I live here. No, we don't, believe me. The US is the most difficult industrialized country to emigrate to (I should know, I went through the process).
Talking about illegal immigration via the southern border. Which is a piece of cake to cross. Some news media in the US even made a video of a man wearing an Osama Bin Laden mask and crossing about 5 meters of shallow water (which is all that separates the US and Mexico in some cases, there is no border wall).
We've had over a year of continuous job growth
Yes, but job growth is to be expected. The question is whether there is enough job growth.
Payrolls in U.S. Rose 126,000 in March, Least Since End of 2013
The unemployment rate is at 5.5% in March, down from close to 10% at its peak.
Using the US government's numbers. Using gallup.com's definition of employment, which is a very broad definition of having working at least a mere 30 hours per week the US has an employment rate of ~44%:
Gallup defines a good job as 30+ hours per week for an organization that provides a regular paycheck. Right now, the U.S. is delivering at a staggeringly low rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time jobs as a percent of the adult population, 18 years and older. We need that to be 50% and a bare minimum of 10 million new, good jobs to replenish America's middle class.
http://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspx
Besides that since 2000 all job growth has gone to immigrants in the US:
http://cis.org/all-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants
you'd realize that immigrants cut the debt as they contribute more in taxes than they take out,
In the US there is no conclusive evidence for this, some studies are positive and some are negative. But the studies don't take in account the use of all social programmes, job loss and wage compression.
In regard to Europe, EU immigration is a boon and non-EU immigration is a huge negative.
http://www.thelocal.dk/20140916/non-western-immigrants-costs-exploded
http://vorige.nrc.nl/international/article2514448.ece/Immigration_comes_at_hefty_price <-- The Netherlands
Van de Beek has come to conclusions the Netherlands may not like. Since the 1970s, little research has been done into the economic effects of immigration, for fear of playing into the hand of the xenophobic right. As recently as last year, populist politician Geert Wilders asked the Dutch cabinet to calculate the net costs or benefits imposed on society by immigrants. Cabinet refused to do so, which led to uproar amongst several opposition parties. The minister responsible called it “improper” to reduce citizens’ contribution to society “to a profit-loss analysis”.
The reluctance to study the matter has done well to conceal some unpleasant facts, Van de Beek claims. For one, the Dutch policy of recruiting workers from outside of Europe in the 1960s needlessly delayed the modernisation of Dutch industry. As the Dutch economy was modernised in the 1980s, many immigrants were laid off and became dependent on welfare. Even today, the Dutch welfare state mainly attracts immigrants that impose a net cost on the Dutch economy, Van de Beek found.
.
.
and are the labour force that pay for social security and medicare (the biggest drivers of the US national debt, by far).
Both programmes are Ponzi scheme so if you say is true (which studies are inconclusive about), you are delaying the collapse of these programmes and increasing their problem by increasing the population. 1/4th of US federal spending is allocated to social security and 1/4th is dedicated to health care (of which medicare is a major factor). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#/media/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png
So the massive third world immigration in the US is just exacerbating the problem of the debt because more people will be placed inside these ponzi scheme social programmes.
You didn't reply to my point about exponential debt growth.
not just scared of brown people,
How old are you, 13? California is already majority Latino. The state has 1/3rd of the welfare recipients in the whole of the US, while only paying 10% of the country's taxes. Because of the low IQ of Latinos (it's about 90) the school performance in the state is extremely poor and california is planning to drop standardized testing completely.
Here's an article talking about race differences in SAT scores (SAT scores are heavily correlated with IQ scores):
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/09/25/sat-scores-are-down-and-racial-gaps-remain
https://a.pomf.se/jmncjd.png (table from article)
Latinos and blacks are massively underrepresented (and Asians are massively overrepresented) in Californian universities because the state banned racial discrimination in university admissions.
Google and Apple (and pretty much all tech companies) also hire almost no Latinos and blacks, even though Latinos are the majority in California. Asians are, of course, massively over-represented in these companies.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/05/28/google-releases-employee-diversity-figures/9697049/
For tech positions, the numbers are similar — 60% are white, 34%, Asian, 2%, Hispanic, and 1%, black.
In the United States, 55 percent of Apple’s workers are white. Asian workers represent 15 percent of Apple’s workforce, with 11 percent identifying as Hispanic, 7 percent Black and 2 percent as more than one ethnicity. Nine percent of workers did not declare their ethnicity. It’s important to note those figures include Apple’s significant retail operations, something that makes its workforce distinct from other tech companies that have issued diversity reports.
Among its leadership ranks, which include store management, Whites make up nearly two-thirds and Asians represent 21 percent, with Black and Hispanic workers making up less than 10 percent.
Facebook on Wednesday released its first diversity report, revealing that its U.S. staff is more than 90 percent white and Asian and its global staff is only 31 percent female.
For comparison’s sake, both Google and Yahoo recently said that whites and Asians make up around 90 percent of their employee bases.
