I'd just like to point out, that the rich, particularly shareholders in, and owners of, large businesses and farmers, consume much more in government services than they pay compared to an illegal immigrant. The poor, and illegal immigrants, are subsidizing the rich and not the other way around. I would venture to say that the vast majority of folks on this forum are in this rich "taker" class, including myself.
I have no idea how the real takers (us) have successfully painted the poor and illegal immigrants as the takers when it's not the case if you just open up the federal and state government budgets. Virtually all expenditures in the departments of defense, state, the courts, treasury, interior, agriculture, commerce, labor, transportation, energy, homeland security are for services consumed only by the rich. The same is true for state expenditures. Poor people simply don't consume the most expensive government services.
Poor people don't travel, don't have a military protecting their business interests, or police forces protecting their properties, don't use transportation and infrastructure as much, don't benefit directly from trade deals or get bailed out by the federal debt or the interest on that debt compared to corporations (and therefore their owners). Poor people don't really use the courts at all (unless they're being convicted by them) etc. etc. They basically consume no government resources.
A TL;DR way to look at it is this: If the government went away today,who would be worse off? It's not going to be the guy picking avocados for less than min wage.