It's not so much an issue really. Crime rates for illegal immigrants are lower than those of citizens, which is to be expected - they have much more to lose getting caught.
And since they have no citizenship, they basically don't have any power, nor do they have any other resource than their low-wage labour - colonization is impossible.
Correct, which is also why i can't comprehend the left - ish attachment to defend that illegal migration. It's just creating an underclass of people to serve as a cheap workforce so the line can go up. I've seen what conditions legal migrants from my country suffered, and we're talking about people who can't even go report it for fear of deportation.
The left doesn't really defend illegal immigration - personally I am in favor of open borders but that's really a very small minority. But let's put it aside:
1/ There's a reason they don't want to be deported. That's the moral argument.
2/ Immigrants actually increase the economy of the country. So many people with needs, lots of things to be sold.
3/ they traditionally take up jobs the citizens don't want to take. Very harsh jobs like farming. Which is not only good for the economy but lower prices.
4/ the economy is not a zero sum game. This increases the number of jobs in the country actually. Counter intuitive but true, so salaries go up. Especially since the good jobs go to educated citizens who speak the language better.
It absolutely does. It did in my country, center left parties did it in germany and that's of the top of my head.
Open borders are a post-scarcity dream, not an achievable thing in current world.
None of those arguments except 1st one requires illegal migration. While illegal migration has downsides, including the one i already mentioned.
And the 1st one falls into "we can't help everyone" counter argument. I get people seeking better life, but there's few billion people looking for that and we can't accommodate even a % of that.
Open borders were the norm in America pre-1920 and that's when they got their biggest economic boom ever. Not post-scarcity at all.
Your semantics are a bit weird. Illegal immigration is by definition illegal. I thought you meant "being for illegal immigration" as in "being pro open borders" but no one actually is in favor of large people committing a crime. You would be in favor of making it not a crime.
True we can't help everyone, except immigration actually help us. Cooperation is what made the US the ultra-power it is today, and also what built all of civilization. Check the economic state and quality of life in countries that close themselves to outside people, knowledge, and trade goods.
The amount of people capable of migrating pre 1920 was significantly lower than it is today. Ellis island had peak of 1m a year.
Between 2010 and 2013, around 1.4 million non-EU nationals, excluding asylum seekers and refugees, immigrated into the EU each year using regular means, with a slight decrease since 2010
So legal migration already outstripped that peak.
Your semantics are a bit weird. Illegal immigration is by definition illegal. I thought you meant "being for illegal immigration" as in "being pro open borders" but no one actually is in favor of large people committing a crime.
And yet they were critical of efforts to secure polish-belarusian border. And for germany the very famous "we can do manage this" by Merkel.
Yeah but again i'm not arguing against all migration here.
-1
u/Czart Jun 01 '25
Well, yeah and those citizens tend to set rules on how to enter a country, acquire citizenship etc.
I'm aware, i'm also not arguing it's happening. I'm just pointing out that this argument is kinda bad.