Here’s a short essay by my co-author Zach Weinersmith in honor of MLK Day. Highlight:
Many today who oppose open immigration, despite having immigrant antecedents, say things like “Well, my grandparents came the right way.” Sure. That’s because they were allowed to. In the 1920s, Ellis Island was sometimes referred to as “The Island of Tears.” Why? Because back then 1-2% of immigrants were turned away. Today, the numbers are reversed. The vast majority of would-be immigrants know that the waiting list for them to get into the US lasts longer than their lifetimes, especially when those lifetimes are shortened by war and famine.
Even if you don’t want more immigrants, the moral case for immigration is clear: If someone can make a better life for her or himself by moving across a border, you shouldn’t stop them unless there are very good reasons. I admit, there may be such reasons, at least in principle. Opponents of more open immigration often cite crime, terrorism, welfare expenses, cultural differences, and so on. In Open Borders, we are at pains to use logic and stats to show that these concerns are either overblown or simply wrong on the facts. Indeed, the available evidence shows immigrants contribute to our wealth and safety while becoming part of our culture as rapidly as they did back in the days of predominantly European immigration.
But suppose you’re already tending toward our side of this discussion. I want to nudge you a little farther. I want you to think of free movement across borders as not just a matter of humanitarianism, not just a matter of good policy, but as an issue of civil rights, in the same tradition as those of Milk, and King, and Stanton, and indeed others yet to come.
The tentative release date for our book, Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration, is October 2019. You’ll know about pre-ordering when we do…
READER COMMENTS
Robert
Jan 22 2019 at 3:38pm
Are you willing to talk with Scott Adams?
He is looking to interview someone advocating open borders. He considers himself left of Bernie. He has been impressed by President Trump’s persuasion. He is in favor of immigration; however, he does state that open immigration benefits the rich while not benefiting the middle and lower classes. He states he is open to the idea and is looking for someone to persuade him.
Lastly, Scott Adams does not believe anyone is truly in favor in open borders in any practical sense for the United States, as opposed to as a theoretical matter. Specifically, he does not believe that any economist would advocate 50 million foreigners migrating to the United States, e.g. where would they all live?
It seems like a wonderful opportunity, and when he asked, I thought of you. What do you think?
David Q
Jan 22 2019 at 10:18pm
Robert suggests that Bryan Caplan talks with Scott Adams on Open Borders. If Bryan plans to do so, and if the meeting will be broadcast, podcast, or published, I have some suggestions. First find out if Adams will bully guests or cite endless low-quality data points in such rapid succession that there isn’t time to address them all, even if Adams and Caplan are given equal time.
I do not mean to besmirch Adams. I only raise these issues because I listened to a radio talk show on immigration that went badly, even though I normally like the hosts. The hosts mocked the open borders guest. The guest was libertarian, possibly from the Reason Foundation or Cato Institute.
Benjamin Cole
Jan 23 2019 at 7:50pm
Scott Sumner says the United States cannot profitably build infrastructure and shouldn’t even try. Whether due to malfeasance, corruption, or politics, the costs of building infrastructure in the US usually exceed the benefits.
The US builds about net 1 million new housing units a year, a number restricted by property rights and zoning.
So where does Bryan Kaplan plan to put all his immigrants?
And yes, there is a class warfare aspect to immigration. The upper classes want cheap labor.
Andrew Swift
Jan 24 2019 at 12:00pm
I read a lot of articles presenting the moral case for open borders.
I would like to read an article promoting open borders that includes in-depth discussions of:
the number of people likely to immigrate
the cultural effects of large-scale immigration
If the US initiated open borders there would soon be massive immigration. It would have a profound effect on our lives.
If you really want people to support this project, it’s important to propose some possible scenarios.
Economists have a tendency to push solutions that have superficially beneficial results while being profoundly disruptive.
At the very least, acknowledge the disruption and how it could be addressed.
Comments are closed.