I dare say that immigration of poor uneducated Hispanics has devastated some urban school districts, which in turn has decimated urban neighborhoods.

But no one talks about the economic impact of this.

My libertarian tendencies make me recoil at this idea. I don't believe it's the place of the federal government to dictate to business who they can and can't hire. It's the government's job to manage immigration and NOT the private sector's. On any other subject you'd probably agree with this statement about the government telling the private sector what to do, and that's what's funny to me with conservatives and immigration.

They don't have to stay under the table. The reason there are illegals is because it is very difficult to nearly impossible for lower skilled workers to enter the US legally, especially from certain countries like Mexico. If they were to fix that and have reasonable legal immigration allowances, much of the illegal problem would go away.

Even if they stay under the table, it appears they still yield more benefits to society than the take away, even by the most conservative estimates.

But you are dodging the question why we even should promote an economy with unskilled labor. I believe we should NOT promote that.

that doesn't make any sense to me. How is it even possible to avoid having lower skilled jobs in the economy? Who will wash dishes at your favorite restaurant, take care of landscaping, do your dry cleaning, stock shelves at the grocery store...? I'm not making fun of your argument, but these jobs aren't going away and are needed. It's good honest work.

Plus, limiting the labor supply by not allowing recent immigrants to have an entry point into the economy is exactly what you would want to do to "promote" those kinds of jobs. Think about it. Less labor supply for work that needs to be done means business will have no choice but to pay more for those jobs and make them more attractive (and raise your prices to pay for it). You're actually arguing for the the exact opposite. If you want to promote the pay scale and prestige of a job then you create barriers to entry.

Virtually all reputable progressive mainstream economists support Hillary. I haven't seen a single one back Bernie yet.

I am actually in favor of limiting labor supply of low skilled jobs. I believe technology will eventually replace all of those jobs.

It would happen anyway. Let the free market figure it out. I don't think there is any reason for the government to make the call on how and when the economy decides to automate certain jobs because being the government they'll probably screw it up somehow. None of this changes the curious fact that conservatives don't trust the free market in some things even though they pay it so much lip service otherwise. I personally think for most people it's a case of being uncomfortable with the social/cultural changes immigrants make on the country, so they try to find less emotional and economic reasons to explain their opposition to it. As Chinocoug already pointed out, the data currently shows that the level of illegal immigration right now is the lowest it has been in years. When the jobs aren't available, folks don't come, just as you wouldn't move to another state if you didn't think you could get a job there.

The market has a self-correcting mechanism. It appears lost on Archaea as he keeps on thinking like an engineer on this issue.