Your first sentence is rather rude. Also, I'm not an economist but probably have studied it much more than the average person. Last time I checked I had a book

Your first sentence is rather rude. Also, I'm not an economist but probably have studied it much more than the average person. Last time I checked I had a bookcase with 20+ economics books, most of which I've actually read. :) My post was only half-serious but the half that was serious was referring mostly to the large influx of Hispanic, mostly Mexican, people. And yes, I do think that when they fill jobs in stores, restaurants, etc. and are willing to do them at wages less than a native citizen would otherwise do them at, it means it becomes harder for those citizens to find a job. It raises the supply of job hunters looking for other jobs, which puts downward pressure on market wages, across the board. It also increases the chance or frequency that those other folks (mostly teens or lower-income adults) will become more of a financial burden on our government and the rest of community, as well. Yes, the Hispanic/Mexican immigrant demographic does spend a portion of their income here in the US, clearly, but studies have shown that their average income level is fairly low, and thus their personal contribution to taxes relative to the benefits they consume is much worse than for a higher income worker. Plus, it's a fact that they send a larger portion of their pay out of the country, to Mexico or wherever. Again, unlike native/natural citizens. To give a particular example, say there's a Mexican guy working in the US on a farm for at or below minimum wage, he lives in small cheap quarters with a lot of other workers, and sends the bulk of his pay back to his family in Mexico, and only stays part of the year, every year -- is that a net win for the US economy? Or a new family that's arrived and has 5 kids, they're in the public schools, they have to be taught in Spanish and English, stores and government offices all feel obligated to double-print everything because of their presence, and their income level is so low they qualify for lots of benefits and may even be a net tax beneficiary rather than a net tax payer -- is that a net win for the economy? Perhaps for that family's little micro-economy, but what about the larger community? You're basically making a black/white assumption about what I was saying, and coming back with another black/white statement as your position. I do think it's subtle with shades of gray. If someone immigrates here and works at a restaurant, great. But what's the net effect on the government budget, and on the wages & prices experienced by those in the community? It may be a net lose rather than a net win.