Immigration Reinvigorates the American Dream, Some Republicans Wrongly Focus on Immigration as a Border Issue

The GOP’s colossal November defeat has led many party leaders and conservative pundits including Sean Hannity, John Boehner, Charles Krauthammer to reconsider the GOP’s big government approach to immigration reform. (i.e. e-Verify mandates, fines against employers, and Arizona-style “your papers please.”) Republicans’ preoccupation with the border and rule abiding-ness has distracted them from the real problem: the rigidities of our current immigration laws.

Like capital mobility, labor mobility is critical to economic prosperity. In the case of capital, prohibiting cross-border investing results in missed investment opportunities and hinders startups from accessing much-needed capital that would be readily accessible if not for an arbitrary geopolitical boundary. Similarly, restricting immigration (labor) results in fewer opportunities for workers and inhibits businesses' ability to hire talent and thus compete in an increasingly global marketplace.

Immigration is also, as George Will rightly points out, an entrepreneurial activity that breeds a culture of individualism and personal responsibility; emigrating from ones’ home country requires substantial risk and hard work, leaving behind family and friends for the unknown, in pursuit of greater happiness. This is the soul of American culture. The act of immigrating to the US is remarkably similar to 19th century Americans moving Westward, an economic experience some argue fostered America’s unique culture of rugged individualism and personal responsibility. Immigration today is the essence of the American Dream, proof of the promise that individuals can rise above the circumstances of their birth and leave their children better off.

Contrary to concerns that liberalizing immigration laws would pose a long-term burden to US taxpayers, Dan Griswold points out that “the typical immigrant and his or her descendants pay more in taxes than they consume in government services in terms of net present value.” Moreover, while he also explains that low-skilled immigrants may impose a net cost on state and local governments (for instance public education), these costs are offset by broader benefits to the overall economy.

Republicans would be wise to recognize that immigrants come to America to build a better life through work, not welfare. There is evidence of this through high labor-force participation rates and immigrant labor movement toward states that offer better employment prospects, rather than welfare benefits. For instance, labor participation rates are higher for foreign-born adults than native-born adults, 67.9 versus 64.1 percent. This gap is even higher among men 80.1 to 70.1 percent. Moreover, fully 94 percent of unauthorized immigrant males were in the labor force in the mid-2000s. Immigrants in the 2000s were also far more likely to immigrate to states with low welfare spending per capita. For instance, the 10 lowest welfare-spending states experienced a 35 percent increase in unauthorized immigrant workers, the top ten welfare-spending states only experienced an 11 percent increase. (Data sourced here). These data indicate that immigrants, including low-skilled immigrants, come to America to earn money in the private economy. The failure to recognize that immigrants are here to work for a better life is insulting and does not win their votes or the votes of those who identify with immigrants.

Republicans have every reason to view immigration as an opportunity to bolster the American belief in upward economic mobility and to strengthen America’s culture of individualism, hard work, and personal responsibility. Recognizing this would help the GOP re-focus their attention on liberalizing our current immigration laws making it easier for people to come here and work with government authorization.

Instead many Republicans (take the Republican presidential primary for example) get caught up in the border and enforcing apparently ineffective immigration rules. This devolves into exclusionary speech that ignores the real reason that people come to the United States. The competitive political process coupled with changing demographics have made it in the GOP’s political interest to accept the facts that immigration strengthens our economy, our culture, and a belief in the American Dream.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Libertymike||

    Yes, there is evidence that male immigrants are more apt to be employed than native gringos.

    My buddy in south Florida inherited approximately $750,000.00 from his mother a couple of years ago. He has not worked since. He's only 50 - but he does employ Carlos, who is from Mexico, one day a week for various and sundry purposes.

    My friend is, like me, an anarcho-free enterprise-individualist who loathes the papers please society and is happy to provide some employment to a man who refused to genuflect to the lawlessness that is ICE.

    In a free society, there are no borders. Borders are for bolzheviks.

  • Randian||

    Are you White Indian now?

  • dave b.||

    The problem is that you can have open borders or you can have a welfare state, but you can't have both.

  • Libertymike||

    Well, we have both.

  • fish||

    For how long?

  • Randian||

    Math is like the honey badger: it doesn't give a shit. It takes what it wants.

  • Lisa||

    We also have a socialist president

  • MWG||

    So... get rid of the welfare state.

  • Randian||

    I concur with MWG. Two wrongs don't make a right.

  • Libertymike||

    No, my sometimes statist friend, they do not.

    Free societies are societies that do not go in for such civilization destabilizers like bureaucracies staffed with those who are a few fries short of a happy meal mooching off of those of us who are productive.

  • Libertymike||

    Let's!

  • ant1sthenes||

    Actually, the problem is that you can't have a democratic welfare state. Open borders doesn't have much to do with it.

  • Tman||

    Wider gates, taller fences.

    Why is this so hard?

  • Randian||

    I want the GOP to be pro-immigration. I want them to stop being xenophobes.

    But this thing:

    The GOP’s colossal November defeat

    has got to die.

    BEHOLD THE GOP'S COLOSSAL DEFEAT

    Final results were two lost Senate Seats and a popular vote loss by 2.8%.

    So colossal.

  • Libertymike||

    Don't you understand the new math?

  • MWG||

    I think, given the state of the economy, foreign affairs, and the overall incompetence of Obama, anything short of a massive Republican victory is a loss for Republicans. The fact that they actually lost ground under the current circumstances essentially is equal to "colossal defeat".

  • Cytotoxic||

    ^THIS^

  • Randian||

    *shrug* They already won on all that in 2010.

  • MWG||

    Regardless of what happened in 2010, 2012 was team red's for the taking. Idiotic comments by a couple candidates played into the "War on Women" narrative, the fact the Romney was a shitty candidate who really didn't even attempt differentiate himself from Obama (really, what were their major differences?) all worked together to turn, what should have been an easy victory, into what was a pretty pathetic defeat.

  • Randian||

    Regardless of what happened in 2010, 2012 was team red's for the taking.

    You have had 10 one-term Presidents in this nation's history, out of 44.

    I'm just not buying it.

  • ||

    America’s unique culture of rugged individualism and personal responsibility

    These aspects of American culture are circling the drain.

  • Chris Mallory||

    Thanks to importing every 3rd world invader we can for the past 40 years.

  • Randian||

    "No one's interested in your dipshit racism, Mallory."

  • Cytotoxic||

    Thank you Mr. Bond.

  • Randian||

    I swear this was completely accidental. I said this line yesterday and everyone started saying it was Bond like. I still don't get it.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Just imagine how Daniel Craig would say it and you'll get it. If you don't your imagination sucks.

  • Randian||

    Who the fuck is Mallory?

  • Jordan||

    The only connection I see is that there's a guy named Mallory in Skyfall.

  • Randian||

    Ah. I haven't seen it yet.

  • Libertymike||

    Saw it yesterday.

    It was okay, but it was no For Your Eyes Only. The latter remains, in my view, the flagship motion picture of the Bond franchise.

  • R C Dean||

    Saw it Sunday.

    Good Bond stuff.

    I like Daniel Craig in the role. Decent villain, some surprises, lots of well done action, no shaky-cam, no look-at-me digital effects. Could've used some more totty, but whatev.

  • Libertymike||

    Don't get me wrong, Daniel Craig is good for the role. I enjoy him.

  • Libertymike||

    Wish you were with me to back me up the other day at Gilette Stadium. Try exchanging ideas in a coherent, measured, yet passionate manner with one's fellow inebriated tailgaters.

    Well, it was a good game.

  • ||

    Yikes. I was there. The words "good game" did not enter my vocabulary. many other angry and offensive words did.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You were debating immigration with a bunch of drunken Massholes?

    You're a braver man than I.

  • Libertymike||

    HM, I was one of those drunken Massholes the other day. Except I can still articulate my positions in a melifluous manner when I my mind is altered.

    Anyways, try telling Pats fans that Peyton Manning is better than Tom Brady. That is brave.

  • R C Dean||

    Based on their head-to-head, Eli Manning is better than Tom Brady.

  • Libertymike||

    Try making that case to drunken New Enlgand fans.

    Matter of fact, if you are going to be in the Foxboro area this weekend, you will have the opportunity to do so.

  • Randian||

    Newt Gingrich is butthurt about free speech.

  • Libertymike||

    He really is incoherent.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I don't like Anne Coulter, but I'll give her credit for completely hating Newt Gingrich.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Newt is a populist fuckstick that would sell his grandmother to a Bulgarian pimp for a cable news commentator slot.

  • Libertymike||

    Then complain that there ought to be more regulation of such sales.

  • Skomoroh||

    The welfare state has changed the rules of the game just like it did in Europe. Traditionally immigrants assimiliated into the american culture, including a belief in self reliance, because they had to. Sink or swim. With the ever expanding welfare state that has changed.

    Immigrants should now be assumed to vote the way non-immigrants in the same situation would vote. This means poor low skilled workers and single mothers plus others will vote for democrats no matter if the repubs call for competely open borders.

    The day of the magical immigrant is over. The type of immigrant we get will determine if small government is viable going into the future.

  • GW||

    While even the vast majority of "undocumented" immigrant males are in the workforce, that doesn't mean they're not sucking at the government teat. Far from it, actually. If you're being paid in cash, the government handouts rain down. I see plenty of it here.

    So not only does the welfare state have to go, I'm tired of hearing "we need unskilled laborers." Bullshit. If the welfare state goes away, you're gonna realize that we're up to our eyeballs in unskilled laborers. Our public schools are churning them out by the thousands.

    Our immigration policy needs to be based on what OUR society needs, not on what IMMIGRANTS need.

  • Randian||

    Our immigration policy needs to be based on what OUR society needs, not on what IMMIGRANTS need.

    Leave me out of your collectivist fantasies, please.

  • Cytotoxic||

    ^THIS^

  • ||

    ^Seconded.

  • Lisa||

    How is preferring local values over foreign values collectivist?

  • MWG||

    Could you define 'local values'?

  • Randian||

    How is preferring local values over foreign values collectivist?

    Because you're trying to rope me into it.

    GW wants ME to pay for men with guns to tell people where they may or may not travel. Not interested.

  • GW||

    No problem! We'll send them all to where you live. Won't charge you a dime. Problem solved.

  • Randian||

    OK. Go ahead.

  • GW||

    See how easy that was. Wait until you see how much it costs to have men with guns keep order in your new culture. You'll wish you would have listened to someone with experience in such matters.

    I swear, some of you guys boil things down so simply you think you have it all figured out. Your dogmatism blinds you from reality.

  • Randian||

    Wait until you see how much it costs to have men with guns keep order in your new culture.

    Shorter GW: THE MEXICAN SAVAGES RAPE OUR WHITE WOMEN.

    Please hush now.

  • MWG||

    Come on Randian, with the right men in power deciding "what our society needs", what could go wrong?

    Top men.

  • GW||

    Do you think our society needs more unskilled, uneducated workers? Millions more? because that's what we're going to get.

  • Randian||

    Do you think our society needs more unskilled, uneducated workers?

    Please leave me out of your collectivist fantasies.

  • Turd in the Punchbowl||

    We'll be happy to leave you out of our collectivist fantasies - soon as you surrender the rights and privileges you have as a member of the collective. Such as voting, protection of your person and property under the law, use of the courts and justice system, residing in US territory, etc.

  • ||

    Turd, what the fuck are you doing on a libertarian website?

    Excuse me, but, get the fuck out.

  • MWG||

    Its doesn't matter what I think. Supply and demand dictates how many we need.

    "...because that's what we're going to get."

    Did you pull that out of your ass, because the fact of the matter is, when the economy sucks, the number of illegals entering the couuntry levels off as it did over the last 5 years.

    People come here for work and when there is no work, they tend not to come.

  • GW||

    You're looking at this with blinders on. Supply and demand for the workforce is only one part of the equation. If you lived in an area where many of the unskilled immigrants have settled, you'd realize that.

  • MWG||

    Uh... I actually lived for 10 years in Arizona. I drove by day laborers everyday on my way to work.

  • GW||

    It's not a collectivist fantasy, it's reality. I just don't think an open borders approach will work, even if you get rid of the welfare state.

    Immigrants who came here when we had open borders knew they had to sink or swim on their own, and we were glad to have them. Today's immigrants don't have that attitude, at least the unskilled ones that will flood the country.

  • Lisa||

    Another problem with open borders without the welfare state is regulating crime. Mexico already doesn't want to deal with their riff-raff, so they send them over here.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Mexico doesn't equal immigration. The vast amount of immigrants are Asian. But Indian and Chinese doctors, engineers and STEM entrepreneurs doesn't fit with the narrative. So Frito Bandito it is!

  • GW||

    LMFAO! The vast majority of those coming through legal channels are Asian. Open the borders and see what happens. You might wanna look at a map first.

  • Randian||

    Put 'em all on trains, right GW?! amirite?

  • MWG||

    50% of illegal immigrants are visa overstays, but you already knew that, right?

  • GW||

    And exactly how do you think they know how many people are in this country illegally, beyond expired visas? How do you count the undocumented, who have a valid reason to remain so?

    Why do you think the estimates are so broad? 11 to 20 million?

    The government has not a clue.

  • Randian||

    Who cares? What makes you entitled to know where each and every person in this country is and what they are doing at any given time?

    Who the fuck do you think you are, exactly?

  • MWG||

    Meh. Most of the studies I've seen put the number to between 10 and 12 million. 20 million? I'd really like to see the source for that.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    And most of those visa overstays are from tourist visas, but you already knew that, right?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    LMFAO!

    Figures you'd be laughing like an idiot. By the way, what are you, 12?

    Secondly, you're wrong. The lion's share of legal immigration comes from Mexico. That's 9,600,000 compared to about 11 million for all of Asia. I misspoke when I said "vast" as it seems Asian legal immigrants and Mexican legal immigrants are about.

  • GW||

    I'm laughing because of your math skills. 9.6 is clearly greater than 11. Good job. And I know Asia isn't a country, but that was your claim, not mine.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    My math has nothing to do with your equivocation. But you keep talking like you aren't a mendacious fuck or did you already forget what you wrote @ 1:01 pm?

    Or are you just posting while high?

  • Randian||

    You said "vast majority", dipshit.

  • GW||

    HM said "vast majority". Read much?

  • Randian||

    GW| 11.14.12 @ 1:01PM |#|–|filternamelinkcustom

    LMFAO! The vast majority of those coming through legal channels are Asian. Open the borders and see what happens. You might wanna look at a map first.
  • Randian||

    I just don't think an open borders approach will work,

    Work for who? It works for me.

  • GW||

    And you live, where, exactly?

  • Randian||

    In America. And you? Must be somewhere you hear "Ihre Papieren, bitte" a whole bunch.

  • GW||

    You clearly don't live where the borders being closed hasn't mattered one bit.

  • Randian||

    You clearly don't live where the borders being closed hasn't mattered one bit.

    I guess that justifies using guns to limit where people live and work based on lines on a map.

  • GW||

    It won't be a problem. You can always move somewhere else.

  • Randian||

    It won't be a problem. You can always move somewhere else.

    What are you talking about?

    Here is the simple reality: peaceful people should be able to travel where they want, when they want. That's what freedom means. Peaceful people should be able to engage in peaceful commerce with whom they want, when they want.

    You, the Statist, can't stand to see Mexicans near you, so you invent a reason why peaceful people should have guns pointed at them.

  • GW||

    Oh, now we're limiting it to peaceful people! You know, and I agree with you. But here's where you've missed the boat. You have no way to tell they're not peaceful until after they're here. Then it's too late.

    And I appreciate the strawman, and calling me a statist is a nice touch. but you've just uncovered the root of the problem. I don't have a problem with anyone because of the color of their skin. It's that whole "peaceful" thing that you're talking about.

    And when the "not peaceful" immigrants overrun your community, you can move somewhere else. THAT was what I was talking about.

    Do you HONESTLY think that minority neighborhoods that used to be white are that way because ALL of those white people were racists and couldn't stand blacks and hispanics?

  • MWG||

    "You have no way to tell they're not peaceful until after they're here. Then it's too late."

    Sure you do. My wife (an immigrant) prove she had no criminal record BEFORE she entered the country... but since you know so much about immigration, I'm sure you already knew that, right?

  • GW||

    Yeah, and how do you go about doing that, especially when your home country is more than willing to help you get out of the country so you can go to the USA to send money back?

    Seems to me, EVERY country would want to make sure people willing to leave had clean criminal records.

    And see the progression here....we've gone from open borders to open border for those who are peaceful. You collectivist pricks!

  • MWG||

    You've never actually been through the legal immigration process, have you?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Yeah, White flight isn't a well-documented phenomenon.

    Go peddle that bullshit somewhere else, GW.

  • GW||

    You ignoramus. It would help if even in a wikipedia article, the central racism you want to attribute white flight to wouldn't be [citation needed].

    As one of those whites who has been in "white flight" more than once, it has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the collapse of your community because of a few bad apples.

    Like I told Randian, you can always move, right?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    As one of those whites who has been in "white flight" more than once, it has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the collapse of your community because of a few bad apples.

    All you've proven is that you're a bigger asshole than I thought.

    Take your Communitarianism over to Taki's Blog, they'll appreciate you over there.

  • R C Dean||

    Throw in a "self-reliant" with all those "peacefuls", and you've got no argument from me.

    As noted, though, we don't live in a world consisting solely of such folks. Given that, open borders means importing a non-zero number of non-peaceful and/or non-self-reliant types.

    What do you do then? That doesn't involve men with guns to either (a) run them off, (b) put the non-peaceful ones in jail or (c) collect the taxes to pay the welfare to the non-self-reliant ones?

    The open borders folks have their own uses for men with guns. Those may be better uses, but lets not pretend they have no function at all in an open borders society.

  • ||

    "Work" in what sense? Work for whom? Towards what goal?

    Does it work for the cause of human liberty? Isn't that the only question that we should be asking?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Our immigration policy needs to be based on what OUR society needs, not on what IMMIGRANTS need.

    So why is it nigh impossible for an Indian or Chinese doctor and engineer to get an H1-B visa?

    Oh yeah....they took "our jobs".

  • ||

    Our immigration policy needs to be based on what OUR society needs, not on what IMMIGRANTS need.

    Collectivist garbage. Our immigration policy should be based on the ideal of individual liberty. Not on what "we" (whatever that means) need.

  • Lisa||

    The rate we are going we will have open borders before we get rid of the welfare state because Democrats want the voters. Libertarians need to prioritize getting rid of welfare before they let everybody in. This is not about being xenophobic, this is about human nature. People will take advantage of free shit if it's there.

  • Cytotoxic||

    There is no reason to pick and choose. There's also little reason for the Dems to open the borders. No incentive.

  • Lisa||

    Because they can just ignore the existing laws and effectively pretend they're already open?

  • GW||

    Are you kidding? The same Dems who are against voter ID?

  • MWG||

    Probably the pro-union dems who don't want the competition from cheaper labor.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Shorter Lisa: HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE, YOU BROWN HORDES!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Instead many Republicans (take the Republican presidential primary for example) get caught up in the border and enforcing apparently ineffective immigration rules.

    That's because Texas and the Southwest are GOP country and they're still fighting the Mexican-American war down there. They still haven't noticed that rest of us couldn't give one single fuck about the Alamo.

    Santy Anno gained the day!/Away Santy Anno! Santy Anno gained the day/Down on the plains of Mexico!

  • Skomoroh||

    HM you are a racist. You try to shame people into not having a discussion on what open borders mean to our liberty because you ascribe racism (a negative trait) to whites. You are a racist.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The stupidity in your comment is as dense as a neutron star.

    First of all, you realize you can find White people outside of Texas and the Southwest, right?

    Secondly, you realize the difference between Anglo and Latino/Hispanic is not "race" but culture and linguistics, right?

    Thirdly, you realize that liberty, by definition, includes freedom of travel, right?

    Fourthly, you realize that for most of American history our borders have been much more "open" than they are now, right?

  • Skomoroh||

    All those points are immaterrial to you being a racist. Your comment above to Lisa claiming her concern on the issue was based on a desire to keep brown people away from her medicare shows what you think of white people.

  • ||

    All those points are immaterrial to you being a racist.

    His entire comment is immaterial to your accusations of racism. You're an idiot.

    claiming her concern on the issue was based on a desire to keep brown people away from her medicare

    Are they or are they not brown? Does the mere mention of their skin color equal an accusation of racism? No. But that doesn't fit your narrative of "everyone who thinks we're anti-immigrant must be RASIST!"

  • Skomoroh||

    As has been pointed out a lot of immigrants are not brown you moron.

  • MWG||

    It would be nice if someone told the GOP that.

  • ||

    But the ones from south of the border generally are. That's the group that gets the most anti-immigrant vitriol, because they're a more visible group and tend to be low-wage workers. Moron.

  • ||

    That was to Sko, not you MWG.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Your comment above to Lisa claiming her concern on the issue was based on a desire to keep brown people away from her medicare shows what you think of white people.

    You got me! Every day, I take my White mother, beat the crap out of her and kill her. Then I resurrect her so I can do it all again the next day, because I'm such a racist!

    Nope, it couldn't be because you are an high-functioning Asperger's sufferer who doesn't see the sarcastic humor in a hyperbolic recasting of Lisa's argument.

  • SugarFree||

    Dammit, HM. Cut him some slack. A horde of filthy Messcians stole his sense of humor!

  • Skomoroh||

    Gosh I can play that game to. I was trying to be funny by pointing out that HM was too quick in throwing around the racist label by calling him a racist.

    Its nice to see you comprehension is based on your point of view.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Its nice to see you comprehension is based on your point of view.

    And psychologists and neuroscientists agree with you.

  • Skomoroh||

    Yep, it is true for the average person.

  • ||

    It's nice to see that you're just a troll rather than being interested in honest discussion. It's hard to believe anyone can be as stupid as you're acting.

  • ||

    Let's not bring autism into this. I absolutely hate when people try to discredit someone by saying things like "you must have autism/Asperger's, that's why you don't understand". It's amateur psychologist bullshit, HM.

  • GW||

    HM, where do you live? Has it ever occurred to you that Texas and those in SW have those attitudes because they deal with what I'm talking about on a daily basis? On California has your view, and look where it's gotten them.

  • ||

    California? Really? You're a moron. They got that way because of their pension and business issues. Plus, they actually have REDUCED immigration now.

  • GW||

    Hey dumbfuck, there' more to California than their financial crisis. There's this thing called culture and society. read a book instead of the internet for a while, and you'll see what I mean.

    "Mexifornia" is a good place to start.

  • Calidissident||

    And what about our culture and society? I really do love the "THEY'RE DESTROYING OUR CULTURE!" people. Justin Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Honey Boo Boo, and the Kardashians aren't popular because of immigrants. And I'd say they represent a cultural decline far more than taco stands do

  • Libertymike||

    Honey Boo Boo said she is going to be Miss America some day.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I live in New Hampshire. Over the border in places like Lowell, MA, we have a large population of Southeast Asian immigrants, there is also a large population of Somalis and Bhutanese. A fair amount of Latinos also reside in the area. My town has a very large population of Bosniaks as well.

    By the way, my wife is a legal permanent resident from Thailand. I work with immigrants everyday as I teach and research Applied Linguistics, so that said immigrants might learn English faster. Yet, I don't have a nativist attitude despite hearing languages other than English....every day!

  • Libertymike||

    HM, I didn't know that we are practically neighbors.

    Nashua? Portsmouth?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Hooksett. Though, Portsmouth was my stomping ground back in my single days.

  • ||

    Except he didn't say a damn thing about race or racism. You're the one who brought that up. Just like all those libs who cry "RACIST!" whenever the topic of food stamps come up. It's all you have.

  • GW||

    I really love these discussions, but I guess I'll let you guys mentally masturbate on this one the rest of the day.

    I always find it interesting that the "fully open border" types seem to always live in a place where there aren't many illegals (i.e., the same type of people we'll be overrun with when the borders are open).

    If you wanna get a taste of what you're in for, come to where I live, and I'll show you some things that you didn't even know existed in the USA. Enjoy!

  • Randian||

    I already knew that yokels in white hoods existed, thanks.

  • SugarFree||

    Whatever, man. You don't know how it is to have to live somewhere with a lot of great taquerias. It's a living hell of cilantro and deliciousness! A living hell! Horchata!

  • MWG||

    "I always find it interesting that the "fully open border" types seem to always live in a place where there aren't many illegals (i.e., the same type of people we'll be overrun with when the borders are open)."

    Did you just pull this 'fact' out of your ass?

  • Calidissident||

    Yeah, I grew up in California and currently live in South Central LA and I have absolutely no experience with immigrants, Mexicans, and illegals. You got me

  • Skomoroh||

    For my part I will point out, though I shouldn't have to, that both my mother and wife are immigrants. My mother is english and my wife is russian. I have spent a lot of time in both countries and I can say I would not want mass migration from either place because of the common views on the role of government in both countries.

    If possible I would like to see potential immigrants tested to determined their desire for liberty and anyone, regardless of ethnicity, race, religion, etc..., who wants to be free would be welcome.

    Ofcourse in a perfect world open borders would be exist but in a mob rule democracy like we have now I believe one has to take a practical approach.

  • Calidissident||

    You could stop all immigration, deport all immigrants, and mob rule democracy is still taking us down the tubes. People of all races and backgrounds can't really name (or agree on) anything to actually cut, and if that doesn't happen, this country is going bankrupt at some point

  • Skomoroh||

    Very true but an intelligent immigration policy might be able to mitigate this problem instead of magnify it.

  • Calidissident||

    Based on the exit polls from the election, about 99% of voters of all races seem to be a part of the problem.

  • ||

    Let leave aside the general immigration debate and just talk about the Dream Act for a minute.

    To oppose the Dream Act mean you think it is moral and in keeping with libertarian principles (if you claim to be a libertarian), to forbid some young Americans, the right to have a job. Any job. And yes, they are Americans in everything but the formalities, if they have lived here since childhood.

    I fail to see how ANYONE can claim to be a libertarian and support laws that forbid Americans from working, not to mention threaten them with deportation to what is (to them) a foreign country if they get caught without the right pieces of paper. Moreover, I don't see how you can claim to believe in individual initiative or free enterprise if you support laws that forbid Americans from improving their livelihood through honest labor.

    There is no difference between a child raised from birth in the US, and a child raised from age 6 months in the US except for which country is listed on a piece of paper with his name on it.
    To claim to be a libertarian and then try to deny these kids their freedom is grotesque and deeserving of the worst condemnation.

  • Turd in the Punchbowl||

    And yes, they are Americans in everything but the formalities, if they have lived here since childhood.

    And presumably if you were raised in a barn you would likewise be a horse.

    There is no difference between a child raised from birth in the US, and a child raised from age 6 months in the US except for which country is listed on a piece of paper with his name on it.

    Yes, a mere piece of paper. Like a contract for instance. Are libertarians now in the business of disparaging contracts because they're merely something listed on a piece of paper with your name on it?

    Merely a formality, I suppose.

  • ||

    We're in the business of disparaging contracts that are not entered voluntarily.

    Did you sign a contract when you were born saying that you're permanently obligated to live only in the geographic area of your birth?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement