SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.
SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.
I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.
I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.
Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).
Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?
Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?
It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.
