Uh, here he is doing it.
> You’re trying to attack his articulation rather than his point.
Restricting immigration, both legal and illegal, is his point. He can’t claim he has no problem with legal immigration, yet also say that he’s for restricting it out of what he calls “diminishing returns”.
> 3. A socialist economic phenomenon;
That assertion doesn’t match the evidence; immigration, both legal and illegal fluctuates with economic cycles, increasing in good years, stagnating or even falling in bad ones.
If it was simply about welfare, it would be one ceaseless trend line, going up, because welfare scarcely ever changes.
We also wouldn’t see immigrants leaving California for Texas.
> 4. Attacks on this country.
? Attacks aren’t a market.
Nor are lakes, nor are dams. Even if you wanted to truncate that as “water”, Government has been a piss poor manager of water rights all over; that’s what caused the California shortages.
Markets are superior when it comes to managing water, as evident when people are allowed to sell water rights that work-out shortages like California’s. It also does utilities better.
I don’t even get the “fence” comment. The market manages most land, and does that better than the public land in several key areas, including conservation.
Thus… I’m still waiting for you to give an actual example that survives scrutiny.
> 7. Yes, I absolute get to say it,
Then say it of Eisenhower; let’s see you liken him to open borders.
And no, you can’t support non-culpable restrictions on legal immigration, and call that position Conservative. Nationalist perhaps, certainly Collectivist or Statist, but calling it “Conservative” ignores our history.
Once immigration is past welfare and controls for criminality & health, everything that remains is an issue concerning liberty. People have a right to come here, and that right was vouched for by the Founders when they decimated the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. Aliens are party to the Constitution and its protections, so said James Madison in arguing against those Acts. If this is so, then any system we put into place to manage immigrants must treat them with that knowledge in mind.
They’re not a standing reserve, they’re not an “option” we can choose to treat in whatever way we wish, they’re individuals with natural rights granted to them by God. Just as it is with anyone else.