Immigration as Voluntary Exchange - Alex Nowrasteh - Libertarianism.org

Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute's Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, explains the philosophy behind his position on immigration in about a minute. To put it simply: since, for the most part, immigration involves a series of voluntary exchanges between two consenting parties, the state shouldn't interfere with it.
Produced by Evan Banks and Aaron Powell.
---
From “immigrants are going to take American jobs” to “they’re going to commit crimes” or “they won’t learn English,” we’ve heard it all. The Most Common Arguments Against Immigration and Why They’re Wrong contains the 15 most common arguments against immigration and Nowrasteh’s responses to them.
From economics to crime, terrorism, cultural assimilation, and the voting habits of immigrants, he considers the most common arguments against immigration and rejects them using sound reasoning and evidence.
Download your FREE copy of The Most Common Arguments Against Immigration and Why They're Wrong here:
www.libertarianism.org/books/...

[@sasho70]

That actually sounds like a solid idea.

[@MrHerrIQarthur]

Yes.

[@sasho70]

I`m a libertarian. I dont want the state to decide where I can or cant go.

[@sasho70]

Why not ?

[@MrHerrIQarthur]

More immigrants = a society with more competing cultures, ideologes, races & latent tensions & conflicts. According to the biggest study on Diversity it = societies with less trust, less social cohesion, less charity, political activity, less altruism, less friends & less belongingness. A Canadian study showed that a 25% increase in belongingness = equivalent happines, to a 110% increase in salery. I'll trade the few $ open border immigration's might provide, for that sense of belongingness

[@24AheadDotCom]

Another cost of that "voluntary exchange" is increased power to far-left racial power groups like the NCLR. An even more insidious cost is increased power inside the U.S. to the Mexican govt. Another cost is reduced congressional representation for citizens (illegal aliens affect such apportionment). Another cost is increased political corruption (as pols turn a blind eye to massive illegal activity). Nowrasteh's "voluntary" exchange is involuntary to everyone who isn't getting a cut.

[@MrHerrIQarthur]

Of course. If they're Indistinguishable from the natives and easily assimilated. I dont see how there could be a sociological problem following from such an immigration. I haven't seen any date that would convince me that there would be problems, but Im open to the idea if enough evidence are presented to me.

[@sasho70]

"CAPITAL" is not a constant that divides itself by the number of workers. Read your economics.

[@Ulysses8813]

Are you in favour of free immigration with Europe?

[@sasho70]

Ok, so...immigrants are alright, if they are easily integrated ?

[@sasho70]

So who decides if they are or they arent. The government ? :D

[@sasho70]

Well, be that as it may from your point of you, you have no right to inforce a law on an employer and limit his options.

[@MrHerrIQarthur]

That is taking my dichotamy out of context! We are talking about the context of the Occidents economic policys! Not Belaru's who was subject to marxism for decades adding additional factors to take into account. The immigrants that made up USA was majority European immigrants. Immigrants who share a similar phenotype to the natives, become indistinguishable & integrated much easier. This is not an applicable scenario & a strawman of what is being argued & a red herring of what I said.

[@sasho70]

This is what happens when you create a huge welfare state with social, unemployment security and so on. The immigrants are not to blame

[@sasho70]

Thats a fairy-tale. By the same logic, I can say: Which one do you prefer: the USA, a country made almost entirely by immigrants and its progress based on open borders OR for instance , Belarus, which has no outside persons going in ?

[@KaiserinAstrid]

It also means more competition for labor and less capital per worker, which means lower average productivitiy and hence less money for you if you're a worker.

[@sasho70]

It also doesnt give me the right to smoke weed in public, now does it ? :) You are missing the point.

[@OilBarron84]

a lot of libertarian policies, like this one, are overly idealistic and have no grounding in reality. You'd have to be living in a fantasy land for them to work.

[@MrHerrIQarthur]

I have the right to use your toothbrush.