7 ms·
Accepting immigrants who desperately want to come is nothing like taking resources by force.
by satyrnein 4y ago
Accepting immigrants who desperately want to come is nothing like taking resources by force.
- cudgy 4y agoTrue, but the parent post did not mention use of force. We cannot deny that there is a brain drain in many third world countries that desperately need well trained workers that is accelerated by acceptance of immigrants into developed nations like the US. Who’s going to lead these countries into better governance and economic improvement if all the talent is incentivized to leave their home countries for greener pastures?
- WalterBright 4y agoWho's going to lead them - they are. It's up to the citizens of those countries to select the government and policies that do not drive away their brains. Usually that means rejecting socialism.
- satyrnein 4y agoImmigration was compared to "colonial appropriation" which doesn't exactly sound voluntary. In contrast, it would be a terrible thing to forcibly lock people into their birth countries to stop brain drain.
- nicbou 4y agoIt’s not voluntary to the drained countries
- satyrnein 4y agoSure it is, unless they have passed laws against emigration, like North Korea. (Of course, those laws would rightly be seen as totalitarian.)
- nicbou 4y agoYou confuse "not committing human rights abuses" with "voluntary". Countries that are losing their best and brightest are not happy about it.
- satyrnein 4y agoSo clear up my confusion: what should we do about it? Are we supposed to commit their human rights abuses for them, by denying entry to their best and brightest?
- csomar 4y agoThere are many ways this play out, and people in Western countries or not enough knowledge of the politics may not see it. For example, many third-world countries had tax-free regimes for tech/services export in order to boost these industries. This made sense to them. If you made $100K contracting for a US company, you'd pay $0. But you'd also get to spend/transfer that much needed money into the economy. You'd probably also not use any of the government services because they are sub-par to what you can get privately. Now, if you are required to pay an income tax at par to what you pay in developed countries, the whole scheme will no longer make sense. No one will agree to pay $50k and get no services in return. So you end moving to some other destination (ie: Dubai, or a western country where you pay $50k but relatively get your money's worth). This is as close to war as it can get.
- jhbadger 4y ago>In contrast, it would be a terrible thing to forcibly lock people into their birth countries to stop brain drain. This isn't hypothetical, of course. This is how places like the Soviet Union and East Germany worked. It was policy to literally shoot people trying to leave the country without permission. On the other hand, while certainly not justifying this atrocity, there certainly has been a "brain drain" as engineers, physicians, and scientists from the former Eastern Bloc have moved West for better employment opportunities.
- goodpoint 4y agoYou are confusing two things. Accepting immigrants is the humane thing to do. Perpetuating economic inequality across the world is not. Millions have to choose between working for meager salaries in one place or move to be exploited elsewhere. They are getting the short stick both ways.