‘That’s a only a…
‘That’s a only a “solution” if you are OK with the massive changes it would bring.’
Since I’m not a consequentialist, I think it’s completely immaterial to government policy decisions what changes it will bring. Shooting innocent people for crossing borders to do a job is an injustice, and there is no possible excuse for it.
As for the alleged consequences:
“… more crowded …”
If there is one thing this country has, it’s lots of empty space, and lots of low-density communities. If you don’t like crowded cities, feel free to move to Idaho. In any case, why should the government have a role in forcing people to live further apart or closer together than they normally would choose to?
“… less well integrated …”
Who cares if we are “integrated”?
“… version of present day Brazil, with a similar standard of living …”
There is no good economic reason to believe this. Immigrant labor is an economic boon, and will be that much better for all concerned once it is no longer consigned to the ugly, brutal world of the black market in labor.
“If that is the America you want, then repealing immigration laws is the way to go.”
Again, the America I “want” isn’t the issue here. The issue is whether or not it’s morally acceptable to shoot innocent people for crossing borders in order to do a job. If it’s is, then good God, why? If it isn’t, then you are better off living with whatever consequences come, your vision for America notwithstanding.
Anticopyright.