People without borders – What would you do?

[Desk trauma]

The point is, No man is an island. Therefore we cannot seal ourselves off from each others problems.
><>

There fore it's on us to solve others problems for them? They are using the same human hardware as the rest of us, they can straighten their own counters out without the revival of the white mans burden.

 

[Desk trauma]

What colonized countries are you referring to?

The model isn't varied enough to matter.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The model isn't varied enough to matter.

What I see is a "willing buyer/willing seller". This can dovetail into wage disparity here at home, to which I say what one earns in comparison to others is less important than how one manages their income.

Income from trade should be used to raise the standard of living of the people, not enrich the despots.

Uneducated, unskilled third world immigrants are going to be taken advantage of wherever they land. And the more that arrive the worse their lot will be.

 

[Desk trauma]

What I see is a "willing buyer/willing seller".

You're seeing what you want to rather then what is. If a country is in a colony/colonizer relationship per the hypothetical they don't get to chose to whom they sell nor are their goods traded at the market rate. Colony has resource x, colonizer takes it at a set price or just take it outright.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You're seeing what you want to rather then what is. If a country is in a colony/colonizer relationship per the hypothetical they don't get to chose to whom they sell nor are their goods traded at the market rate. Colony has resource x, colonizer takes it at a set price or just take it outright.

True, but are you talking about actual colonies, or just that we treat them like colonies in our trade with them? And don't we treat our own farmers the same way, often forcing them to sell their products below the cost of production, and driving many out of business by demanding lower priced food?

 

[Desk trauma]

True, but are you talking about actual colonies, or just that we treat them like colonies in our trade with them?

In the hypothetical put forward the country is absorbed into the US or otherwise placed under US power. I put forward that the only way this is an economic gain is that the US goes whole hog on the colonialism.

And don't we treat our own farmers the same way, often forcing them to sell their products below the cost of production, and driving many out of business by demanding lower priced food?

If a farmer is unable sell their produce for more then they spend bringing it to market they should go out of business because they are not a viable business. All the romanticizing of farming looses sight of the fact that it's just a business like any other, if someone cannot make it profitable the logical outcome is they go out of business.

 

[afishamongmany]

Income from trade should be used to raise the standard of living of the people, not enrich the despots.

OWG, definitely, this is a positive statement. Any ideas (as Mr President) how to make that happen?

"Uneducated, unskilled third world immigrants are going to be taken advantage of wherever they land. And the more that arrive the worse their lot will be."
So, 100% inevitable, absolutely no way change this even if they land on your doorstep?
><>

 

[afishamongmany]

In the hypothetical put forward the country is absorbed into the US or otherwise placed under US power. I put forward that the only way this is an economic gain is that the US goes whole hog on the colonialism.

Dt, wasn't Hawaii once a colony? Has it been absorbed? Has there been an economic gain? ><>

 

[Desk trauma]

Dt, wasn't Hawaii once a colony? Has it been absorbed? Has there been an economic gain? ><>

Hawaii was not a corrupt, violent, near failed state when it was admitted to the union.

 

[afishamongmany]

Ok I'm going to give this the weekend, to see what else comes up, then try to list what positive /practical ideas have been suggested.
Disappointing that there have not been more international/european contributions.

To give a snapshot comparison of the USA and European situations:-
One in 18 migrants die crossing the Mediterranean as death rate soars amid divisions over EU rescue policy
USA population - 326million - 2017 detained illegal entries 310,000 - 294 migrant deaths mexican border 2017.
EU population - 512million - 2017 illegal entries 204,219 (2016-511,078 -- 2015-1.8 million) - 2,550 migrant deaths crossing the Mediterranean from January 1 to September 13, 2017.

><>

 

[section9+1]

section9+1, I think this idea needs some fleshing out. This in tandem with Desk trauma's employment controls and a system of sponsorship has possibilities. I think though maybe sponsorship first then entry?
A nationwide survey to see how many would be willing to take in and support an individual or a family would certainly be very interesting.
><>

I could be wrong, but to me sponsorship amounts to getting these people into the system. Helping them until they jump through the government hoops and are able to receive public assistance. I propose no assistance at all. If someone wants to sponsor an immigrant that is alright, but that sponsorship should mean they are a permanent dependent until they are able to support themselves-if ever. And whatever care or support that they cannot provide for themselves, the bill goes to the sponsor-forever.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Hi Ana - well thanks, that's cheered us all up. The ships going down! Get the deck chairs out! ><>

Would you rather I lie to you?

 

[TheBear]

TB, with respect I disagree. The mass movements of destitute people is a world wide problem. There are some different specifics for the different areas of the world but even 'solutions' for those specifics may be adaptable for wider use.
No I don't subscribe to world government and I'm for sovereign states controlling their borders. There is already in place a proto, unofficial world government. But neither it nor any of the sovereign states seem to have any will or way to deal with this problem.
Remember, you as Mr President or an altruistic multi billionaire have to work with the world as it is but you want to change it, you want to make it better - Or do we just want to shrug our shoulders and watch 'the game'?
><>

Have you considered the fact that each country has their own constitution and immigration laws which vary from country to country?

What I'm saying is that there is no 'one size fits all' solution for all. Each country has their own, unique situation. Things are a lot more complex and nuanced than you might think.

 

[expos4ever]

Let illegals in but provide absolutely nothing for their support. Conduct a survey and let 100% of their welfare be upon the shoulders of those who want them in.

Can we apply the same principle and demand that those with heads planted firmly up their “you-know-whats” pay for the damage of global warming?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

OWG, definitely, this is a positive statement. Any ideas (as Mr President) how to make that happen?

"Uneducated, unskilled third world immigrants are going to be taken advantage of wherever they land. And the more that arrive the worse their lot will be."
So, 100% inevitable, absolutely no way change this even if they land on your doorstep?
><>

With technology replacing human labor we need fewer people but are importing more. Immigration is supposed to enhance a country, not destroy it.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

In the hypothetical put forward the country is absorbed into the US or otherwise placed under US power. I put forward that the only way this is an economic gain is that the US goes whole hog on the colonialism.



If a farmer is unable sell their produce for more then they spend bringing it to market they should go out of business because they are not a viable business. All the romanticizing of farming looses sight of the fact that it's just a business like any other, if someone cannot make it profitable the logical outcome is they go out of business.

I'll go back the other way then. If third world countries can't sell their resources for a decent profit...they go out of business?
Yes, but then they say we screwed them and therefore they get to come and live in our country.

 

[afishamongmany]

Would you rather I lie to you?

Certainly not. But the view you've expressed is not a matter of true or false. Better to ask, is it a prediction of a possibility or a prophecy of a certainty? The more people that think nothing can be done and therefore do nothing, the more of a possibility it becomes.
><>

 

[afishamongmany]

Have you considered the fact that each country has their own constitution and immigration laws which vary from country to country?

What I'm saying is that there is no 'one size fits all' solution for all. Each country has their own, unique situation. Things are a lot more complex and nuanced than you might think.

TB, sure, no 'one size fits all' solution for all. But solutions, solutions, solutions are needed not shrugging shoulders, pointing fingers or bunker mentality. It is also certain that many of the solutions need cooperation between these countries that have different rules and regulation (or none). So because it's complex and nuanced we don't bother?
><>

 

[afishamongmany]

Can we apply the same principle and demand that those with heads planted firmly up their “you-know-whats” pay for the damage of global warming?

Please expo4ever -global warming and heads up "you know what" are off topic! We need solutions not sniping. You got any helpful ideas?
><>

 

[section9+1]

Can we apply the same principle and demand that those with heads planted firmly up their “you-know-whats” pay for the damage of global warming?

Certainly, but the other way around. Let those who are concerned about it and insist that it be corrected foot the bill for it. If it's your issue, you support it.