The economics of the border

The July 9 editorial “Border insecurity” claims that illegal alien workers are necessary to our economy. The basis for that contention is that there is a demand for their labor. What you are implying, however, is that it is up to employers, rather than society, to set labor standards in our country. With that philosophy, you should also oppose minimum-wage and child-labor laws. It is my contention that your position on illegal immigration is reactionary.

LANCE B. SJOGREN

San Pedro

*

As an independent thinker with liberal leanings, I have to side with securing the borders from the flood of illegals pouring across as a top priority. Yes, some industries need cheap labor. But if we are so desperate for illegals looking for work that the demand can’t keep up with the supply, why are there constant issues in communities that resist having crowds of men waiting on sidewalks for day jobs? Why can’t there be simultaneous efforts to improve the monitoring of expiring visas, practical and enforceable work visas, employer checks, realistic wages and a less porous border? Yes, these efforts will cost money; too bad we have to spend billions on an unwinnable war.

MARTY WILSON

Whittier

*

The editorial states: “The border would be secure, but at the expense of the land of the free becoming a police state.” The Times also forgot to call securing the borders mean-spirited, racist and xenophobic.

Hogwash! Open-border advocates always like to say they are against illegal immigration, but they always find fault with any idea that actually secures our borders.

JIM JAGIELO

West Covina