The high benefits that come from the inclusion of a large immigrant body are attacked by statements that the overall negative consequences are far more drastic than the positives that the immigrants bring to society. So let us cover the costs in detail to see why the benefits out-weigh the cost in an overall beneficial matter that contributes heavily to the United States population.
One of the main components of the argument against immigration is its effects on the lower class (consisting of the poor and the less educated). The opposition makes claims that an influx of immigrants ruins the lives of unskilled laborers within the United States forcing them to lose their jobs and subsequently their standard of living. How though does an immigrant force a native-born citizen to lose his/her job? The opposition states that it is by immigrant's accepting wages that the native-born population simply find unacceptable for the amount of work desired. However, everyone is very familiar with the concept of minimum wage, which states, a legal worker cannot be paid less than the set federal minimum wage (in a majority of circumstances, setting aside illegal immigration). This particular piece of legislature (FLSA) should prevent individuals from being involved in a serious competition of price competition, because at some point this chain reaction will have to cease and it will all come down to which employee has the superior qualifications that are desired by the corporation or business entity currently seeking employees.
As a brief side note to this concept of minimum wage, it has been stated by several studies including one conducted by the University of California (Jacobs, Graham-Squire and Luce 2011), that minimum wage is something that simply cannot provide enough fiscal income to support a family. These studies state that a “living wage” must be set. Although, if people keep agreeing to work for minimum wage then these higher wages will never be set because the economic marketplace knows that it can increase its profit margin by paying workers less which is what it will always try to do. Looking at the article, it can be seen that if Wal-Mart were to raise there minimum wage to the acceptable amount of twelve dollars ($12.00) an hour, the corporation would take a $3.21 billion dollar hit to their checkbooks. Even if immigrants were the ones who were always sweeping the market to its lowest paying profit margin they are still providing a benefit to corporations which is therefore providing a benefit to everyone who interacts with that corporation and should it be a corporation like that of Wal-Mart a plethora of people are receiving the benefits while much fewer are being harmed.
Why do any economists see this poor treatment of the poor as unfair? It really boils down to the fact that economics is not about being fair and in trying to establish fairness one ends up in ethics which strays from the best economic policies and usually hurt more...