• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Prominent Libertarian Charles Murray Changes His Mind on Low-Skill Immigration

BobStackFan4Life

BobStackFan4Life

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
31,661
Reaction score
1,538
Looks like reality is finally starting to set in, even with some libertarians. This is from George Borjas' blog:
This sounds like big news to me. I’ve always found libertarians to be the most unpersuadable people when it comes to immigration; their religious-like attachment to open borders seems totally impervious to facts. So it was a bit of a shock to come across this news article describing Charles Murray’s change of heart when it comes to low-skill immigration:
Charles Murray announced his support for a moratorium on low-skilled immigration…“I want to shut down low-skilled immigration for awhile,” Murray said, explaining it was the only way to find out if it would actually help native low-skilled workers…”I have had to undergo a great deal of re-thinking…The thing that has gotten to me over the course of this year… has been the idea, the very simple idea, that the citizens of a nation owe something to each other that is over and above our general obligations to our fellow human beings. That there is a sense that we should take care of our own, our own in this case being Americans.”

Doesn’t this sound an awful lot like the responsible nationalism now advocated by Larry Summers:
A new approach has to begin from the idea that the basic responsibility of government is to maximize the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good. Closely related to this is the idea that people want to feel that they are shaping the societies in which they live.
Who would have thought it would take the rise of Donald Trump for these very wise men to see the obvious?
Click to expand...
https://gborjas.org/2016/09/27/charles-murray-changes-his-mind-on-low-skill-immigration/
 
Last edited:
The National Academy of Sciences recently published a report titled The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration. Borjas mentions a few major takeaways from the report:
1. There has been a slowdon in assimilation- "the rate of relative wage growth and English language acquisition among the foreign-born is now slightly slower than it was for earlier immigrant waves.”

2. Immigration has a harmful effect on the earnings of low-skill workers

3. Immigrants and their dependent children create a fiscal burden

4. "the current stock of immigrants lowered wages by 5.2%" This is equal to $500 billion.
https://gborjas.org/2016/09/21/nas5/
 
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"


NOT
 
dot com said:
Jesus did say we should only help the true American poor.
Click to expand...

Somehow I think having a decent quality of life is more important to most Christians than destroying the United States by trying to take in the world's poor. But if there are Christians who want to help the world's poor (instead of America's poor), they are welcome to go overseas and do that- but don't force your religious beliefs onto the rest of us through public policy. The population in Africa is set to double by 2050. They will represent just a small percentage of the world's desperately poor. Should we take in a continent's worth of people because some assume that's what Jesus would want? What do you think would be the impact on the standard of living in this country if we did that? What about the impact on our environment? Immigration is the largest factor contributing to population growth in the US and population growth is having a tremendous impact on our environment. Somehow I suspect having a decent quality of life is more important to most Christians than taking in the world's poor.
 
so do you think a decent quality of life is more important than taking the world's poor?
 
Population growth is also the only thing keeping our government programs afloat and providing the workforce to take care of all the aging Boomers, who are about to start shitting their pants in numbers never before seen in Western civilization.

Ask Japan what happens to an economy when the population stops growing and starts aging rapidly. It's about to hit China like a freight train, too.

Doesn't mean we should, or ever will, take in every poor person in Africa. That is stupid hyperbole.

All that said, clearly large numbers of the American electorate want tighter controls on low-skilled immigration. It is a legitimate concern that our politicians need to address. There are smart ways and dumb ways to address it, though.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
so do you think a decent quality of life is more important than taking the world's poor?
Click to expand...

Yes. You have a newborn, correct? Would you like that child to grow up in a United States that is prosperous, with a healthy environment, where most have a chance at a decent life, or would you prefer to see it flooded with the world's poor and watch the standard of living plummet?
 
Is "prominent libertarian" supposed to be a good thing?
 
I'm curious. Which of the two major presidential candidates is proposing to throw open the borders and "flood" the country with "the world's poor"? Just want to know exactly which candidate is proposing to destroy America as we know it so I can vote against them.
 
Deacon923 said:
Population growth is also the only thing keeping our government programs afloat and providing the workforce to take care of all the aging Boomers, who are about to start shitting their pants in numbers never before seen in Western civilization.

Ask Japan what happens to an economy when the population stops growing and starts aging rapidly. It's about to hit China like a freight train, too.

Doesn't mean we should, or ever will, take in every poor person in Africa. That is stupid hyperbole.

All that said, clearly large numbers of the American electorate want tighter controls on low-skilled immigration. It is a legitimate concern that our politicians need to address. There are smart ways and dumb ways to address it, though.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you about population decline being a negative for Japan, I think Japan is in a much better position economically than most (if not all) western countries, and I think their immigration policies are far more sane than ours.
 
Wow, 500 billion less in wages, What an economic boon to Trump! Less wages to pay out for your gardener and your house painter and the cook at the restaurant that you go to. Think of the increased profits.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
I disagree with you about population decline being a negative for Japan, I think Japan is in a much better position economically than most (if not all) western countries, and I think their immigration policies are far more sane than ours.
Click to expand...

That's not what the OECD, World Bank, or IMF think.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
I disagree with you about population decline being a negative for Japan, I think Japan is in a much better position economically than most (if not all) western countries, and I think their immigration policies are far more sane than ours.
Click to expand...

just like Trump: when you're wrong, just say you don't believe in the facts!
 
It's also not what the Japanese think, because they're flailing to try and turn back the clock on an aging population, and begging North Africans to come work there.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
I made three points. You're welcome to tell me why they, and you, disagree with them.
Click to expand...

None of your "points" are rooted in fact.

Also what do you mean by tell you why your points disagree with your points?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top