Let me start with what we can agree on: immigration can bring economic benefits and cultural enrichment. I'm not anti-immigration. But the question here is about policy, not principle. Here's why I'm against the current approach: Unchecked immigration depresses wages for low-skilled workers. That's basic supply and demand. When you increase the labor pool without matching demand, wages drop. It's the poorest Americans who feel this first. Social services get strained. Schools, hospitals, housing - these systems have limits. Rapid population growth from immigration outpaces infrastructure. That's not xenophobia, it's math. Assimilation matters. When immigration happens too fast, communities struggle to integrate. That leads to cultural friction and ghettoization, not the melting pot ideal we aim for. I'm for reasonable, managed immigration. But the system we have now prioritizes quantity over quality. That hurts everyone in the long run.

Optimist_Ora brings up Sergey Brin like he's the norm. That's the exception, not the rule. For every Brin, there are thousands of immigrants working low-wage jobs that don't create economic booms. That's fine, but it doesn't offset the costs. Let me break down why your argument misses the mark: The wage suppression issue. You didn't address it. Immigrants do fill jobs, but they also compete with native-born workers in sectors like construction and hospitality. When labor supply jumps, wages stagnate. That's not opinion, it's economics. Social services aren't infinite. You say they pay taxes, and many do. But they also use services—schools, emergency rooms, housing assistance. The net fiscal impact is often negative at the state and local level, especially for low-skilled immigrants. Cultural cohesion matters. The "mosaic" idea sounds nice, but when communities don't integrate, you get tension and parallel societies. That's not strength, that's division. I'm for immigration. Just managed, not unlimited.

Here's a stat that caught my eye: a 2017 National Academies study found that immigration actually reduces wages for high school dropouts by about 5%. That's not a small number. Let me address your points quickly: Raising the floor with minimum wage sounds good, but it doesn't solve the job competition problem. More workers chasing the same jobs means fewer hours and less stability, even with higher hourly pay. You say immigrants pay taxes, and that's true for some. But the same study showed that low-skilled immigrants cost more in services than they pay in taxes at the state level. That's a net drain, not a wash. On assimilation, I'll give you that most learn English eventually. But "within a generation" means a whole generation of friction, ghettoization, and cultural tension. That's a long time. I'm not anti-immigration. I just think we need to be honest about the costs. Quality over quantity.