YES, THAT CHEAP LABOR SUBSIDY IS REAL.

In two published papers, Eliakim Katz and I analyzed immigration amnesties as a way of screening the pool of illegal immigrants by subjecting them to exploitation in the underground economy and confronting a positive but not certain prospect of an amnesty, in order to induce favorable self-selection, meaning it wouldn't pay to sneak into a rich country in the hopes of going on welfare later.

Yes, that sounds cynical, and yes, we did get some grief for characterizing the underground economy as a sort of apprenticeship.  Other scholars subsequently expanded on our work.

We show that an amnesty is more desirable the bigger is the gain to aggregate income induced by granting legalized workers access to all the available employment opportunities. On the contrary, a more redistributive welfare state makes an amnesty less desirable, as low-skilled legalizedforeign workers will gain access to benefits. We also find that the introduction of a legalization program can only be optimal if there is a positive shock affecting the income received by the natives. In this case, the legalization allows the government to mitigate the adverse effects of an excessively restrictive policy implemented in the first period.

That paper offers the following elaboration on our work.

Karlson and Katz (2003) consider instead the role of amnesties as a tool for governments to induce immigrants to self–select based on ability. Similarly to our model, they also consider migrants that differ in their skill level. In particular, they emphasize that a legalization will offer skilled workers better labor market opportunities. As a result, the latter might be enticed to migrate even as illegals, in the hope that an ex–post legalization will improve their income opportunities. Differently from us, in Karlson and Katz’s (2003) model and in their companion paper (Karlson and Katz 2010), legal immigration is not explicitly considered together with illegal immigration.

The authors continue in an academic vein, and it looks like light bedtime reading.  But not tonight.  Rather, I'm in the mood to thank loudmouth leftist Jill Filipovic for simultaneously validating our cheap labor argument and demonstrating the folly of minimum wage laws.

If you would like to pay $30 for a pint of strawberries, $700 for someone to clean your one-bedroom apartment, and $100,000 for a new roof on your normal-sized house, then deporting all undocumented people is a policy you should support. https://t.co/l3m7JyCzfP

— Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) November 18, 2025

Twitchy's Brett T. compiled a few of the more pungent ripostes.  "Are Americans that spoiled by cheap, illegal alien labor?"  Hie thee hence, and judge for yourself.