Mar 29 Tue 6pm/6.30-8pm Century Foundation and NYU Wagner 295 Lafayette St Debate: “American should embrace the undocumented and expand immigration.” Posted on March 22, 2016 by textgenie In a typically high level Debate of the Century, at NYUWagner, whose students are typically cost-benefit economists who move into appropriate berths after graduation, two tough proponents battle over what to do about illegal immigrants, with Marielena standing up for the many children born and raised here who deserve full support for their education, and the independent thinking conservative David Frum pointing out the danger that the country faces an era of automation that will leave illegals without the jobs they hope for, even though with their low wages they are still substituting for advances in that area compared with, say, Australia, and the debate centers on the cost and benefits for US citizens, without changing audience opinion which remains overwhelmingly supportive of the immigrants, and there is no mention of moral considerations such as the idea that perhaps the richest country in the world should take somne responsibility for rescuing the poor and oppressed from less fortunate nations. http://wagner.nyu.edu/events/wagner-03-29-2016 Debate of the Century: “American should embrace the undocumented and expand immigration.” Tuesday, March 29, 2016 | Reception 6:00PM | Debate 6:30PM – 8:00PM NYU Wagner, 295 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10012 Immigration has become one of the most explosive and polarizing issues of the 2016 presidential campaign. Most everyone, regardless of political affiliation, seems to agree that our current immigration system is broken. For years we have been talking about what to do about the 11 million undocumented individuals that now make up 3.5 percent of the US population. Does it make sense to keep the undocumented in legal limbo, while they pay taxes, participate in our communities, and send their children to public schools? Unease about immigration rose another notch recently when the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino by ISIS sympathizers reminded us that getting immigration right is not just a matter of equity and economics but national security. The problem is that nothing approaching a national consensus has formed on how to fix it. Policy solutions run the gamut and include mass deportation, building walls on our porous borders, excluding whole categories of immigrants, creating a monitoring system that would weed out potential security threats, limiting immigration to highly skilled workers, or undertaking a comprehensive reform that includes “a path to citizenship” for the undocumented. Immigration advocates claim comprehensive reform will strengthen the overall economy, increase US GDP, foster innovation, create jobs, and even reduce the federal deficit by 25 billion dollars. Opponents of this kind of reform argue that accepting waves of low-wage workers actually puts downward pressure on national wage rates, that “a path to citizenship” effectively means granting amnesty to those who have broken our laws, and that the prospect of an amnesty would create a rush across our borders by more illegal immigrants.