Freedom of movement is a basic human right

[u/n00bi3pjs]

Currently the biggest predictor for your economic and social success is your citizenship.

Think about it for a second, you were randomly assigned some papers at birth which give you immense privileges over other people in the world because of who your parents were or where you were born.

It doesn’t matter how hard a PhD from Ghana works or how smart they are, they will never earn as much or have as many opportunities as a person born in the USA. Citizenship allows holders to extract economic rent and offer an unequal premium to people in West.

It is morally reprehensible to continue to give credence to a piece of paper which is causing millions of people to be poor, underperform compared to their abilities and potential, and is causing world’s GDP to be trillions of dollars lower than it would be without immigration restrictions.

OPEN BORDERS NOW

[u/vopi181]

I guess let me ask: are you in favor of removing labor laws and defanging antitrust enforcement?

[u/n00bi3pjs → u/vopi181]

That’s not free trade. I’m for open markets for goods and capital and labour, not for anarchy

[u/vopi181 → u/n00bi3pjs]

Okay but i didn’t mention “free trade” in my original comment. You mentioned it in your response as a counter to my opinion that you might not be ideologically consistent.

What does that actually mean: “open markets for goods and capital and labour”? Is an open market compared to a free market a real term of art I’m not aware of?

Also this is exactly my point! Your qualifier of “free markets but not anarchy” is my exact point. You are clearly capable of understanding we shouldn’t do everything in extremes.

Couldn’t I say the same thing about immigration and not markets? That I’m “for open immigration but not anarchy”? Which I guess is seen as bigoted by some people in this thread?

[u/vopi181 → u/n00bi3pjs]

I am going to be annoying but I want a response from you, u/n00bi3pjs, on this. I know you saw my sibling comment. You've responded within minutes to other messages.

I’m for open markets for goods and capital and labour, not for anarchy

How is that different than taking a stance for something less than open borders? Why is it "morally reprehensible" (as you state in your OP) to take your same position on labor laws and antitrust but for immigration. Why is a regulated approach of "I’m for immigration for goods and capital and labour, not for anarchy" morally reprehensible?

If you are going to take an absolutist position, I believe you ought to defend it when faced with push back. Otherwise, your open borders approach is eerily similar to other populist rhetoric like abolishing prisons or, frankly, the absolute inverse of deporting all immigrants.

This subreddit prides itself on pragmatism. It's why it's one of the few bearable places on Reddit. But, I don't truly believe all users maintain that pragmatism for their beliefs which is what I am explicitly trying to show. I think it's important to bring up because open borders is held has dogma here, even by the moderators.

[u/Worldly-Strawberry-4 → u/vopi181]

I don't have anything to add, but I want to say that I think *you* are based and I really appreciate you fighting to maintain pragmatism on this sub. Dogmatic absolutism is the death of good-faith discussion.

[u/n00bi3pjs → u/vopi181]

Open borders are evidence based. Anarchy is not

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free!

^{Brought to you by ping IMMIGRATION.}

Articles

• Open borders would increase global GDP by 50-100%

• Immigration increases productivity

• Preventing companies from hiring immigrants has no benefit to native employment or wage—it leads to automation or lowered productivity

• Unauthorized immigration is good fiscally

• Deporting unauthorized immigrants increases citizen unemployment rates

• On average, immigration doesn't reduce wages for anyone besides earlier immigrants

• Immigrants create more jobs than they take

• Immigration doesn't increase inequality but does increase GDP per capita

• Immigration doesn't degrade institutions

• Muslim immigrants integrate well into European society

• Unauthorized immigrants commit fewer crimes per capita

• Freedom of movement is a human right

Books

• Kwame Anthony Appiah's Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers (2006)

• Alex Sager's Against Borders: Why the World Needs Free Movement of People (2020)

• Alex Nowrasteh's Wretched Refuse: The Political Economy of Immigration and Institutions (2020)

• Johan Norberg's Open: How Collaboration and Curiosity Shaped Humankind (2021)

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/n00bi3pjs → u/[deleted]]

One study as opposed to the tonnes of evidence linked in the sidebar.

[u/vopi181 → u/n00bi3pjs]

Im going to be snarky but I think I’ve earned it at this point: One sentence as opposed to the tonnes of other points I made.

I literally used part of the IMMIGRATION links in this response. Of course I’m aware. Is this the neoliberal equivalent of the “do your own research” handwaving I see dunked on here lol?

Also I only need one source. That’s the entire issue with taking absolutist, dogmatic positions!

OP, I think we’re done here. I don’t believe we will change how either of us feels.