6 ms·

The risks of immigration (of any sort) include: - spread of disease - erosion of social trust due to conflicting cultures - erosion of other social capital i

The risks of immigration (of any sort) include: - spread of disease - erosion of social trust due to conflicting cultures - erosion of other social capital if immigrant culture has a higher time preference than native culture - identity politics (people vote along ethnic rather than ideological lines) Now, there are certainly benefits to immigration as well, but they must be put in balance. I agree that trade and immigration have many parallels, but there is still a difference between an economic transaction at arms-distance vs. inviting someone into your home.

anigbrowl 7y ago
Is this like when the British settlers deliberately used smallpox-infected blankets to give diseases to the native Americans? Trying to associate immigration with disease is some vile rhetoric.
- CapricornNoble 7y ago
  >>>Trying to associate immigration with disease is some vile rhetoric. Cross-border population movements are a potential vector for disease transmission. Just look at the Google Scholar results from some similar searches, especially [1] and [2]. Casting objective physical science concerns as some sort of subjective expression of xenophobia is unhelpful to mitigating or solving real problems. [1]https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2000/00000004/00000004/art00002 https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2000/000... [2]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640853/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640853/
  - tomhoward 7y ago
    Yet no serious commentator advocates shutting down tourism out of concern for spread of disease, and it's long been found that the key to preventing infection outbreaks is to have a well-functioning medical system.
    - CapricornNoble 7y ago
      Probably because tourists move through very easily monitored access points. Not sure about the US, but most major airports in Asia have body-heat sensors to flag anyone who might be suffering from an infection-related fever. Similar controls should exist at all immigration points to the US. Implementing processes and technical systems to mitigate risk first requires acknowledging that the risk exists, and isn't just "vile rhetoric". Then we can reap the benefits of legal immigration while avoiding the negatives.
      - tomhoward 7y ago
        I've never knowingly been tested by any body heat sensor at an airport or other border crossing, and I've travelled plenty in Asia, USA, Europe, and in/out of my home country of Australia. It’s hard to imagine how much use it would be; an active fever is only one indicator of whether someone is carrying an infectious illness, so such a test will lead to many false positives and negatives. I'm fine with a sober discussion about the economic and moral pros/cons of immigration, and about fair and humane means of controlling immigration. But this line of argument seems like a red herring.
        CapricornNoble 7y ago
        >>>I've never knowingly been tested by any body heat sensor at an airport or other border crossing, and I've travelled plenty in Asia, USA, Europe, and in/out of my home country of Australia. I guess they are easy to miss, they just look like camcorders on tripods, usually, but the checkpoints themselves and their purpose are usually clearly marked. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-27/a-thermal-camera-system-at-incheon-airport-south/1664426 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-27/a-thermal-camera-syst... http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30523865/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/how-thermal-imaging-cameras-spot-flu-fevers/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30523865/ns/technology_and_science...
        tomhoward 7y ago
        Both those links refer to specific infection outbreaks, that health authorities feared (rightly or wrongly) may escalate into global pandemics. Both were contained due mostly to medical systems implementing standard procedures for controlling outbreaks. Checking some people at some border crossings may have helped somewhat, but it was only one part of a much broader response. The point stands; no recent, serious infectious outbreak can be blamed on immigration - authorised or not - any more than any can be blamed on tourism. It's just not a serious part of the discussion, and it is likely invoked as an attempt to cast certain classes of foreigners as unclean and trigger susceptible people's disgust response.

anigbrowl 7y ago

Is this like when the British settlers deliberately used smallpox-infected blankets to give diseases to the native Americans? Trying to associate immigration with disease is some vile rhetoric.

CapricornNoble 7y ago
>>>Trying to associate immigration with disease is some vile rhetoric. Cross-border population movements are a potential vector for disease transmission. Just look at the Google Scholar results from some similar searches, especially [1] and [2]. Casting objective physical science concerns as some sort of subjective expression of xenophobia is unhelpful to mitigating or solving real problems. [1]https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2000/00000004/00000004/art00002 https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iuatld/ijtld/2000/000... [2]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640853/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640853/
- tomhoward 7y ago
  Yet no serious commentator advocates shutting down tourism out of concern for spread of disease, and it's long been found that the key to preventing infection outbreaks is to have a well-functioning medical system.
  - CapricornNoble 7y ago
    Probably because tourists move through very easily monitored access points. Not sure about the US, but most major airports in Asia have body-heat sensors to flag anyone who might be suffering from an infection-related fever. Similar controls should exist at all immigration points to the US. Implementing processes and technical systems to mitigate risk first requires acknowledging that the risk exists, and isn't just "vile rhetoric". Then we can reap the benefits of legal immigration while avoiding the negatives.
    - tomhoward 7y ago
      I've never knowingly been tested by any body heat sensor at an airport or other border crossing, and I've travelled plenty in Asia, USA, Europe, and in/out of my home country of Australia. It’s hard to imagine how much use it would be; an active fever is only one indicator of whether someone is carrying an infectious illness, so such a test will lead to many false positives and negatives. I'm fine with a sober discussion about the economic and moral pros/cons of immigration, and about fair and humane means of controlling immigration. But this line of argument seems like a red herring.
      - CapricornNoble 7y ago
        >>>I've never knowingly been tested by any body heat sensor at an airport or other border crossing, and I've travelled plenty in Asia, USA, Europe, and in/out of my home country of Australia. I guess they are easy to miss, they just look like camcorders on tripods, usually, but the checkpoints themselves and their purpose are usually clearly marked. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-27/a-thermal-camera-system-at-incheon-airport-south/1664426 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-27/a-thermal-camera-syst... http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30523865/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/how-thermal-imaging-cameras-spot-flu-fevers/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30523865/ns/technology_and_science...
        tomhoward 7y ago
        Both those links refer to specific infection outbreaks, that health authorities feared (rightly or wrongly) may escalate into global pandemics. Both were contained due mostly to medical systems implementing standard procedures for controlling outbreaks. Checking some people at some border crossings may have helped somewhat, but it was only one part of a much broader response. The point stands; no recent, serious infectious outbreak can be blamed on immigration - authorised or not - any more than any can be blamed on tourism. It's just not a serious part of the discussion, and it is likely invoked as an attempt to cast certain classes of foreigners as unclean and trigger susceptible people's disgust response.