The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
My New Article on "Freedom Through Foot Voting"
The article adapts and expands some of the ideas developed in my recent book "Free to Move," and is now available for free download on SSRN.
My new article, "Freedom Through Foot Voting" (forthcoming in the British public policy journal Economic Affairs), is now available for free download on SSRN. It builds on and expands some of the ideas developed in my recent book Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration, and Political Freedom. Among other things, the article applies my framework for dealing with potential downsides of freedom of movement to the case of the Covid-19 pandemic, and other similar situations. My book, of course, was finished just before the pandemic began, so I was not able to address that issue there.
Here is the abstract:
Freedom of movement is one of the great issues of our time. Expanding opportunities for both international and internal migration can greatly expand freedom and opportunity for hundreds of millions of people. The same goes for expanding freedom of choice in the private sector. "Voting with your feet" in any of these three ways is also, in crucial ways, superior to ballot box voting as a mechanism of political choice.
In this article I summarize the key advantages of foot voting over ballot box voting, describe how they apply to the three major types of foot voting, and outline answers to several types of standard objections to expanded migration rights. I address these issues in much greater detail in my book Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration, and Political Freedom, on which this article draws.
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. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Go where?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7YntoZAOpE
I'd describe Somin's topic differently.
"Destroying national cultures is one of the great issue of our time."
We need massive government intervention to protect the national culture. Whatever you say, Joe.
Well, I guess that you have no culture to protect, but many european nations do. You must be blinded to that by extremist political prejudice.
I don't think protecting 'national culture' is a legitimate state interest.
Of course it is. But then in your America, there is no culture.
Just to be specific, in France, Italy and Spain there is a strong sense of culture. Similar thoughts exist in Asian countries. Preserving those cultures are state interests
Not clear to me what you mean by "culture."
Could you be more specific?
I mean culture. Italy as a culture that is distinct from that of Germany or a Greece or France. Of course there are similarities as well as differences region to region. But to deny the national culture is to deny the history, heritage and patrimony of the country.
America's exceptional in that our national culture includes and indeed embraces being a nation of immigrants.
I'm not for open borders, but immigrants seem to do just fine integrating into America's diverse culture as it is.
So how do these cultures differ? More important, how does American culture differ from that of Italy or Germany or Greece?
I agree with sarcastro that American culture embraces immigrants, and also think that it owes a tremendous debt to Blacks. Our music, drama, literature, cinema, is hugely disproportionately Black and Jewish, for example. Our cuisine is certainly multicultural. Our scientific community is heavily Asian.
So what precisely are you talking about?
Hi, Ilya. First, recognize the lawyer of license of India. British law. The King's English. 1.3 million of them. We need a lot more lawyers in academia. They would love $30000 a year.
Otherwise, don't propse the suppression of wages for everyone else, from laborer to professional, to explode the enrichment of tech billionaires.
We need massive government intervention to keep wages high. Whatever you say, Karl.
Massive government intervention is plain old border security has has been practiced for centuries, Mata Hari.
We spend hundreds of billions of dollars enforcing immigration restrictions and it involves intervention in a massive amount of consensual activities (employment, renting, etc.,).
Again you refuse to address the point of my comment, probably because you live somewhere with no culture to protect.
Moreover, employment of illegals reinforces low pay scales, questionable employment conditions, etc. Yo kid yourself with your phrase of "consensual activities."
No matter how many of every other profession are imported, professors at universities will continue to be vastly overpaid beyond the actual value of their work as long as government has unlimited money for student loans.
I would like to introduce the lawyer scum bag to the concept of the dose-response curve for all remedies. Too little does not work. Too much is toxic.
When you propose a remedy, you must propose the dose, from now on.
Diluted, the botulinum toxin, the strongest poison in the world, has 700 medical benefits. Water, if ingested more than the kidneys can excrete, will cause seizures and death. Are water or botox poisons or beneficial. You must specify the dose. Forget host factors. That would be so above the head of the lawyer dumbass, there is no point in bringing it up.
Is immigration good or bad? Specify the dose to be debated. Is the death penalty good or bad? Specify the dose to be debated. Is environmental regulation good or bad? Specify the dose to be debated. Name a remedy, the same applies.
Advocates freedom through the ability to move to different types of regimes.
Wants America to be a discount version of top down authoritarian Western Europe.
Cheer up, Ilya, you're going to get to see your ideas put into practice!
Have the decency to stick around to enjoy the results, instead of foot voting your way away from the consequences.
No one is buying that Ilya cares about "freedom". Just another leftist culture warrior against America and Americans.
American was built on immigration, it's you that are a culture warrior against America and Americans.
No, it was not built on immigration. It was built by English colonists. It was expanded by European immigrants. While German Protestants and Italian Catholics had some different cultural elemnts from English Protestants, they were 100 times closer to each other than Mexican mestizos, Somali Muslims, Chinese Uighurs, and the other third worlders you people want to import for votes
No, everyone knows Prof. Somin is thinking about freedom, just some dead-enders on the right have decided nativism is a litmus test for being not a lying lefty conspirator.
Says a lot more about the sad state of conservativism than anything about Prof. Somin.
Immigration policies chosen for the benefit of Americans isn't "nativism". If you actually liked Americans you might also want policies to benefit Americans.
Your assumption of what benefits America is begging the question quite hard.
Disagreeing with you is not the same as not liking America.
Massachussettes taxing out of state teleworkers.
California trying to create an "exit tax".
You have neverending work.
It looks like we're all going to get what Ilya has been longing for, good and hard. I have but one request of him:
You asked for this. Stick around to enjoy the consequences, instead of foot voting your way out of them.