2 ms·
In the modern world migrants tend to enhance, not deplete, an area. Your model works best for agricultural societies with no land ownership. I'm not sure how m
by whiddershins 9y ago
In the modern world migrants tend to enhance, not deplete, an area.
Your model works best for agricultural societies with no land ownership. I'm not sure how many historical examples we have of that.
In general, in the modern world, population density tends to increase economic activity and have a growth effect on GDP.
In the modern world borders also prevent competition for citizens by different social and political structures. Most tyrants and despots might be completely defanged by the loss of their populace to more just and humane regions.
It is possible open borders could create a "market system" for the greatest resource in the world: human capital. Which I guess could theoretically render war obsolete.
- mc32 9y ago"In the modern world migrants tend to enhance, not deplete, an area." You realize that's the result of controlled migration, not uncontrolled migration. But your proposal sounds like a paradox. On the one hand you have no borders but on the other hand someone is enforcing "state actor" laws. Without borders corporations become the de facto government. Why pay Japanese auto workers 1800 yen an hour when I can just put a factory in the middle of the Indian countryside and pay 120 rupees? But instead of just autos, do that for everything!