Each time we deport an illegal immigrant there should be an outstanding charge of $100,000 plus the cost of deportation attached to that individual. In addition, the illegal immigrants nation of citizenship should be charged $100,000 as well as the crossing nation; these funds should be collected via tariffs.
Obviously the illegal immigrant isn't going to pay the fine. But if they get caught again, we jail them and put them to work at minimum wage to pay off their fine (two since they are a repeat offender).
We don't want them to engage in labor that would be better off in the free market, so I have a solution. Something that would be nice to get done, but wouldn't make a dent in the free market labor pool: have them dig rainwater harvesting holes in the desert areas of America to catch rainwater. A 2-4 foot deep hole, 5-10 feet wide placed every 20-30 feet would turn huge areas green. In a few decades it would be enough to turn the entire southwest into a green patch.
It doesn't assume it is a waste-land, it assumes that it doesn't capture rainwater, which it could if human effort was applied.
Why let them remain deserts when they could produce much more life?
There is already much very unique life present in deserts. Just because it doesn't match your idea of productivity doesn't mean it should be destroyed.
I'm not suggesting destroying it, merely capturing rainwater to recharge the water table and provide for more life.
"...have them dig rainwater harvesting holes in the desert areas of America to catch rainwater. A 2-4 foot deep hole, 5-10 feet wide placed every 20-30 feet would turn huge areas green. In a few decades it would be enough to turn the entire southwest into a green patch."
What you are proposing would destroy the ecosystem -- an ecosystem that has persisted for thousands of years and has many plant and animal species adapted for that ecosystem.
We don't need more water in deserts. They do just fine without us meddling in something as you proposed. Making the "southwest green" would be as destructive as tearing it apart with a bulldozer. Even something as benign-sounding as free-ranging cattle has an impact upon arid/desert regions, because the manure changes the soil over time, and cattle eating the choicest plants alters entire plant/animal communities.
Incorrect. It would not destroy the ecosystem, it would provide more water for that ecosystem, while reducing erosion.
Why the insane hyperbole?