Now now now?? Really? How long has this been a problem, 40, 50 + years? That's what you call "now now now". For the first time in at least half a century we have someone who is showing any sign of wanting to deal with the problem.... and the left goes howling mad with tantrums at the audacity of someone wanting to address the problem.
As usual, you aren't really understanding. What I'm saying is that it's delusional to think that you can reverse those decades of illegal immigration problems in a matter of months without creating serious problems. The sudden vacuum in certain fields would be bad enough (don't assume that there would be legions of Americans lining up to be housekeepers), but it'd also rip large chunks out of certain communities with little to no warning.
Addressing the problem is fine. But you have to address it intelligently, and acknowledge that you can't simply get rid of millions of people without serious consequences. Let's abuse driving analogies for this one. Which is smarter when approaching a red light: slamming the brakes at the last possible moment, or coming to a smooth stop? Both achieve the same end, but only one is responsible and safe.
Yes, and yes. You can't have a policy if you can't keep more people from coming in (or people coming back once you get them out). So yes, you need a wall as a start. Only then can you have a meaningful conversation about policy.
Need? We don't even know if the wall will work. Has there been a feasibility study conducted? I'm not seeing evidence of one. Just because Trump thinks it'll work doesn't mean it will. Assuming it gets built, that is... right now, the estimated cost is $21.5 billion, or more than twice what he claimed it would cost.
Ah yes, the tried and true "jobs Americans do not want" nonsense. Guess what, there's no such thing as a job that Americans do not want. There are "jobs that not enough Americans want at the price the employer wants to pay". Instead of doing what normally should occur: offering higher wages to get people to do the job, the answer has been to import illegals willing to do the jobs for low wages. Is it any surprise then that wages are stagnant? Normally, when demand is higher than supply, the price goes up to reach equilibrium. When you add new supply to meet demand, the price (wages) doesn't need to go up. Shocking how economics works no?
This isn't really an answer. It makes a couple of bad assumptions: that there will always be a large-enough pool of legal residents willing to work these jobs, and that the companies can always justify paying whatever it takes to fill those jobs. A berry farm is not going to pay $12 an hour when it was paying, say, $4 before. You will see a pay increase, but that'll likely mean minimum wage and not much more. It's an improvement, but the notion that this will magically fix the job situation is misguided.
Increasing minimum wages is just a distortion of the job market, it doesn't fix the fundamental underlying factors that are setting the prices. An improving economy improves working conditions, not drivel about forcing McDonalds to pay someone $15 per hour to flip a burger and thus forcing the company to get rid of the jobs altogether in favor of kiosks.
Minimum wage hasn't been keeping pace with inflation. It's as simple as that -- a job that used to be just enough to get by now forces many people to work second jobs or take on one or more roommates. You can't pretend that market forces will fix this, because they've had decades to do that and have clearly failed.
Also, news flash: automation is coming whether or not the minimum wage stays low. Why would McDonald's pay $7.25 per hour for a large number of cashiers when it can replace most of them with a few touchscreens? At best, keeping wages low delays the inevitable. I'd rather improve the quality of life while human workers are around so that they can live better lives and have the money needed to study for more sophisticated positions.