In the US, where public health is not a political priority, the catalyst for policy change promoting healthier living will be fiscal. The government cannot afford the current trajectory of healthcare spending, which will eventually force changes in housing, food, and community planning.

Vocal support for unchecked immigration often comes from individuals shielded from its negative impacts on security, schools, and local services. Those with direct stakes—like parents and business owners—tend to hold more pragmatic views because they must confront the real-world trade-offs daily.

Political discourse often fixates on emotionally charged, minor components of legislation (like the 10% of a healthcare bill for immigrants) to control the narrative and divert public attention from the larger, more complex financial or policy implications that affect the other 90%.

Beyond its long-term growth benefits, rational immigration policy can be a powerful short-term tool against inflation. By addressing labor shortages in critical sectors like construction, agriculture, and elder care, an increased and targeted immigrant workforce can directly reduce cost pressures on essential goods and services.

Contrary to common political narratives, undocumented immigrants are often a net positive for government finances. They are heavily documented for tax purposes (e.g., Social Security) and pay into these systems but are less likely to draw benefits, effectively subsidizing programs for citizens and creating a highly profitable workforce.

America intentionally avoided solving illegal immigration because it serves a crucial economic purpose: providing a flexible, cheap labor force that doesn't draw on social safety nets. This benefits industries and consumers while placing little burden on the state.

The choice between a competitive, market-based system and a European-style welfare state is not just economic. It's a choice between America's "hardcore" identity, which values risk-taking and innovation, and Europe's model of "managed decline," which prioritizes security over global influence and dynamism.

A leader known for a tough immigration stance has the unique credibility to pivot towards an open, structured policy. This can neutralize opponents, appeal to independents, and address business needs, effectively allowing them to 'declare victory' and move on.

Framing immigration solely as a moral imperative leads to impractical policies by ignoring crucial factors like resource allocation, cultural integration, and public consent. A pragmatic approach balances humanitarianism with national interest, preventing unsustainable outcomes and social friction.