I’m confused by the left’s stance on this.
I get that the goal of amnesty for immigrants currently in the country is because of a desire to be compassionate and avoid the pain (both political and real) of splitting up communities.
But, why the opposition to stopping illegal immigration (e.g. “the wall”)?
Is it:
1. Because the costs of stopping it outweigh the benefits of being able to filter all immigrants?
2. They are actually opposed to filtering immigrants and prefer moving towards open borders.
3. They are concerned that if illegal immigration stops legal immigration limits will not be increased. This would lead to less immigrants in the country which is bad.
Theoretically there should be an impenetrable border and then we decide who does or doesn’t get to live in the country.
Then you would also increase the # of immigrants accepted each year.
Your thoughts?
^Day 121/90 158 words
Konrad Kopczynski 