Diane Feinstein is indeed THE trolley problem
1 Like
This only works if there is a multilateral agreement anyway, compensation for state spending and who is eligible is one of the details to work out, not some insurmountable obstacle.
We unfortunately already have this and it’s super creepy that you want more of it.
3 Likes
I know. My question is how you want to achieve both open borders and a generous welfare state. I don’t think that’s trivial.
Why are they going to be less productive than current residents? (not the 70 year olds, just immigrants in general) You know the economists think open borders drastically increases wealth?
3 Likes
There is zero middle ground with Republicans on reforms that make voting easier. They’ll say that it is some “liberal wishlist that weakens voting integrity” and pay no political price for it. Dems have to nuke the filibuster or walk away from bills like this.
2 Likes
Give them citizenship. That’s not what I am talking about. What about the person who came into the country 28 months/weeks/days/hours ago? What should they get? I think that’s a valid question.
I was responding to your “fuck you” to NBZ and Microbet calling him deplorable. I don’t think that’s warranted if somebody believes that not all immigrants should get automatic citizenship or resident status.
If you offer generous benefits then there will be a people who will be
a) better off in the US than in their home country
and
b) will not be productive enough to make up for these benefits.
Now you can say you are fine with a whole bunch of people being a net negative for the social safety net system. That’s fine. You just have to acknowledge that this will decrease the per capita benefits for everyone.
Can you link me to anything that’s less than a book in length?
I called that view deplorable. I even went out of my way to show that I understand people can have a deplorable opinion and not be a deplorable person. So, like you’re lying.
We already have this; they just happened to be born here.
If we redistribute per capita benefits appropriately (compared to what they are now), it’s possible that this isn’t true.
Ok, change my post to “called his view deplorable”. The point still stands. Also didn’t you argue in the moderation thread that calling someone’s posts stupid is the same as calling that person stupid, or was that someone else?
Yes. You can’t kick them out and having to many of them is a problem. Ask any country that has a pension system and an upside down age pyramid.
No. Why are you just assuming it’s not the case? Just Google it. I’m not asserting it’s a guarantee, but open borders dramatically increasing wealth is a very common position for economists.
I would be ok with lower benefits, but I think you’re wrong to assume that would happen.
Because it’s counter-intuitive that letting every person that is a net negative for the social safety net (eg. because of age, medical condition, disability) into the country is better than not doing that.
I didn’t call his post stupid. I’m not trying to call him deplorable. I made that clear. I do think borders are immoral, even deplorable. But lots of well meaning people support them for various reasons.
Why would immigrants, on average, be less productive? They show gumption and ambition on average. They have the means to travel in average. They are not feeble on average. They come here for work on average.
1 Like
Immigrants are young on average. Do you imagine a bunch of 80 year old Guatemalans are going to come here by themselves?
1 Like
I really don’t have a problem with his language. I came into this debate knowing that my views would be problematic to some.
“be productive or die”
Full on deplorable
1 Like