(05-05-2010, 04:53 PM)kandrathe Wrote: We are both immigrants, or descended from them. How fair is it that the ones who break the law, get to be the first in line? What about the lawful ones who patiently wait their turn?So why not just abolish the line? Everyone gets in, the market reaches an equilibrium on its own, and nobody has to break any laws. The poorest no longer have to trust coyotes to sneak them across the border. Employers no longer have to break the law to employ mutually beneficial labour. People who followed the existing process lose nothing. Migrants would be much easier to keep track of, since they no longer have to fear any contact with the government.
Sometimes, the way to stop people from breaking laws is to abolish the laws they were breaking. Who does migration harm? Do the benefits outweigh the costs? I think the answer there is overwhelmingly yes. How do you offset an aging population? With young workers. Where might you find a willing pool of young workers, eager to take cheap jobs? Migrants. It's a gigantic gift of free labour, children you didn't have to raise or educate, coming to work in your country anyway. And, when they make their money, the majority will head back home, where they can live cheaply and support their families.
It's not a solution free of its own problems, but it solves the big ones by simply letting people do what they want. Liberty!
-Jester
(05-05-2010, 04:53 PM)kandrathe Wrote: The proper coarse for citizenship is to earn it, by demonstrating that you are willing to work for it. There is no physical measure, but rather one of character and heart.What does a child born in the US have to do in order to earn their citizenship? Nothing. Geography of birth is sufficient. That's as terrible a measure of character and heart as I can possibly imagine. And yet, it's how the vast majority of citizens "earn" their citizenship.
-Jester