about overpopulation and a twisted government in a neighboring country?

That's not how I would describe Canada, but I guess
your perception is different.