That would be an interesting question if we were answering the purely academic question of "who's a better human being, immigrants or natives?"
I fully agree that on average, the American underclass is terrible and most immigrants are better people. As evidence of this, witness all the left wing types who seem to believe that the American underclass would rather sit around on welfare than do the work that illegal immigrants will no longer be doing.
But that's not the question we're asking. The question we're asking is whether a new immigrant - a person we have the choice of accepting or rejecting - will be a benefit to society or a parasite upon it? Many natives suck, but we're stuck with them. Does that mean we are forever obligated to import more people who suck only slightly less?
(For the record, I think the best solution is to end the welfare state and open our borders. I'm just arguing with bad reasoning.)
>As evidence of this, witness all the left wing types who seem to believe that the American underclass would rather sit around on welfare than do the work that illegal immigrants will no longer be doing.
Also if America were actually such a terrible place for the underclass (because racism, etc) wouldn't the rational left-wing response be to try to get the underclass to emigrate somewhere where they might get "fair" treatment?
> witness all the left wing types who seem to believe that the American underclass would rather sit around on welfare than do the work that illegal immigrants will no longer be doing.
What? Isn't the "welfare queen" a right-wing talking point?
It's a common left wing talking point too: we need to import more Mexicans because "they do jobs that Americans just won't do". See the comment just above mine, for instance. This talking point is correct and I can back it up with Census and BLS stats if you like.
Admittedly, it's only right wingers who bring that talking point up when discussing welfare.
I fully agree that on average, the American underclass is terrible and most immigrants are better people. As evidence of this, witness all the left wing types who seem to believe that the American underclass would rather sit around on welfare than do the work that illegal immigrants will no longer be doing.
But that's not the question we're asking. The question we're asking is whether a new immigrant - a person we have the choice of accepting or rejecting - will be a benefit to society or a parasite upon it? Many natives suck, but we're stuck with them. Does that mean we are forever obligated to import more people who suck only slightly less?
(For the record, I think the best solution is to end the welfare state and open our borders. I'm just arguing with bad reasoning.)