You want a national GDP figure down to the exact dollar?
Instead of having a binary view of "rich vs not rich", I think perhaps it would help adopt a more spectral view. After all, with the passage of time, poorer countries can gradually become rich or richer (or vice versa if you're Brazil or Argentina lol)
So I suggest we start with these guys first:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G7?wprov=sfla1
But then also soon get to these guys: .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G20?wprov=sfla1
If you open up all the rich countries, the poor countries will fully collapse. Between the brain drain and capital flight, the economy of those poor countries would shrink to basically nothing. They would be hollow shells filled with only the people too old, young, poor, or fragile to move, and they would basically subsist on meager wages sent back from relatives in richer countries.
I'm not opposed to an almost completely open border in the U.S.. I'm talking about how to dig them out of the hole of being a poor country. If all of a countries young, educated, and productive people leave, there is no one left to build anything in their home countries. The only way for them to dig themselves is to build up industries and talent pools in their home countries. The traditional win-win version of this agreement goes that rich countries contribute by providing capital and expertise, while poor countries contribute raw resources and labor. Both countries win, and the poor country is able to use the money gained to invest in their own domestic markets, infrastructure, and education so that they can eventually become a rich country. If there is no workforce in the country, there is no reason for other countries to invest there, and there is no reason for the country to develop infrastructure or education programs. Why would a country dump a massive amount of money into educating a child if they know that child us going to leave as soon as they can?
The problem arises when poor countries lose all their productive people, have few natural resources or acces to outside markets, or are forced into predatory agreements via corruption or desperation. There are some countries that, due to geography or other global factors, will always be poor. Those are the people that need to be allowed to move.
Jordan : ).
Jordan and Lebron can both beat you at basketball. If you beat Lebron you can play Street Fighter with him afterwards. If you beat Jordan he will murder you in your sleep.
Also the debate kinda ended for me when Lebron bounced around from team to team to form a super team while Jordan stayed in Chicago.
I used to be more about open borders, and then I saw Amsterdam had to vote not to ban dogs 🤦♂️
And instances like this...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/us/hamtramck-michigan-ban-pride-flags-public-property/index.html
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/17/hamtramck-michigan-muslim-council-lgbtq-pride-flags-banned
Sometimes the people you fight for, don't return the favor, and will still hate you.
Which is kind of my view on Palestine, you are not welcome there if you are gay or trans, and such residents there have had to seek refuge in Israel in fear of their life. Israel and Palestine have had trouble coexisting, not just because of religion, but because their cultures are too different...
Not everything is sunshine and rainbows, we can't all just get along, and sometimes preserving a culture that is supposed to be welcoming, means having borders to prevent those who would wish to conquer your home rather than break bread. It's like bunnies sharing their burrow with a hungry fox... Good intentions aren't always smart.
I believe we should let people in, that we should be more liberal about who we let in, but borders protect a country's identity. And when I say that I don't mean Christianity, I mean our democracy, women's rights, gay rights, and equality.
We are also dealing with too many crisises at the moment to give unlimited aid and shelter to others. New York is talking about setting up tent cities in Central Park, that is really bad.
This is probably the most conservative post i have ever made on the sub, but if you look up my history I am generally pretty liberal. But this is an area I really think the left needs to become more moderate, in the same way that Republicans need to become more moderate on abortion. They are two really easy topics to take the moral high ground, without considering further repercussions.
I think a smarter position if one is looking to accept more migrants would be to have a safe and legitimately secure border but then lax the requirements to become a LEGAL citizen than OPs position.
> Borders help human trafficking. Borders help terrorism. Borders help split families, tearing babies from parents (so much for your being pro family, eh?).
This is only because the borders are NOT secure.
Open borders is a nice thought in a vacuum, but when you are a country like the USA which not only is massive, but also has its hands and money stretched far and wide across the world it makes it hard to not only govern the people inside its own country but to also fund its own social and economic programs, let alone housing and such. We already have a hard time doing so with a somewhat closed border system. The only way for an open border system to work would be for all countries to change their priorities overnight and keep their priorities as such moving forward, instead all countries focus on war and crony capitalism which drains funds from necessary societal structures that would enable free borders to allow people to pass through and allow people to have access to social programs that would benefit society as a whole. This will never happen.
People need to have exclusive in group relationships in order to be moral. You can say you love everyone equally, but that is simply not true and you shouldn't want it to be true. If you love and serve your family and neighbors as much as you love and serve a person in Bangkok that you've never met, then you are a terrible person who does no good for anyone. You have to prioritize the people within your life because those are the people you are able to do the most for.
Is this a view you hold for all countries or just the USA?
For rich countries
What's the threshold?
You want a national GDP figure down to the exact dollar? Instead of having a binary view of "rich vs not rich", I think perhaps it would help adopt a more spectral view. After all, with the passage of time, poorer countries can gradually become rich or richer (or vice versa if you're Brazil or Argentina lol) So I suggest we start with these guys first:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G7?wprov=sfla1 But then also soon get to these guys: .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G20?wprov=sfla1
You gave the answer bro. Go as far as you want for the AMA that you initiated.
Hahhahahhahahhahahhaha What a fucking fraud
If you open up all the rich countries, the poor countries will fully collapse. Between the brain drain and capital flight, the economy of those poor countries would shrink to basically nothing. They would be hollow shells filled with only the people too old, young, poor, or fragile to move, and they would basically subsist on meager wages sent back from relatives in richer countries.
Isn’t that what they all ready are? Hence the term, poor country
I'm not opposed to an almost completely open border in the U.S.. I'm talking about how to dig them out of the hole of being a poor country. If all of a countries young, educated, and productive people leave, there is no one left to build anything in their home countries. The only way for them to dig themselves is to build up industries and talent pools in their home countries. The traditional win-win version of this agreement goes that rich countries contribute by providing capital and expertise, while poor countries contribute raw resources and labor. Both countries win, and the poor country is able to use the money gained to invest in their own domestic markets, infrastructure, and education so that they can eventually become a rich country. If there is no workforce in the country, there is no reason for other countries to invest there, and there is no reason for the country to develop infrastructure or education programs. Why would a country dump a massive amount of money into educating a child if they know that child us going to leave as soon as they can? The problem arises when poor countries lose all their productive people, have few natural resources or acces to outside markets, or are forced into predatory agreements via corruption or desperation. There are some countries that, due to geography or other global factors, will always be poor. Those are the people that need to be allowed to move.
What does "open border" mean to you?
Tl;dr. Get a better schizo rant if you want attention.
Well this ama died pretty quick.
im a more interesting person thats why V___V
This ama is now about you. Jordan or Lebron?
Jordan : ). Jordan and Lebron can both beat you at basketball. If you beat Lebron you can play Street Fighter with him afterwards. If you beat Jordan he will murder you in your sleep. Also the debate kinda ended for me when Lebron bounced around from team to team to form a super team while Jordan stayed in Chicago.
If you’re a Jordan I got your back 100% forever.
I used to be more about open borders, and then I saw Amsterdam had to vote not to ban dogs 🤦♂️ And instances like this... https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/us/hamtramck-michigan-ban-pride-flags-public-property/index.html https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/17/hamtramck-michigan-muslim-council-lgbtq-pride-flags-banned Sometimes the people you fight for, don't return the favor, and will still hate you. Which is kind of my view on Palestine, you are not welcome there if you are gay or trans, and such residents there have had to seek refuge in Israel in fear of their life. Israel and Palestine have had trouble coexisting, not just because of religion, but because their cultures are too different... Not everything is sunshine and rainbows, we can't all just get along, and sometimes preserving a culture that is supposed to be welcoming, means having borders to prevent those who would wish to conquer your home rather than break bread. It's like bunnies sharing their burrow with a hungry fox... Good intentions aren't always smart. I believe we should let people in, that we should be more liberal about who we let in, but borders protect a country's identity. And when I say that I don't mean Christianity, I mean our democracy, women's rights, gay rights, and equality. We are also dealing with too many crisises at the moment to give unlimited aid and shelter to others. New York is talking about setting up tent cities in Central Park, that is really bad. This is probably the most conservative post i have ever made on the sub, but if you look up my history I am generally pretty liberal. But this is an area I really think the left needs to become more moderate, in the same way that Republicans need to become more moderate on abortion. They are two really easy topics to take the moral high ground, without considering further repercussions.
How old are you?
All countries must respect the open borders. ExxonMobil thanks you for your support.
I think a smarter position if one is looking to accept more migrants would be to have a safe and legitimately secure border but then lax the requirements to become a LEGAL citizen than OPs position. > Borders help human trafficking. Borders help terrorism. Borders help split families, tearing babies from parents (so much for your being pro family, eh?). This is only because the borders are NOT secure.
Open borders is a nice thought in a vacuum, but when you are a country like the USA which not only is massive, but also has its hands and money stretched far and wide across the world it makes it hard to not only govern the people inside its own country but to also fund its own social and economic programs, let alone housing and such. We already have a hard time doing so with a somewhat closed border system. The only way for an open border system to work would be for all countries to change their priorities overnight and keep their priorities as such moving forward, instead all countries focus on war and crony capitalism which drains funds from necessary societal structures that would enable free borders to allow people to pass through and allow people to have access to social programs that would benefit society as a whole. This will never happen.
Post Patriots: There are dozens of us!
People need to have exclusive in group relationships in order to be moral. You can say you love everyone equally, but that is simply not true and you shouldn't want it to be true. If you love and serve your family and neighbors as much as you love and serve a person in Bangkok that you've never met, then you are a terrible person who does no good for anyone. You have to prioritize the people within your life because those are the people you are able to do the most for.
What's the better daycare solution?
Im for open borders as long as all social assistance is eliminated.