Food was good, conversation was better.
Korean Fusion is yummy stuff. Pita Bread, Korean BBQ (Golbi?), and Kimchi (Mild American Kimchi) make for a tasty semi-sandwich. Fried (battered?) plantains with chimichurri sauce was excellent.
Good overarching conversation, spanning epistemology, ethics, HBD, food, Chicago, Transformers, and a few other topics in a long hour.
I think we were both in agreement that the anti-immigrationists (him) and the pro-immigrationists are mostly talking past one another.
our agreement:
The pro-immigrationists are for Jose trading his lawnmowing work for my $, and his $ for lodging and food...and are highly offended by busybodies trying to get in the way of his trading with me and his landlord.
The anti-immigrationists are opposed to American Andy having to pay for Jose, or his effects, when Jose crashes his car, or has 6 children.
Furthermore, the anti-immigrationists are opposed to the incremental changes in our culture produced by Jose (and family)....and especially by large numbers of Joses.
As is normal, very few folks are willing to acknowledge both sides of the issue.
I suggested that if these are really the issues, we should simply abolish legal immigration, illegal immigration-enforcement, and land-citizenship. Thus Jose gets to trade lawnmowing with whomever he wants, Andy doesn't have to pay for Jose, and Jose doesn't get to vote, nor do his kids. I remain in favor of a net-taxes paid requirement for citizenship...or more specifically for voting privileges.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Thus Jose gets to trade lawnmowing with whomever he wants, Andy doesn't have to pay for Jose, and Jose doesn't get to vote, nor do his kids.
You have good ideas, but there is no practical application. Activists today have their leech jaws firmly implanted in the body politic under the guise of protecting "human rights" and have installed centralized welfare States with no screening. No chance of cutting off immigrants from subsidies. No chance.
Our local Agriculture loan program is desperate for minorities to whom they can lend money, so they are importing Mexican nationals who promptly use the system to launder drug money. One of these guys spent a year in prison with no break in his loan program. How does one farm from prison? On one hand the mind boggles, on the other it is more of the same.
RSF,
As a hardcore libertarian, the fact that government agencies have managed to colossally screw up something they touched isn't exactly surprising. My vote is that it's government involvement that IS the problem...and getting government out would solv ethe problem. But that's not the point you were making.
We agree to get government out of the business of ruining things.
I say until then we need to limit immigration.
So long as we agree that it's a value-proposition with value on both sides...then it's an emphasis question.
I'm personally of the opinion that while both are bad, it's a greater evil to restrict trade with honest traders who are unfortunate in their choice of parents than it is to get stuck paying for free riders. I recognize that other folks can rationally disagree.
So long as we agree that it's a value-proposition with value on both sides...then it's an emphasis question.
Let us say we throw open the borders to gain the good of trade, and we pay the price of free riders foisted on us by the government.
Now let us say our economy stagnates, that our new arrivals don't add value, that the free riders overwhelm the producers. I'd like to go to the free traders and get my money back, but we have no mechanism for this. The costs have been socialized.
Let's say we close the borders, lose the value of all that trade, and the economy stagnates. I'd like to go to the closed-borders folks to get my value back, but we have no mechanism for this. The costs have been not only socialized, but hidden.
Furthermore,
I think we really need to have a presumption against government action. Assume governments will screw up WHATEVER they do...and then operate accordingly.
Government is required to do nothing for open immigration, while it takes activity to control immigration.
I recognize that a lot of folks like the idea of using MORE government to try to remedy other government-caused problems, but I'm strongly inclined against.
Government is required to do nothing for open immigration
Problem today is that the government is actively promoting dysgenic immigration what with the social welfare programs and State department employees faking paperwork. Open, market based immigration is fine. But we've just about got our government running air conditioned buses down to foreign prisons and loading up criminals to come and burglarize the native population.
I'd like to go to the closed-borders folks to get my value back
We can capture such value at a later date. It is hard to un-immigrate the value destroyers.
At some point you have to develop and make do with the native population. To always chase value in the next village has diminishing returns.
1. So...I've thus far been very happy in my interactions with spanish-speaking immigrants, be they legal, illegal, or unknown status, both in California and in Texas. I've not had any problem with crime in any cases... and as far as I've been able to tell, the data on crime and immigration is pretty inconclusive. I think first generation immigrants are notably better behaved than natives, but maybe 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants aren't?
2. The distinction between not picking up a free $5 on the sidewalk and burning a $5 is purely emotional, and has no non-emotional impact.
3. Wealth creation is cumulative, not captured once. If I don't start the wealth creation process with them now, it's destroyed wealth forever. Wealth creation by bringing more folks into the market has increasing returns, that multiply over time.
4. Furthermore, wealth-creation comes from exactly 2 places: new implemented ideas, and trade between dissimilar people. The more unlike you the people you trade with the higher the potential value to both parties from the trade.
1) I'd say you are wearing rose colored glassed with regards to immigration. It sounds like you move in relatively upper class circles where the immigrants you encounter are productive and add value. You probably don't spend much time going to funerals of acquaintances killed by illegals with sketchy driving skills, or talking to landlords who have had their property destroyed by Somali immigrants (who don't cotton indoor plumbing, and soon try to flush anything, crap everywhere when the commode plugs, then threaten violence from their clan if the landlord tries to evict.), or see businesses driven out by the Russian mafia. These types should be weeded out at the border by a real immigration policy, but we have this romantic (naive? condescending?) notion of nice people coming here to mow our lawns. The authorities don't even keep crime statistics broken out by immigration status: the narrative is more important than reality.
2) We can cut a tree down today, or let it grow a few more years. The choice is not between using it today or watching it burn tomorrow.
3) Wealth creation is cumulative
Wealth destruction is also cumulative.
If someone is productive, they will be productive in their home country. If we need more people, it is better to grow our own.
Wealth creation by bringing more folks into the market has increasing returns, that multiply over time.
You assume they create wealth. But people are expensive--lots of services required, old age costs. Our chain migration policy brings in lots of aged parents and non-working relatives. And we wonder why our economy sucks worse now compared to the late sixties before all this wonderful immigration. Must be all that government activity we didn't have in the late sixties.
4. Furthermore, wealth-creation comes from exactly 2 places: new implemented ideas, and trade between dissimilar people.
Yes! Trade, but don't bring them here.
The more unlike you the people you trade with the higher the potential value to both parties from the trade.
This seems false. Who has more potential value: Germans and Swedes, or Pygmies and Somalis?
Post a Comment