Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The free lunch of using government force (i.e. closed borders) to keep out your competition who can do your job better than you.
What "process" did Columbus or Thomas Paine go through?
And like I said, I understand that we can't open the borders wide open overnight - it's the current bureaucracy and limits that I have a problem with. Who in their right mind would go through the risks of being illegal if legal immigration was more accessible?
If an employer recruited you - you may come. If you have a job - you can stay. Dat's it.
More workers means faster economic growth, and we won't be buying so many things from China...
Shouldn't it be up to the employers to decide who has job skills and who doesn't? And there's a strong demand for the kind of labor "illegal" immigrants have to offer - only government force stands in the way.
For the millionth time - social services shouldn't exist, period. They are the problem, not the immigrants.
The economic growth Chinese cities are experiencing are indeed something to strive for. As for the slums of India - they are a consequence of socialism and unemployment.
Economic growth, which freer movement of people and capital would contribute to, has been shown to decrease birth rates in every society where it happened, (in many cases too well - threatening to cut their numbers in half with every generation). It is your "out of sight, out of mind" philosophy that's contributing to unsustainable population growth!
And if population growth is economically sustainable it is a good thing - there is no known limit for how many tens or hundreds of billions, or even trillions, our solar system can support.
You don't seem to understand that there are natural economic limits to immigration. Why would they spend money to come to a place where there are higher costs of living, no public property to build slums on, and no jobs to be found?
We agree that those countries need to reform, but holding a gun to its citizen's heads and keeping them from leaving is not the way to do it. In every example of every country that pulled itself out of poverty in the 20th century, the former expatriates led the way, returning to lead after spending time studying and/or working in a more successful country, most often the United States.
You are nothing more than a de facto anarchist.
Again: if you do not like the way we do things here-------------leave! Your poisonous ideas are little more than a barrage of insults against law and order, First World style.
I'm not an anarchist, I'm an anarcho-capitalist, capitalism being the key word there. Calling an anarcho-capitalist an anarchist is like calling a chickpea a chicken. And this country used to, for the most part, stand precisely for the principles I am now advocating!
I'm not an anarchist, I'm an anarcho-capitalist, capitalism being the key word there. Calling an anarcho-capitalist an anarchist is like calling a chickpea a chicken. And this country used to, for the most part, stand precisely for the principles I am now advocating!
This country used to, for the most part, kill Indians, sell blacks, put 12 years old boys to work in coal mines, whip horses, and dump sewage in the nearest river. It no longer does these things...
The free lunch of using government force (i.e. closed borders) to keep out your competition who can do your job better than you.
What "process" did Columbus or Thomas Paine go through?
And like I said, I understand that we can't open the borders wide open overnight - it's the current bureaucracy and limits that I have a problem with. Who in their right mind would go through the risks of being illegal if legal immigration was more accessible?
If an employer recruited you - you may come. If you have a job - you can stay. Dat's it.
More workers means faster economic growth, and we won't be buying so many things from China...
Shouldn't it be up to the employers to decide who has job skills and who doesn't? And there's a strong demand for the kind of labor "illegal" immigrants have to offer - only government force stands in the way.
For the millionth time - social services shouldn't exist, period. They are the problem, not the immigrants.
The economic growth Chinese cities are experiencing are indeed something to strive for. As for the slums of India - they are a consequence of socialism and unemployment.
Economic growth, which freer movement of people and capital would contribute to, has been shown to decrease birth rates in every society where it happened, (in many cases too well - threatening to cut their numbers in half with every generation). It is your "out of sight, out of mind" philosophy that's contributing to unsustainable population growth!
And if population growth is economically sustainable it is a good thing - there is no known limit for how many tens or hundreds of billions, or even trillions, our solar system can support.
You don't seem to understand that there are natural economic limits to immigration. Why would they spend money to come to a place where there are higher costs of living, no public property to build slums on, and no jobs to be found?
We agree that those countries need to reform, but holding a gun to its citizen's heads and keeping them from leaving is not the way to do it. In every example of every country that pulled itself out of poverty in the 20th century, the former expatriates led the way, returning to lead after spending time studying and/or working in a more successful country, most often the United States.
I am sure that you are a very fine young man and you have obviously devoted a great deal of thought to this............but it just does not make a great deal of sense. That makes it rather difficult to respond to.
You claim to want open borders, yet you state:
Quote:
If an employer recruited you - you may come. If you have a job - you can stay. Dat's it.
If you need to have a job in order to come here, then your borders are not really open, are they?
Quote:
For the millionth time - social services shouldn't exist, period. They are the problem, not the immigrants.
This is simply not realistic. What is it that you propose to do for orphaned children or someone who is disabled as the result of an auto accident?
Quote:
And if population growth is economically sustainable it is a good thing - there is no known limit for how many tens or hundreds of billions, or even trillions, our solar system can support.
Sorry, but this is beginning to bring back memories of conversations with ProLogic so I think I will sign off here. Best of luck to you in your quest to do whatever it is you are trying to do.
If you need to have a job in order to come here, then your borders are not really open, are they?
As I've stated before, government protectionism is not a drug you can quit cold turkey, you have to phase it out gradually. And in absence of government bureaucracy the job requirement wouldn't be that big of a problem: why would people come here if there are no benefits and no jobs? It's easier to be poor in a poor country than a rich one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andreabeth
This is simply not realistic. What is it that you propose to do for orphaned children or someone who is disabled as the result of an auto accident?
Private charity will do some of the things the government currently does, and far more efficiently. And some benefits need to go away - people need to pull their own economic weight in order to make civilized society possible. Life doesn't owe anyone a free ride.
As for government services... I've seen the corruption first-hand.
The Russian Mafia in New Jersey is milking government benefits for the elderly like you wouldn't believe! One person can get like 30 hours a week of visiting nurse services (for which their agency gets like $150 an hour), plus $10,000+ a month in medical services and prescriptions. Every Russian I know over the age of 50 is disabled and/or sick as hell, if you know what I mean, for which they get kickbacks, but as much as a quarter million per person per year goes to the "intermediaries". Also almost like every elderly Russian couple in NJ is divorced (my parents as well) - you get more benefits that way, including housing, etc. And those "visiting nurses" visit on paper only (unless there's an inspection, which is when Oscar-worthy performances take place), but after "working" 15 years they get full government benefits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
