11 ms·
In the interest of moving the Overton window, I've yet to hear a good, logical reason why we don't allow the free movement of people between administrative stat
by brm 4y ago
In the interest of moving the Overton window, I've yet to hear a good, logical reason why we don't allow the free movement of people between administrative states.
- snowpid 4y ago1.) welfare state 2.) some people refuse to integrate like Expats using only English.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- eloisant 4y ago1. Immigrants are a net positive for the welfare state because you don't have to pay for their education and all their young years where they don't produce anything. They come ready to work and pay taxes. 2. Expats who only speak English and not the local language are the one who have no trouble getting a visa anyway. To take the example of France, the countries from where people want to migrate (and can't even come with a tourist visa) are mostly African French speaking countries.
- balderdash 4y agoI don’t think you can make the blanket statement that immigrants are educated, want to work (who does?!), and pay taxes.
- snowpid 4y ago1. This is not in case in Germany generally. What if the immigrants are uneducated? 2. strenghts my argument.
- eru 4y agoYou can have free movement without extending to welfare state to non-citizen.
- 082349872349872 4y agoprobably not the why you were looking for, but 1914*. cf Zweig, The World of Yesterday for the memoirs of someone who remembered a world without. * iow, the start of the "short 20th century"
- yourapostasy 4y agoMan, did Zweig ever have an ear for lyrically lush phrasing. His and Garet Garrett's polemics against strident nationalism unfortunately fell upon deaf ears.
- michens 4y agoTo reduce the impact of foreign intelligence agencies? Especially important in the EU nowadays.
- eru 4y agoHuh? As if an FSB agent couldn't get a passport..
- gggggg5 4y agoBasically any foreign intelligence agency can produce perfect fake passports (except for the chip, but you don't need a functional chip). Even regular criminals manage to produce good enough documents to travel with, and those guys don't have access to Heidelberg printing presses.
- rwmj 4y agoPretty sure any half-competent intelligence agency should be able to make the chip too, if only by infiltrating the company that makes the passports.
- gggggg5 4y agoSure, I can't imagine it being too difficult to compromise the keys for some first world country. But there's no need to bother, you won't get busted at an airport because the chip of your passport failed. If they were suspicious, they'd just go through a document verification checklist and see if your passport has the correct physical features. Check out the PRADO glossary for example https://www.consilium.europa.eu/prado/en/prado-glossary/prado-glossary.pdf https://www.consilium.europa.eu/prado/en/prado-glossary/prad... A bunch of EU countries still issue non-biometric passports, even if with limited validity periods.
- dfadsadsf 4y agoSame reason you do not invite local “unhoused” meth addict to live in your spare bedroom. There are significant negative consequences from crime to destruction of high trust society.
- SCdF 4y agoAre you intentionally equating people who are from countries with less passport mobility than yours with meth addicts?
- prepend 4y agoFrom a US perspective, I think it’s because people enter on travel visas and do not leave. I had a coworker from India who was a naturalized citizen for 5-10 years and he was trying to get travel visas for his parents to visit. He had applied many times and been denied each time. We talked about it and he said that the reason given was that the state department considered his parents a risk to not leave at the end of their visit. Comically, when I complained about how that was wrong and his parents would obviously go back he said “100% they will stay, I don’t really blame the visa people. My in laws stayed on a travel visa years ago and are still here.” There’s also a reciprocity issue that’s sort of chicken and egg. India didn’t grant visas easily back in 2005 because the US didn’t grant their citizens visas.
- eloisant 4y agoThe question isn't that much "why don't we accept all travel visas" but "why don't we accept all immigrants". People are talking about the "risk that they stay" like it's something bad to have too many immigrants. And it ended up like some common sense idea. But what if it's not? Did California or New York suffer from getting people moving from all the "country side" state? Did the US suffer from their immigration waves when they had open borders, and all you needed to get in was a medical exam on Ellis Island?
- prepend 4y agoI think there’s pretty common and clear data on why unlimited immigration is harmful to the receiving country [0] (tl;dr; lowers wages and increases costs for non-immigrants). The question is whether it’s worth it for the obvious benefit to immigrants. So it may be a net benefit when factoring the improvements to people who immigrate in. The US benefited greatly from open immigration 100+ years ago because they weren’t that great and there wasn’t much to lose. So it’s apples to oranges of open immigration then to open immigration now. Back then there were no government services and land was literally given out for free. [0] https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/3-ways-immigration-helps-and-hurts-the-economy.aspx https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/3-ways-immi...
- arvinsim 4y ago
- detrites 4y agoJust move to any place that's had its workforce, welfare system and social order decimated by impoverished immigrants and given enough time to amass some awful experiences, you'll be able to list your own reasons.
- eru 4y ago> Just move to any place that's had its workforce, welfare system and social order decimated by impoverished immigrants [...] Can you name an example?
- detrites 4y agoMany parts of the UK, and half of mainland Europe? Was ongoing and in decline in some places, but become worse since the Ukraine crisis which has exacerbated, as both wealthy and poor are arriving en masse straining limited resources. Sure, in a country with unused land, untapped resources, and infrastructure that can easily adapt, it could (potentially) result in growth and prosperity for all. But much of overcrowded Europe doesn't meet the prerequisites.
- eru 4y agoHow do migrants decimate the workforce? Wouldn't they add to the workforce? (Though I do agree that eg the German policy to ban asylum seekers from working while at the same time enrolling them in welfare is asinine. The devil finds work for bored young man.) Enrolling migrants in the welfare system is a choice. It's easy to restrict the welfare system to citizens only. Social order is a bit too nebulous to make a comment.
- detrites 4y agoMigrants from poorer countries have lower standards of living, and often able to claim exclusive subsidies. When a job market is saturated with people willing to do jobs for way less, the existing workforce gets pushed out. Country level this mightn't change much initially, as the existing workforce moves where they maintain their income. But on a local level it's disruptive, and if not held in check flows up to country-level. (A "brain-drain".)
- klntsky 4y agoPublic goods exist.
- eru 4y agoPublic goods are by definition non-rivalrous. So other people coming and enjoying them is fine.
- rippercushions 4y agoFor bonus points, explain why that reason should apply to movement between nation states, but not to movement between the states of a nation state.
- elvis10ten 4y agoBecause of the asymmetry of prosperity? Movement is gonna be one-sided from a lot of less prosperous countries. I think this list clearly reflects that: you are ranked higher if movement is close to equilibrium (you have a country lots of people also want to move to or not a lot of people want to leave).
- whodidntante 4y agoThe current politics around this issue is not simply about free movement. It is about economics. For example, it is easy to travel to Denmark, using Denmark as an example of an "enlightened" state. However, if you intend to stay for more than 3 months, you must secure work/residency before even arriving. State benefits are also available only to citizens and others of certain legal status, with more limited benefits available to EU citizens. The actual question that is being debated is allowing free movement into this country while at the same time providing full benefits (welfare, housing, health, etc) without requiring job/work permit/etc.
- _xnmw 4y ago1. Large-scale free movement of people between administrative states is called "an invasion". Why doesn't Ukraine just let Russians walk into Kiev? 2. Because it would lead to further concentration and centralization of power and money and influence and insanely expensive real estate in the hands of even fewer. 3. Because it is nice to live in a community of people that speak the same language, have a shared culture, and can interact according to some shared norms. I understand this is already lost in Western urban centers, so cultural homogeneity not valued anymore. But those who have it, value it.
- 082349872349872 4y ago> I understand this is already lost in Western urban centers I don't want to accuse anyone of lying to you on the internet ... but as I've had no problem interacting according to shared norms (with varied languages and varied cultures) in many* Western urban centers, I will suggest you may wish to reconsider the veracity of your sources. * eg. Amsterdam Barcelona Boston Edinburgh Hamburg London Los Angeles Milan New York Paris Salzburg Seattle Vancouver
- _xnmw 4y agoSource: I was born in Toronto, and have been to many of the Western cities you mentioned, and didn’t know anything else until I moved to culturally homogeneous Ukraine. The difference is night and day. Life is just more meaningful and I have a much stronger relationship with people living around me. I would prefer Bangladesh to Toronto anytime (and yes I have actually travelled extensively in Bangladesh, and I am NOT ethnically Bengali) just because of the cultural homogeneity. There is no place on Earth I hate more than Dubai because of the cultural potpourri. Maybe it’s just me, but I strongly prefer cultural homogeneity over everything else, even risking my life in a warzone right now (Kyiv) because I love being part of a well-defined centuries-old cultural heritage.
- 082349872349872 4y agoFair enough; good luck! I hope to visit Одеса* some day (but not as a war zone). * in my head-canon, the "swarthy moldovan" of Смуглянка fame is not necessarily an ethnic moldovan, but possibly a vineyard worker from the Moldavanka slum (as it was then) of Odesa.
- balderdash 4y agoWell considering one general way of defining the purpose of a nation state is to provide for the security, economic/social/public welfare, and administration of justice for its citizens - its hard to see mass migration from certain states to others as aligning with those obligations.
- yucky 4y agoThe same reason that has been true since the beginning of civilization - resources are limited. Also, not all cultures align. Hundreds of millions of people are very much against some of the values that you may hold dear. If enough of them become your neighbors, you may be forced to align to their values.