should all illegal immigrants get amnesty

My opponent did not quite answer my question of whether he or she thought that large scale immigration is good in principle. My opponent only stated that most immigrants got here legally, but are currently staying on expired visas, and are thus illegal. I doubt the validity of this statement, but given that this issue is not extremely important, I will let it slide. The United States federal government should grant illegal immigrants amnesty for two reasons; for economic and for moral reasons. The rest of my argument will be spent dealing with why granting amnesty is not only an economically preferable strategy, but is also the right thing to do. Much of my opponent's argument is spent on spewing statistics stating that illegal immigrants are costing Americans money, and I agree. However, it is important to acknowledge that all of these problems are due to a large influx of people who don't pay taxes, not due to the fact that they are somehow more troublesome. Therefore, these economic issues will disappear as soon as these people start paying taxes. Granting amnesty would make these people legal, and would require them to pay taxes, so it would solve the problem. Nevertheless, inn dealing with these economic losses, the United States has three options: 1) Grant amnesty 2) Deportation 3) Ignore the problem I think my opponent would agree with me when I say the ignoring the problem is a bad option, and will only lead to greater economic loss and systematic problems. Therefore, the choice is between granting amnesty and deportation. My opponent provided his or her own evidence saying that the systematic deportation of millions of illegal immigrants would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. What my opponent does not provide evidence for, however, is for the claim that the United States would be somehow save money in the long run, because the federal government would be more able to manage immigration. This argument does not make any sense, because the economic problems that currently exist are systematic, and will continue to exist as long as illegal immigrants keep getting into America. My opponent provided evidence stating that the United States currently spends billions educating illegal immigrants. Clearly, these immigrants have settled in for the long haul, they are sending their children to American schools! They clearly are intent on staying in America, so if a mass deportation occurs, then these immigrants will just cross the border again, legally or illegally, because they have invested in an American life. Even if the immigration system were reformed after a mass deportation, as my opponent contends, there will still be well-meaning families who will simply go right back to where they were, because my opponent provided evidence stating that for every illegal border-crosser that gets caught, 2.7 make it through. The barrier preventing them from achieving it is the current bureaucratic stranglehold. Granting amnesty would remove this bureaucratic problem, and therefore, would lead to a preferable economic outlook to the status quo, because these immigrants would now be legal, and would pay taxes. My opponent' plan of mass deportation would not solve the current economic problems, because immigrants would continue to enter into the United States, and even if the plan did solve, granting amnesty is the preferable option because it achieves the same results and does not lead to the high costs associated with a mass deportation. Furthermore, amnesty is a more humane option. Crossing the US-Mexico border is a traumatic experience, undergone by people in search of a better life. They are unable to cross the border legally, and so they risk everything for hope. These people are clearly very strong, and are not out to "steal American jobs" (I put that in quotes not to quote my opponent specifically, but rather to quote the stereotypical battle cry of the anti-immigration camp). My opponent argues that a mass deportation would be a better outcome for everyone in the long run, but this argument is not logical. Such a mass deportation would lead to either the repetition of the same problems, or will achieve the same outcome as granting amnesty, but on a longer timeframe and with greater economic cost.