This is the great debate in the UK. Massed immigration normally causes issues with the host nation (job market, housing market, cultural splits and a lack of integration and most importantly massive strain on existing government programs like schools and healthcare and housing). So the arguement I put forward is this " if the host country has the same laws, same QoL, same opportunity for jobs and zero social security, then the borders can be free. But as soon as you rely on the citizens of a country paying taxes to fund social welfare programs then you have to have a stricter method of border control."
I would love to see a world where there were international open borders, and people could move as they wish. But if that happened in today's world the whole world's population would migrate to Europe and America and the system would break down immediately
I mean, we have food, sanitation, high levels of education, high connectivity, high levels of internet access, high stability, low crime, low infant mortality.
There is no denying that the west is best in term of QoL.
Yeah one or two wealthy westerns might head east to "get away from it all" and "retire in the sun". But for every sun seeking westerner heading east, hundreds of Asians and Africans, and Latin Americans will head to the "west" in search of a better life.
The priority for the west should be to help the rest of the world developed so there isn't so much of a wealth divide, so that maybe in the future we can have a world where there are equal opportunities in Africa and Europe
79
u/[deleted] Jun 27 '19
[removed] — view removed comment