What part?

What I mean is what part of this are you assuming we disagree on? Were you presenting a justification of sorts for Mexican nationals to cross illegally? Yes, then we would disagree. But you didn't blatantly state that. I agree that the primary motivation to enter "by any means necessary" is the potential for a better life. The weak Pesos, health care (I would wager our ERs where they are guaranteed treatment is better than most upper scale Mexican hospitals), these are all reasons to one degree or another; but I think everyone would agree that the majority of illegal southern boarder crossings are quote, "in pursuit of a better life." I believe perhaps you have overplayed the philosophical reasoning a person hiking through the Arizona desert may be pondering. "A better life" is the simple answer, versus a group of five or six 24 year olds poised on the verge of leaving, all gathered together discussing the Utopian attraction of a truly classless society. And I'm not demeaning the Mexicans' capacity for reason, it was you that pointed out that the Mexican government was encouraging inmates and the like to relocate, not philosophy majors at "Mex U."

But let me make the American attraction even more simple. We have the most robust, dynamic economy in the history of mankind (fingers crossed boys). It drives people to relocate their lives here, it always has. However, I think you have failed to mention geography's role in all of this. The vast majority of our new immigrants (legal or illegal) are Mexican. They are our neighbor to the South. The vast majority of the UK's new immigrants (along with France's) are from North Africa (mostly Muslim). In fact the largest single ethnic group migrating to Europe are Muslims from 3rd world nations, primarily Africa. In other words Africa is (in a sense) Europe's Mexico. My point being that poor people with the drive for a better life are going to immigrate to the closest "free/dynamic" economy that can offer them that better life. Now I should add here that superior free social services such as health care & housing undoubtedly plays into the decision to move - lets face it, not every one migrates with the best of intentions or work ethic. But I don't find anything extraordinary in the premise that the populations of poorer nations will migrate to richer nations, with geography as the determining factor as to which "rich nation" they end up in. In that scenario we are the biggest magnet to be sure, but a poor North African man won't find it as easy to get here as say a Polish engineer, so perhaps he goes to Europe (and then probably saves for a move to America). People will go to the nearest land offering a better life ... period.

Now what I do find extraordinary is that the UK is allowing the "Muslimization" of their nation by introducing Muslim Courts & aspects of Sharia law within certain neighborhoods. Not to mention the US (under any administration) allowing the border to be so unbelievably porous, especially in a post 9/11 world - and especially when both of these nation's populous keep demanding the opposite. THAT is extraordinary. Now on that, and the means by which these problems should be remedied, we may certainly disagree.