There are difficulties and restrictions, but California lets the undocumented get drivers licenses and their kids go to school and they certainly do manage to get jobs. Start a construction company or a restaurant and you’ll see how many undocumented are working, whether it’s completely under the table or they are using someone else’s social security number.
And I know it’s a counterfactual, but, it’s really hard to believe that there’s a significant percentage of poor people who would make it to the US not to find work, but to look for free services. A whole population of unambitious people who want nothing better for themselves or their children than to get on welfare? With there being absolutely no evidence to suggest that that is the case, it’s kind of insulting, no?
I’ve been to a bunch of countries that have what are usually called slums. These people have jobs. They just live in makeshift housing. If we have an open door immigration policy where you do just get your passport stamped in the airport once you can afford a plane ticket to the USA, I just don’t see how that is not inevitable. Is everyone going to sleep in a church? I think you run out of room pretty quickly.
Let me ask you this, is there any evidence of a correlation between the number of immigrants coming into the US and an increase in what you call slums? It sounds like you are trying to scapegoat immigrants for the existence of slums, when there seems to be little evidence that they are related. Absent that evidence, I don’t think our immigration policy should be tied to those unfounded fears.
What you’re saying is basically what most people in the US (and other rich countries) think. I think it’s wrong and insulting to people who are trying to get here, but it’s more or less normal to think it, so I don’t really blame people for thinking or saying it. I think you have to go out of your way and risk most people thinking you’re a naive simpleton to suggest that there aren’t masses of people waiting to take advantage of the social services in the US.
This is very true. I guess my concern is that new residents will need things (food, shelter, transportation, etc) and the amount of time it takes to increase the supply of those things is longer than the anount of time it takes for a group of people to cross the border.
Even if you assume that the supply and demand would even out over time as we build more houses/schools/grocery stores/ (or people move to areas that are able to absorb new residents more easily) and change supply chains to focus on growing areas, I still think you have a rough few years as everyone adjusts to the new equilibrium. Is this an insurmountable hurdle? Probably not. But, I do think it would require planning and forethought about how to manage a transition.
[I’ll also note that the current system where new folks arrive but are locked out of many parts of the economy and life in general because of a lack of documentation also sucks and would probably be improved if those barriers did not exist]
I’m curious whether you acknowledge the point on any level. Like for example, Qatar has 250k citizens with a per capita citizen income of $500k/yr because they have exclusive access to all the good jobs. If Qatar creates ‘open borders’ would that be good or bad for their existing citizens ?
One more thing, even if there is a correlation, I’d rather take direct actions to address housing and other more closely related issues than implementing a system like we currently have.
Of course it would be worse for the average Qatari who is rich and just imports indentured workers to do everything and forces them to live in slums and can send them back to Bangladesh or Pakistan whenever they want.
But, yeah, I’ve posted in here explicitly to the effect of…Ok, I’ll get a quote…
The Persian Gulf side of the Arabian peninsula is such a good demonstration of the evil of borders and monopolization of natural resources that you’d think it came from a dystopian novel and couldn’t be real.
Ok so your position is that open borders is +EV for the vast majority of citizens in the vast majority of countries with the possible exception of some oil states, but that borders are unethical in any case.
I think that’s right, though I might add a “probably” in front of the “+EV” and clarify that I have no illusion that borders are going away or that I could possibly get many people to agree with me and that I would support incremental improvements like DACA or getting rid of the razor wire death traps in the Rio Grande.
Things like DACA and razor wire death traps seem to be a matter of Democrats vs a Republican judiciary. I’m not certain that Democrats will ultimately win those arguments.
Me neither. And I’ve also said the Dumbocrats should not campaign on immigration as nearly all the Republicans and like half the Democrats in the country are quite hostile to it. I think things will get worse and worse as the country continues to lose its white majority. Things may get better if the white majority disappears like it did in California in the 1990s and after a while people see that it wasn’t actually the end of the world.
Aren’t there like a couple of million illegal immigrants? An open door immigration policy to the whole world seems like it would just blow that out of the water in terms of housing demand. Where is everyone going to live? Are you saying they are going to secure housing before showing up?
You’re stating reasons why immigration is a good thing and has been a good thing. Immigrants pay into the services that we provided and do the jobs that cant be filled and such.
Our kids and their kids are likely going to be living in a world where less than 40% of folks will work a job. When all the businesses monopolize towards the largest tech and kick out most of the b&m places, restaurants, factories that built cars other than robots building teslas, Airbnb wiping out hotels and hospitality, doordash planning to have robotic delivery (no seriously) and McDonalds being the only restaurant left while going down to 1 employee per store, … it changes things for not just immigration but for population control and we se that in china and other parts of the world.
When govt programs are funded through income taxes and corporate income tax, you’re still working with a finite amount to supply, fire, police, education and emergency services. All that has to be addressed and it’s all affected and ties into issues like homelessness and drugs and such. This idea has to be acknowledged when you have so many people not working and have to be supported through govt means.
I’m not stating what the moral decision should be, but that there are credible forces that can affect immigration in the short and long term and that should be acknowledged. Completely ignoring all of that cannot guarantee an improvement to people living in the US.
What didn’t I acknowledge? Those things are possible sure. Just speculation, but possible. Net migration with Mexico is negative now though and it varies quite a bit depending on job opportunities and housing in the US and conditions in Mexico. The only world in which masses of people might want to come from Mexico to the US is when USA is just getting richer and richer while nothing good happens in Mexico. Is that situation possible? Obviously. It’s what Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE have. They are richer and richer and import near slaves from poor countries in the region to do all the manual labor. I don’t want that, even if it would mean I would be one of the rich people who don’t have to work.
But, it’s still just wild speculation that that is what is coming instead of just everyone being better off, which is what is happening now in the US and has happened throughout its history.
Of course not. And even though most, or at least many, economists think it would, there’s no guarantee. But…so?
Definitely the vast majority of people will stay even in a place like Haiti. Millions live in super rural places and have been farming family plots for generations–in the real world, little desire to jump ship among this group, even though they’re very impoverished. Millions are old or have some disability or sickness that will prevent them from moving to the US. Many will have a source of remittances once their kids/parents/whatever go to the US. And as younger, single, working-age people emigrate, there will be a lot more jobs open for the ones that remain.
It’s easy to look past the fact that immigrants are actual people with different views and personalities. Some are more adventurous and take initiative, and are more likely to decamp and follow their dreams. Others sort of get in a routine and do their thing, and are more likely to stay. Everyone is concerned about falling flat on their face, language and culture shock, etc. It’s a huge, huge decision to leave, and most can’t or won’t take it.
For sure, its all just speculation - although I wouldn’t call it just blind guessing which is why we have periodic changes in immigration. It’s not to crack down on some badass terrorist thats going to blow up the world - that’s shit is to keep the mouthbreathers busy.
My original point was that open borders, in practice, completely removes any chance or opportunity to make good decisions on behalf of basically everyone.
