It is necessary to look at the arguments made for illegal immigrants.
"They do jobs that no one else will do etc."
I do not believe this. I believe that if the illegals are removed (accountability and responsibility), someone will do the work (and businesses will pay) -- provided the workers are not already being subsidized by the government. AND....if we do need more immigrants -- they should come legally (green card, workers permit, etc)
An argument against the minimum wage (libertarian?) is that it keeps entry-level workers from getting work. If an employer has to pay X amount of taxes/permits/fees on top of $10/hour for someone who doesn't know anything, the employer is less likely to hire that entry-level worker.
(a little off topic, but in regards to entry-level worker disadvantage)
In short, people will do the work -- unless the government interferes with subsidies (cradle-to-grave welfare etc).
i don't know how closely you've been following this thread, but go back to the worries put forth by medic in the beginning of this thread in regards to wage stagnation. if you take the underlying sentiment in his posts--that the working man should progressively grow richer as a nation grows richer--you can see how this will rise median income to a point where it's no longer feasible to have low-wage workers in the economy doing menial work.
if this is the sentiment held by all citizens in a country, it follows that it won't be long before there isn't anybody wanting (maybe willing but not wanting) to do the menial work. so i think illegal immigration is not the politician's doing, but something we need as a nation to grow, compete globally, and work around these stupid minimum wage laws put into the system by the "fair" proponents.
EDIT: it is also a false picture of illegal immigrants to believe they are all farm-workers toiling in the fields like slaves. Not true. They work in most manual-labor industries -- including home construction. A Hispanic owner with a bunch of illegals, can definitely take market-share from a law abiding owner of a construction business.
It is an invisible economy (that slips by the tax system).
as long as the Hispanic owner is not doing anything unethical in regards to construction saftey, i have no moral dilemma with him doing this. the reality is that when the laws of a nation stop having clear relationships to an already inherent moral code we already possess, people will break the law.
The failure of the drive for equality is not because the wrong measures were adopted; not because they were badly administered; not because the wrong people administered it. The failure is much more fundamental. It is because that drive goes against the most basic instinct of all human beings.
In the words of Adam Smith, the uniform, constant, and uninterrupted effort of every man to better his condition, to improve his own lot and to make a better world for his children and his children's children. When the law interferes with that pursuit, everyone will try to find a way around. He will try to evade the law. He will break the law or he will emigrate from the country. [...] There is no moral code that justifies laws fixing prices or fixing wages, or preventing a man from earning a living unless he joins a union and submits himself to the disciplines of the union, or forcing you to buy more expensive goods at home when cheaper goods are available from abroad. When the law prohibits things that most people regard as moral and proper, they are going to break the law. Only fear of punishment, not a sense of justice will cause them to obey the law and when people start breaking one set of laws, there's a strong tendency for the lack of respect for the law to extend to all.
- Milton Friedman, Free To Choose Volume 5, Created Equal