Well, your pro illegal agenda leanings are really starting to come out now. But you're an up and comer huh? I haven't heard the ridiculous 'breaking into a sovereign country is nothing more than a misdemeanor' lately. How many misdemeanors do you know of that are punishable by deportation?

We've tried many times to make breaking into our sovereign country a felony, but the libtard Democrats keep it from passing. The libtard Democrats don't want to turn away any illegal alien future Democratic voters if amnestied.

You could very well be just another activist in Calderon's 100 million dollar campaign to soften up the American sheeple toward the illegal Mexican invasion. Calderon DEFINITELY doesn't want any of these illegal Mexican scabs back in Mexico. He wants all of these illegal Mexican scabs to stay in the US, so activists like you are dreaming up ridiculous schemes for letting these illegal Mexican scabs stay.

You may have mistaken my pro-federalist enthusiasm for market friendly public policy for a "pro-illegal" agenda. In my view, a market friendly work visa scheme would solve the issue of "illegals" since they would have a market based incentive to become legal or enter legally.

If they are legal, why does it concern you where they are from?

Simply becoming an evil socialist empire and using police-state tactics will not solve socio-economic issues involving disparity.

Yeah, it's quite a coincidence that your "pro federalist enthusiastic agenda" so closely parallels a Calderon approved pro illegal agenda, isn't it? Hopefully you aren't fooling too many.

Obviously, all you are attempting to do is to give non-deportable legal status to the 20 plus million mostly illegal Mexican scabs that have broken into the US. EVeryone realizes this.

Only Democratic politicians or every pro illegal would be willing to give legal status to illegal Mexican scabs who have broken in, mainly because they view them as future Democratic voters if amnestied.

It sets a bad precedent to reward illegal behavior with legal status. And then, again, there will be all of those millions of new illegal Mexican scabs as well as all of those millions of other illegals from all over the world that will be breaking in and paying paltry fine to receive legal status too.

As I said, definitely a Calderon approved crackpot scheme to keep all of those illegal Mexican scabs from being deported back to Mehheeko. Mehheeko does't want the illegal Mexican scabs either.

What is it about solving your current "illegal" problem, with a market friendly work visa scheme that can lower our tax burden, and lower public sector and private sector costs, that you have issues with? If it is merely, with illegals and that form of illegality, then there is a market friendly solution to that problem.

The amusement park sector already makes a profit with that business model.

Well, it's not even market friendly. It's just another el presidente calderon approved scheme from the pro illegal lobby to keep 20 plus million illegal mostly Mexican scabs from being deported back to mexico, who dumped them on the US and doesn't want them. It doesn't lower our tax burden or other costs. It also encourages more illegal immigration from that next 10% of the entire Mexican population, and the rest of the world, to break in, pay a palty fine, and get non-deportable legal status. Hairbrained.

It does absolutely nothing to stop the illegal Mexican invastion, now does it? It would creat a tsunami of new illegal break ins from Mexico and the rest of the world. Hey, break in, pay a paltry fine, and get to stay and work in the US legally, keep paying annual paltry fines and stay in the US for the rest of your life, or until a Democratic Congress and WH can engineer an amnesty for "who really knows how many future Democratic voters".

What do you consider market friendly? I consider a proved business model that is currently making a profit for the amusement park sector to be market friendly.

We wouldn't have an illegal immigration problem with a market friendly work visa scheme since they would be fined and become legal. A fine would lower public sector costs. A fee for obtaining a market friendly work visa could lower our tax burden. Incorporating forms of insurance could lower public and private sector costs. Amnesty will not do that. Naturalization and labor market participation are two different issues.

Why would anyone want to incur the expense of a fine if they could apply for a market friendly work visa through normal channels?

Well the 20 plus million illegal mostly Mexican scabs already here would have to pay their paltry fines to become legal to begin with in your Calderon approved scheme. These 20 plus million suddenly became non deportable which is what Calderon wants. Mexico dumped these poverty reject illegal Mexican scabs on the US and DOESN'T want them back. That's where paid activists like you come in. You know, try to soften the American sheeple on the illegal Mexican invasion.

So then that next 10% of the entire Mexican population that Calderon wants to dump on the US plus that 1 billion from around the world apply for your market friendly work visas. Although the US gov is corrupt and incompetent they just can't accept that volume of "marker friendly work visas". Not to fear. Your rules are that you can just break in, pay a paltry fine and become legal right? Talk about opening the floodgates.

I thought your problem was with illegals and that form of illegality? Simply paying a fine would make them legal. Problem solved.

With a market friendly work visa, we wouldn't be getting as many, less educated, labor market participants since it would be easy to apply for such a visa. With such a market friendly public policy scheme, labor market participants who are more market friendly (including communication market), would be applying for a work visa. Many more would probably speak English than they do now since they could make more money in the US if they speak English more fluently. Many of the people you are complaining about now would probably be better off moving up in their local economy if the more educated decide to try the US labor market for awhile.

What is wrong with one billion people applying for a market friendly work visa? A market friendly work visa is not a guarantee of a job. Imagine the revenue that we could be generating to offset public sector costs. With that revenue, we could be lowering our tax burden and other costs.

How much revenue will a public policy of prohibition bring in to lower our tax burden, and other public and private sector costs?

You appear to be one of those pro illegal open border activists that even when you're obviously debunked you come right back with the same pro illegal Calderon approved propaganda agenda. You know, as if you haven't been totally debunked.

I am the one advocating eliminating illegals and that form of illegality through the use of market friendly public policy that could lower our tax burden and other public and private sector costs.

Since when has prohibition ever worked, in the history of the US?