I'm saying it's a different number. Saying "people here illegally will work for below minimum wage and don't need Obamacare contributions so your goods can be cheaper" is an economic statement, sure, but it would also have applied to slavery.
And that would've been a reasonable point, if people here had made that argument, but the person you first responded to only pointed out that the war on immigrants is inflationary, and that was also what I supported.
It's reasonably to argue that the way illegal migrants are used as cheap labour is a problem, but that doesn't alter the economic reality of the effect reducing it has.
You then need to choose whether you're willing to take that cost and/or whether you instead want to remove the ability of employers to exploit these workers this way.
> It doesn't matter if you think this change is good or bad, it will necessarily have economic knock-on effects and you need to decide if those are good or bad, and if bad if they are worth it.
Which sounds like morality is irrelevant, and only economic utility matters.
