Difficult, but I would start by changing our policies that harm them (farm subsidies and such), legalize drugs to destroy the illegal drug trade and refuse to recognize their corrupt government as legitimate. For true change it will take the people of Mexico to take an active role in changing their government, which for practical purposes will take many years and there is little we can do to encourage it.

To help we can streamline the immigration process for short term visas and encourage them to Americanize by not giving them special treatment (such as having government documents in Spanish or allowing their children to take school tests in Spanish). Again, I don't really see the number of people coming across as the huge problem many make it out to be. We have plenty of room here. The big problem is the crime associated with the drug trade. Legalize it and tax the hell out of it if you want. There is way too much money in it to pretend that the "war on drugs" is going to make an ounce of difference.

We also need to change the 14th Amendment so that their children are not automatically granted citizenship. Citizenship should be something that they desire to work and to earn, not something that is granted by happenstance. 

Also, if I was dictator, I would make it easier for American businesses to operate on both sides of the border. Work on opening up true free trade with Mexico and allow businesses to operate on both sides of the border without significant penalty or paperwork. Of course, that would require the cooperation of the Mexican government but we could certainly try to apply pressure on them. 

The easiest and quickest way would be to simply take over the country and make it into a couple of states. Ah the good old days when we were an imperialist nation and simply stole land but unfortunately we can't do that anymore.  

Do you think that either of our borders are closed? Or even could be closed? (short of full militarization and shooting anyone in sight?)

Do you mind cutting out the pedantry and actually answering the question?

I believe it's because they aren't fond of being hosts to the remaining plebs in South America. "Our Nation is fucked up enough as is, thank you"

Okay...I've been hesitant to bring this up but, here goes...

Have any of you heard of the New World Order (conspiracy?) 'theory'?

Alex Jones is the most vocal on the subject, that I am aware of and while he is fanatical about the subject and some of the claims are suspect, there is an element of truth in what he says.

If you believe the goal of The Elite is to join the US with Mexico and Canada and form a North American Union, it is clear that the process has begun.

Commercials in Spanish, Spanish language on most product labels, signs, forms, web sites, instruction sheets, etc, government agencies working with Mexico and Canada (NIST, for one)..., the construction of the I-69 Super Highway connecting Mexico to Canada by way of the US... it's pretty clear that our government has no intention of separating itself from Mexico- quite the contrary.

So, get used to it... it ain't going away.

My point is that closing the border isn't worth the amount of money it would cost to actually get it done. Could it theoretically be done? Maybe. It will cost hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of dollars and it is hard to imagine anything short of a fully militarized border have any kind of serious effect. It seems a huge waste of resources to me. 

I don't really have a problem punishing any employers who knowingly hire illegals if the employer was either not withholding taxes or actively aiding the illegals in getting social security numbers. However, in many cases the employers actually run the social security numbers and are told by the government they are real (like Meg Whitman for example). It is the government, you can't expect them to do anything accurately or efficiently. And if we just reformed our tax code and eliminate the payroll tax we can solve the problem of payroll tax evasion on the part of illegals or non-illegals who work for cash.

Okay, you may have problems seeing this if you are on a cell phone, but next time you are near a library, you can always use one of their PCs to see the picture on a bigger monitor.

Google maps.  Satellite view.  Look up Tucson, AZ.  Follow I-86 to the US/Mexico border.  Scroll a short ways to the left - note: there are no roads through that mountain range.  Continue left - ah, roads near the border.  And it is flat as a pancake.  That area is all desert and salt pans.  If there isn't a town or city - there is no water.  Sandycane, if you have never been to any desert areas, it would be a shock.  I remember the first time I went back east to Mississippi.  About eastern Texas, I noticed there was water in the ditch along the road.  My ex almost wrecked the car laughing when I said gee, it doesn't look like it rained this morning.  I was 21, and had never seen standing water without a recent rain before.

If there are no towns, there is no water, not even ground water.  Or, what water there is is too salty to drink.  Literally.  I was used to salty water when I was a kid.  And I remember traveling between Yuma and Tucson and refusing to drink the water in a little town called Casa Grande.  If you go to Las Vegas - anymore they hand out water bottles free to any customers.  No one drinks tap water - though I thought Las Vegas water was no where near as bad as the water in Yuma. 

All those stories about how the Apaches evaded the US army in the desert for so long in the late 1800s?  Sure, sip springs.  Enough water in a good year for about 4-6 people to get a drink - once.  Yeah, once a year, there was some water.  The Apaches surrendered because they had drank all the available water for that year and there was no more.  People crossing the desert die even today because there is no water.

I remember almost dieing with laughter during the Reagan administration when they were talking about the Nicaraguans invading the US.  To bring an army across there?  The number of water trucks they would have to bring with them would have lit up the infrared radars like a christmas tree.

Well, yeah, it is.  The net affect of illegals is slightly positive on the US economy.  Because they are paying taxes but not getting any benefits.  No, illegals do not get food stamps or social security or medicaid.  Their children if born in the US get benefits.  And the children are, after all, citizens.  Yeah it ain't fair.  But my husband and I are not eligible for a lot of benefits either - we are almost 60, so no social security, no medicare, no family aid payments, no medicaid.  Food stamps - that is it.  And if the Hispanic family are legal, that is all the adults get as well.  The ignorance about the laws and regulations in the US concerning aid to families in need is appalling. 

edit: fixed quote

With a wall designed to stop ancient armies. A wall that is fortified can be very effective at turning back entire armies. It is substantially harder to stop individuals. Even if wee built the equivalent of a modern great wall it probably would be of limited use unless we positioned snipers and shot anyone trying to get through it like they did with the Berlin wall. So if you really want to argue that we should start shooting people... 

It goes into the general fund like any other payroll taxes. I don't think it is really possible to calculate the amount contributed by illegals compared to the amount that is taken out since we really have no idea how many there are. It also depends on how they get the SS#. If they are using the SS# of a dead person they can probably get away with collecting SS when they retire, if they are using a living persons # they will never get to collect so they are simply adding to the system. Although, given the amount of money involved any influence, either positive or negative, is probably statistically insignificant.