Dick...I see the argument that illegals work cheaper, and that raising the minimum wage would 'probably' cause more Americans to seek 'those' jobs...(I am not totally sure it would make a huge difference. Stoop labor in fields? You sure? How much would you think it would take to make a significant number of un-employed Americans to pick tomatoes in S. Cal.?)

So...assume we do raise it a bunch, and lots of US show up and displace THEM--where do 'they' go? "Oh, shucks...can't get hired, back to Mexico, I guess." Can you see THAT happening? Do we make all 8-12 Million legal like Ron seems to be suggesting? Then who gets the jobs? Do they toss a coin for it? And if we make 12 million legal, what about the next 5-6-9 million who see even HIGHER wages beckoning in "the land of plenty"?

I'm sorry, but that policy and plan looks like perpetual motion to me. What have I missed? Where is the part of "raise the wages" and "make illegals legal" that sets ANY limits? Would that not do as I said and just allow the 'critical mass' to be larger and raise prices as well as the wages that are creating the critical mass?

At some point, we have to look at the bottom line and ask....how many immigrants can we absorb? Never mind how we did it in 1823 or 1904 and "what this country was founded on"...as John In Kansas says "that argument is specious"....what will WORK now and not cause worse problems later?

Imagine a much smaller population...say on a little island one mile square...and a group of 14 castaways who find plenty to eat--for 14; maybe even for 27....and with care, maybe 73. Then an island nearby finds them and sees "the grass is greener" and immigrants...ummm..'refugees' start arriving. How many can they absorb and how do they decide?

.....well, there are two ways to look at awkward situations. One is to set a rigid set of 'principles' that say we MUST be welcoming and flexible, and another that says we have to set quotas, boundaries, and limits in some fair & practical way. The sad thing is, 'fair' is not always pleasant. Someone does not always get as much as they want.

I could invent metaphors for hours about dividing limited resources among growing populations, but...really....simple math should make all my extra typing unnecessary. I do NOT like the implications of what I see, and I see NO current solutions that are either easy OR reasonable.

So...tell me what I have missed. Do NOT tell me about precedent or obligation or some game of musical chairs where no matter when the music stops, someone doesn't find a seat. Just tell me what will work.