At the risk of beating a horse so dead only its ghost remains:
Is it expedient to regulate the number of immigrants entering the USA? Sure, one doesn't want carte blanche on who enters. Is it one of the top 10 issues to be concerned about in terms of where tax dollars are going? **** no.
Where I stay banks pay 6% tax on aggregate, while tax paying citizens pay upwards of 40% depending on income bracket, not to mention VAT, sin tax, capital gains tax, fuel levies and any other number of silly add-on taxations that don't get spent on public infrastructure anyways. The trend is for banks to accrue insane amounts of money (over here, the equivalent of $700,000,000,000) on their collective balance sheets through pension fund investment. If that's how it looks in some ****ty African country, it probably looks a whole lot worse in an economy as scaled and sophisticated as the USA's.
Who the **** in their right mind complains about something like $500,000,000 going to housing or medical care for immigrants when you're being shafted out of, in all seriousness, trillions of dollars in pension funds whose interest goes to a group of like 5,000 directors and board members nationwide?
The global economy doesn't suffer from an immigrant problem, an unemployment problem, or a job unavailability problem; it suffers from a predatory capitalism problem. Taarna, I don't know if you're a fanatic or just plain ****ing off your rocker, but even if Trump manages to evict each and every immigrant, alien or visiting employee in the States the awkward truth is the following: Economically, socially, and politically, America will still be in the ****ing toilet.