ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, October 01, 2013

Immigration: a temporal comparison

Steve Sailer draws attention to a failed social experiment in mass immigration.
Spain 2007: Imagine what would happen if a prosperous Western nation threw open its borders, allowing immigrants to flood in virtually unchecked. Soaring unemployment, overstretched social services, rising crime, even rioting in the streets? Not in Spain.... Over the past decade, the traditionally homogeneous country has become a sort of open-door laboratory on immigration. Spain has absorbed more than 3 million foreigners from places as diverse as Romania, Morocco, and South America. More than 11% of the country's 44 million residents are now foreign-born, one of the highest proportions in Europe. With hundreds of thousands more arriving each year, Spain could soon reach the U.S. rate of 12.9%. And it doesn't seem to have hurt much. Spain is Europe's best-performing major economy, with growth averaging 3.1% over the past five years.
- Spain: Immigrants Welcome, May 20, 2007

Spain 2013: A strong tourist season helped the unemployment rate dip to 26.3 percent from 27.2 percent in the first quarter, the National Statistics Institute said on Thursday. That left 5.98 million people out of work - a far greater proportion of the population that every other euro zone country bar Greece.
-  Spain's Unemployment Rate Falls, July 25, 2013

That should suffice to explode the myth that "Immigration is good for the economy".  That is worse unemployment than Spain suffered during the Great Depression of the 1930s; for that matter, it is worse than the USA experienced during the Great Depression.

But there is more to it than just the problem of excess immigration. As I have pointed out, the free trade in labor has increasingly driven Spain's native population out of the country.

"One interpretation of this finding is thus.  Given the quality of its institutions, Spain is due for a lower wage structure, with lower quality jobs, as they might be perceived by the workers themselves.  To some extent, Spain will achieve this new equilibrium by population adjustment and exchange.  Spanish engineers will move to southern Germany and Ecuadorans will move to Spain."

Free trade is incompatible with national sovereignty and national identity. It is, intrinsically and quite literally, anti-American, anti-semitic, and anti-everything except big corporations and even bigger governments.  Never forget that Karl Marx was a free trader for precisely that reason. You cannot claim to support either the U.S. Constitution or the American nation and also support free trade.

Free trade results in "equilibrium by population adjustment and exchange".  In practical terms, that means 50 percent of your children will have to live in another country.

Labels: ,

109 Comments:

Blogger Francis W. Porretto October 01, 2013 4:56 AM  

Mass movements of persons always involve a disaster. Sometimes the disaster is what got the mass movement started; sometimes it's inflicted upon those already at the immigrants' destination. Something to ponder when your Omnipotent Government next starts admitting "refugees" by the thousand.

Anonymous p-dawg October 01, 2013 6:00 AM  

Having been raised a free trader, it took quite some time for me to lose that particular stye. That's one of the things I thank you for, Vox. I'd prefer to see reality as it is, not how I imagine it. It's a shame so many people choose to ignore the evidence in favor of the popular pro-free-trade opinion.

Anonymous p-dawg October 01, 2013 6:02 AM  

"ignore the evidence in favor of the popular pro-free-trade opinion"

Oops, shame on me for that ambiguous phrasing. I meant to say, "ignore the evidence against free trade in order to embrace the popular pro-free-trade opinion".

Anonymous Miserman October 01, 2013 7:24 AM  

The only reason why a person would not see this coming is if they started with assumption of universal and global cultural equality. One poor assumption and suddenly we're faced with a lot of poor people.

Anonymous Putt-Putt Champion October 01, 2013 8:19 AM  

Why do you hate poor people, immigrants and diversity? What about the chillrens?

Blogger IM2L844 October 01, 2013 8:34 AM  

It's a shame so many people choose to ignore the evidence in favor of the popular pro-free-trade opinion.

It's only easy to be appreciative of having your presuppositions shaken to their core in retrospect. The process includes a period of cognitive dissonance that is quite disconcerting and most people will try to avoid it at all cost.

Anonymous ZhukovG October 01, 2013 8:39 AM  

I too am a former Free Trader. I now think of myself as a Nationalist Libertarian.

Anonymous DrTorch October 01, 2013 8:45 AM  

Your contrast of Spain's reported conditions are far more clear than Sailer's. He should have done it the way you did.

Anonymous daddynichol October 01, 2013 8:52 AM  

The question is whether or not the controlling powers grasp the ramifications of their experiment. Perhaps they do and fully approve.

Anonymous GoldenTee 1997 October 01, 2013 9:03 AM  

But it's Freedom and Liberty!
Just ask Schiff, Rockwell, Paul, North, etal

This is one of the subject matters that helps you know that ALL of the (financial/political) exits are truly covered.

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
- Karl Rove




Anonymous MendoScot October 01, 2013 9:19 AM  

From a rather sunny article in the Miami Herald:

Spain has a few more than 47 million people in its territory. From that number, almost 23 million could work, but only 16.5 million do so. A little more than 6 million are jobless.

Roughly speaking, out of the 16.5 million who work, 13.5 million do so in private activities, while 3 million earn their salaries in the public sector...

The result: 13.5 million workers must provide for 47 million Spaniards and pay the wages of 3 million public employees. Among the Spaniards who must be provided for are 15.5 million of so-called inactive persons: pensioners (more than 7 million), students (2.5 million), permanently disabled persons (1.5 million), homemakers (4 million) and other citizens.


I haven't seen a recent update on the simmering problem of the Cajas, just that Draghi and Rajoy have managed to sweep the problem under the carpet. Immigration from South America has reversed - even Argentina now has net immigration from Spain. Still, with even Germany showing unemployment problems, I'm not sure that Montaner's optimism is warranted.

Until that happens, if it ever happens, Spaniards will continue to pack their suitcases and emigrate. On one hand, the country loses a large number of workers, but on the other, they are people who will acquire knowledge, experience and savings that they can later utilize in their own country.

In that sense, it is a blessing that those who have no work can find it in Germany, Holland or Switzerland.

Anonymous beerme October 01, 2013 9:29 AM  

I'm another converted free traitor. Thanks.

Anonymous Tawmmy from Quinzee October 01, 2013 9:49 AM  

THE OWNLY PRAWBLEM WITH SPAIN'S IMMIGAYTION IS THAT THEY AH IMPORTING THE WRONG KIND OF IMMIGRANTS.

THEY AH IMPORTING A BUNCH OF DAHKIES, SAND DAHKIES, AND JOOBAGS. THAT IS NAWT HOW YOUAH BUILD A CHAMPIONSHIP CULTCHAH AND DOMINATE IN THE MAHHHKATEPLACE ON A WORLD WIDE STAGE.

DO YOU SEE BILL BELICHICK THE FOOTBALL GENIUS BRINGING IN A BUNCH OF NO GOOD LAZY SELFISH DAHKIES TO OWAH GREATRIOT ORGAHNIZATION?

THE REASON OWAH FOOTBALL PEDROIAHS AH WINNAHS IS BECAWSE WE HAVE MORAH NON DAHKIE GRITTY WINNAHS WITH LUNCH PAILS AND HAHT. LIKE TAWMY FACKING BRADY, WELKAH, DANNY FACKING WOODHEAD, AND OUR OTHA WELKAHS, EDELMAN AND AMENDOLA. NO ONE DENIES THIS!

SPAIN NEEDS TO TAKE A PAGE FROM OWAH BAWSTAHN STRAWNG PLAY BOOK AND STAHT KICKING OUT Y
THEYRAH DAHKIES AND SAND DAHKIES AND REPLACE THEM WITH IMMIGRATION PEDROIAHS.

Anonymous Walter Wiliams Jr October 01, 2013 10:02 AM  

Why not this:
Country allows free trade but enforces strict immigration rules.

Free movement of goods, but restrict the movement of labor. If you do let a handful of immigrants in, I'd not allow them to vote (as I believe is the Swiss policy)

Anonymous Spychiatrist October 01, 2013 10:03 AM  

One thing that I really hate about libertarianism with a passion is their advocacy of free trade and open borders. Libertarians are liberals in sheep's clothing.

Act local to fight Global should be our war cry.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 10:03 AM  

Free movement of goods, but restrict the movement of labor.

Capital flows to the countries with cheaper labor costs in that scenario.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 01, 2013 10:12 AM  

I will be the one to say it.
Opposing free trade is one of the fastest ways to get an argument started with Libertarians. They want no barriers to people, goods or money. They want no national borders at all. In fact, they want no nation states either. Anyone who opposes free trade, the Libertarians will either label as an isolationist or anti-consumer (or worse).

I am reminded of a Lincoln quote.....I will stand by my friends when they are right, and part with them when they are wrong.

Anonymous Vegas Dude October 01, 2013 10:18 AM  

I am still a free trade libertarian because I detest gov't control. I'd rather live amongst semi-literate Mexican peasants than SWPLs and blacks. Plus, I am hoping the watch the US evil empire and its rotten supporters go down like the Titanic in real time. Cloward-Piven won't lead to true socialism but to some lovely chaos.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 10:21 AM  

Opposing free trade is one of the fastest ways to get an argument started with Libertarians. They want no barriers to people, goods or money. They want no national borders at all. In fact, they want no nation states either. Anyone who opposes free trade, the Libertarians will either label as an isolationist or anti-consumer (or worse).

That's funny, Vox is a libertarian and opposes free trade. There are other libertarians here who oppose free trade. Libertarians aren't a monolithic group.

Anonymous Paulus Krugmanistes October 01, 2013 10:27 AM  

Clearly the immigrants to Spain were not diverse enough or numerous enough. Moar!

Anonymous DonReynolds October 01, 2013 10:28 AM  

p-dawg....."Having been raised a free trader, it took quite some time for me to lose that particular stye. That's one of the things I thank you for, Vox. I'd prefer to see reality as it is, not how I imagine it. It's a shame so many people choose to ignore the evidence in favor of the popular pro-free-trade opinion."

My experience was slightly more exciting and challenging. Pick any university you like, then try to complete a masters and doctorate in economics, while arguing against free trade with the faculty. I know it can be done, because I did it, but I also know that very few people could do it. Anyone opposed to free trade would be well-advised to take their degree outside the economics department. Take all the econ courses you like while pursuing a degree in another department.......say, agricultural economics (like John Kenneth Galbraith), or statistics (like Milton Friedman), or engineering (like Herbert Hoover).

Anonymous anon123 October 01, 2013 10:32 AM  

I spent August in Spain (Madrid, Barca, Sevilla, San Sebastian).Youth unemployment is around 50%. Those that are employed appeared to be either working for the state (lots of police presence, garbage picked up every day and streets washed every night) or in the service industry. And lots of African street vendors selling knockoff handbags and sunglasses, who spend more time and effort playing cat and mouse with the police. Oh, and plenty of gypsy beggars everywhere.

Anonymous Stilicho October 01, 2013 10:34 AM  

Free trade's just another word for nothin' left to lose,
And nothin' ain't worth nothin' but nothin's free,
Feelin' good was easy, Lord, when Friedman was the news,
And buddy, that was good enough for me,
Good enough for me and my NAFTA McGee.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 01, 2013 10:39 AM  

Josh....."That's funny, Vox is a libertarian and opposes free trade. There are other libertarians here who oppose free trade. Libertarians aren't a monolithic group."

No.....what is funny is claiming to be a Libertarian without agreeing to the central ideas and policy prescriptions of Libertarians. It helps to qualify the word "Libertarian". Maybe a "Nationalist Libertarian", which is almost a contradiction in terms. Maybe a "Christian Libertarian", or a "Left Libertarian", or a "Classical Libertarian".

Libertarians believe in open borders, free trade, and free movement of people, goods and capital. They are not nationalistic. (I would not even say they can be patriots, since they will not admit to nation states.) But they do believe in free enterprise, so I count them as friends and vote for them when they run for public office.....but no, they are always disappointing when it comes to legal and illegal immigration.

Anonymous Roundtine October 01, 2013 10:46 AM  

Open borders libertarians are anarchists.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 10:46 AM  

Libertarians believe in open borders, free trade, and free movement of people, goods and capital. They are not nationalistic.

Except for the ones that don't believe in the former and do believe in the latter.

Anonymous Daniel October 01, 2013 10:51 AM  

Harkin says govt shutdown is "as dangerous as the breakup of the Union before the Civil War." Does this make all Virginians in D.C. immigrants by federal declaration?

Anonymous The other skeptic October 01, 2013 10:58 AM  

Free trade results in "equilibrium by population adjustment and exchange". In practical terms, that means 50 percent of your children will have to live in another country.

If you and your spouse's IQ is around 85, then the likelihood of children with IQs above 110 is low. In that case, probably all of your children will have to live in a less cognitively demanding country.

Of course, if the only cognitive demands made of you is to vote for the right people, then the situation is different, although, even there they still seem to get it wrong often enough.

Anonymous Roundtine October 01, 2013 10:58 AM  

Harkin shows what happens when you eat too much corn. You $@#% your brains out.

Anonymous Roundtine October 01, 2013 11:05 AM  

I'm thinking about starting up an independence movement on Kickstarter. I'll raise money and start buying up contiguous pieces of land. Investors will own a share of the land. Why fight when the capitalists will sell it to you?

Anonymous VD October 01, 2013 11:20 AM  

Country allows free trade but enforces strict immigration rules.

That's not free trade.

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 11:28 AM  

"Libertarians believe in open borders, free trade, and free movement of people, goods and capital. They are not nationalistic."

I have long identified as a libertarian but have never supported open borders or free trade. I don't identify as conservative because of my opposition to the drug war and the surveillance state, and because conservatives seem to have a mindset that we must lose our liberty in piecemeal compromises or run the risk of losing all of it. That sort of defeatism seems counterproductive.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 11:34 AM  

conservatives seem to have a mindset that we must lose our liberty in piecemeal compromises or run the risk of losing all of it. That sort of defeatism seems counterproductive.

A current example: all the conservatives whining about how the house republicans caused the government shutdown.

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 11:37 AM  

Exactly Josh. And it's not even a real shutdown since so many of the "essential" functions of government are still happening.

Anonymous civilServant October 01, 2013 11:55 AM  

Free trade results in "equilibrium by population adjustment and exchange". In practical terms, that means 50 percent of your children will have to live in another country.

But with "free trade" there is no other country. Just one big one. Yes?

Free trade is incompatible with national sovereignty and national identity.

Is there not a relationship between free trade and libertarianism? In what sense may one be libertarian and not accept free trade? Is not restriction of trade a function of government? Is not restriction of free trade a de-facto monopoly of whatever trade is permitted?

Anonymous civilServant October 01, 2013 11:57 AM  

I now think of myself as a Nationalist Libertarian.

In the name of libertarianism you propose to restrict the trade of others? Is this not a violation of free association?

Anonymous MattN October 01, 2013 12:06 PM  

Does anyone know if there are other Libertarians that are against free trade besides Vox? I've looked and haven't really found any.

Blogger Mark October 01, 2013 12:13 PM  

I would agree that free trade and open immigration are not compatible with a massive state which taxes the producers and shares those taxes collected with the “needy”. I would not agree that free trade and open immigration are not beneficial to a libertarian society.

I’m always amused when people who pull various tenets, principles or beliefs from competing philosophical theories are astounded to find their worldview results in things crashing down around them. This happens in religious circles (e.g., taking a salvation stance based on the Armenian concept of choice but a baptism stance based on Luther’s writings), diets (eat proteins according the new Paleo diets, but still follow the USDA’s recommendations on the amount of grains to eat each day), and, as demonstrated here, in economic and political theories.

The confused religious adherent may lose his or her faith altogether when they realize they can’t reconcile their Lutheran belief that the act of infant baptism by itself brings faith through the Holy Spirit with their Armenian belief that everyone has to choose to be saved. The confused dieter will see nothing but rapid weight gain. Likewise, a nation which attempts to implement the libertarian theories of free trade and open immigration but maintain state control of the economy will bring itself to ruin.

The modern state with its controlled economy provides incentives (free education, health care, food, lodging) which draw in underskilled immigrants from those “less developed” countries (usually places where those controlling the government keep all the benefits instead of passing some of them on). When more needy show up, this requires even more resources for the state, which takes them from those who actual produce something through higher taxes or debased currency. Of course, this in turn has the impact of driving those actual producers to places where the state does not extract as much, or as those places dwindle, causes the producer to shut down altogether, depriving society of goods and services which otherwise would have been available.

Based on what I’ve read, libertarian theory holds that free trade and no barriers to immigration are good, but only in the context of a society in which, among other things, everything is privately owned, where there is no coercive government, and no government benefits to obtain.

Since the libertarian’s conditions for having free trade and open immigration doesn’t exist anywhere on earth at this moment, it is a fair point for debate as to whether there is any merit to attempting to understand these libertarian tenets, and also wise to raise an alarm when a nation which has a state controlled economy attempts to implement these ideas. However, the fact that free trade and open immigration is incompatible with a state controlled economy does not mean that those concepts would not work in the ideal free society as envisioned by the libertarians that espouse such doctrines.

Anonymous Idle Spectator October 01, 2013 12:22 PM  

If good immigrants are hot water and bad immigrants are cold water, what happens when you mix them together and dilute them? Do you get good, good, good, or bad, bad, so very bad? We don't need a temporal comparison. It's bath time for children.


Mass immigration. The idea that somehow mixing cold water with hot water makes hotter water.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 12:27 PM  

Mass immigration. The idea that somehow mixing cold water with hot water makes hotter water.

Well see, on a global scale it makes the overall water slightly warmer.

Anonymous Idle Spectator October 01, 2013 12:28 PM  

Well see, on a global scale it makes the overall water slightly warmer.

That's true. In their mind if they just make the bathtub big enough, the rules change.

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 12:32 PM  

" However, the fact that free trade and open immigration is incompatible with a state controlled economy does not mean that those concepts would not work in the ideal free society as envisioned by the libertarians that espouse such doctrines."

If we ever have a world comprised of libertarian states, perhaps it would be a good time to revisit whether free trade and open borders make sense. Until then, they don't.

Anonymous Idle Spectator October 01, 2013 12:36 PM  

What's the mix in the global scale? Is it like 70% cold water, 30% warm water?

How the hell is that ever going to benefit the warm bathtub countries? Fucks you, I like the water the way it is!

Anonymous civilServant October 01, 2013 12:42 PM  

libertarian states

This would seem to be a contradiction.

Based on what I’ve read, libertarian theory holds that free trade and no barriers to immigration are good, but only in the context of a society in which, among other things, everything is privately owned, where there is no coercive government, and no government benefits to obtain.

In reality it is very simple. Libertarianism is nothing more than "Me" and whatever is good for "Me". Libertarians believe in free association - for themselves. Libertarians believe in freedom of movement - for themselves. Libertarians believe in free trade - for themselves. Libertarians believe in absolute arbitrary unanswered unaccountable governmental power - for themselves.

Blogger Log October 01, 2013 12:42 PM  

As long as you adhere to the economic principle of quid pro quo you are going to have problems.

The primitive Christians - those who knew what the true doctrine (not dogma) was (Acts 2:42), Apostles who were eyewitness to the glory of Christ and His Resurrection (Acts 4:33, 2 Peter 1:16), who had the power of God (Acts 2:43) - had all things in common (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:32), because they had actually been born again, and loved one another.

How odd that they seemed to welcome immigration to their community, rather than decrying it (Acts 2:47). Maybe they didn't understand economics well enough.

Or maybe they did.

"Having adequate nourishment and decent covering we shall with these suffice ourselves. But those who want to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into hankering for many things which are silly and harmful, and which drag human beings down to ruin and utter destruction. For the root of all evil doings is the desire for money, being driven by which people have gone astray, got lost from the faith and become hopelessly involved in agonizing situations. But thou, O man of God, keep away from these things" (1 Timothy 6:8-11)

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 12:45 PM  

"This would seem to be a contradiction."

Only if you're a binary thinker.

Libertarianism is nothing more than "Me" and whatever is good for "Me".

There's that binary thinking again. Try reading the Declaration of Independence, it elegantly and concisely spells out why we need government. You are describing anarchy.

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 12:50 PM  

"For the root of all evil doings is the desire for money, being driven by which people have gone astray, got lost from the faith and become hopelessly involved in agonizing situations."

That sounds a lot like illegal immigrants going to countries that pay them more welfare benefits. Did the Christians described in the verses you cite pay welfare to immigrants who came to their lands, chose not to work, and had large numbers of children they couldn't support?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 12:58 PM  

Log, give me all your money

Anonymous civilServant October 01, 2013 1:00 PM  

Libertarianism is nothing more than "Me" and whatever is good for "Me".

You are describing anarchy.


Yes.

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 1:05 PM  

You admitted inability to think in terms other than absolutism certainly does explain a lot, civil.

Anonymous 11B October 01, 2013 1:12 PM  

One thing that I really hate about libertarianism with a passion is their advocacy of free trade and open borders. Libertarians are liberals in sheep's clothing.

That is not necessarily true. Like other ideologies, there are various stripes of libertarians. Just as you have neo-conservatives and paleo-conservatives who are often at odds with each other, you have neo-libertarians and paleo-libertarians. There might be more. But paleo-libertarians are not the open border types you imagine libertarians to be.

Check out Ilana Mercer for an example of a paleo-libertarian. She is definitely not an open-border type.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 1:12 PM  

You admitted inability to think in terms other than absolutism certainly does explain a lot, civil.

We see that a lot on this blog.

Anonymous civilServant October 01, 2013 1:17 PM  

You admitted inability to think in terms other than absolutism certainly does explain a lot, civil.

Libertarian thought lends itself to absolute terms. The absolutism you decry is theirs.

Anonymous Walter Wiliams Jr October 01, 2013 1:19 PM  

"Country allows free trade but enforces strict immigration rules."

'That's not free trade.'


Fair enough. I don't think that I've seen you expound on your ideal trade setup, if there is one. Perhaps something like...

10% across the board tariffs that would fund a minimalist central government, restricted immigration with no voting rights. No special protections for any industry.

I could live with that...

Anonymous Jack Amok October 01, 2013 1:33 PM  

I am still a free trade libertarian because I detest gov't control.

And here is the core of the problem. We're festooned with incompetent and corrupt governments as the agents enacting any controls on trade or immigration. As things stand now, whatever restrictions we get are more likely to be crony-capitalist rent-enabling laws than social or economically protective ones. When the regulators are in bed with the corporations and the unions, it makes deregulation look damned attractive.

Anonymous Jack Amok October 01, 2013 1:38 PM  

As far as Spain goes in what Vox quoted above... well, the 2007 "hurray for open borders!" story get's the causality wrong. Mass immigration isn't what causes prosperity, it's what follows it. People pick up stakes and move to a new place only when that new place offers a better lifestyle than the place they're in. Spain had lots of immigrants because its economy was already growing before the immigrants got there.

Anyone know what "lies, damn lies, and statistics" is en espanol?

Anonymous Vicarius Christi October 01, 2013 1:48 PM  

The Pope says open borders.

Thus, Christianity = Open Borders

Anonymous Alexander October 01, 2013 2:06 PM  

The Pope is quite literally the King of a sovereign country. A country that has the world's lowest number of citizens, those citizens are vastly under-vibrant, and those citizens are temporary. It is also not a poor nation. Let him lead by example and open the Vatican to thousand of third world non-Catholics.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 2:11 PM  

The cry of the libertarian: "Grant me power over you and I promise to leave you alone."

The cry of the anarchist: "You don't need any power to leave me alone."

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 2:23 PM  

But the libertarian does need power to enforce contracts and punish those who initiate force or fraud against others.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 2:41 PM  

Porky, do you think mass immigration is a good thing or a bad thing?

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 2:49 PM  

Porky, do you think mass immigration is a good thing or a bad thing?

Depends. The mass immigration of millions of nubile bikini models could be a very good thing.

Anonymous Krul October 01, 2013 2:58 PM  

Porky - The cry of the libertarian: "Grant me power over you and I promise to leave you alone."

The cry of the republican/democrat: "Grant me power over you and I promise not to leave you alone."

Anonymous Krul October 01, 2013 3:04 PM  

civilServant - Libertarians believe in absolute arbitrary unanswered unaccountable governmental power - for themselves.

For clarity, I would add the words "over themselves" to the end of this sentence. Otherwise it implies that libertarians want to exercise absolute power over others, which is absurd.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 3:19 PM  

Depends. The mass immigration of millions of nubile bikini models could be a very good thing.

What about the mass immigration of unskilled third world workers?

Anonymous Noah B. October 01, 2013 3:22 PM  

For clarification Josh, does nubility count as a skill?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 3:30 PM  

No

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 3:35 PM  

Hey, Log, what translation were you using for 1 Timothy 6? Because I can't find the phrase "hopelessly involved in agonizing situations" in any translation, not even with a straight Google search.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 3:41 PM  

What about the mass immigration of unskilled third world workers?

How much skill does it take to rock a bikini?

But Josh, "good" and "bad" are subjective. This is one area where libertarians and anarchists agree. We don't care who comes over the border. The difference is libertarians can't wait to levy taxes on them or disenfranchise them, unless they are indians in which case libertarians would let them have their own government and practice human sacrifice.

Anonymous Yorzhik October 01, 2013 3:52 PM  

No country is obligated to let any particular person or group in, but they should have a reason for refusal.

A country that needs work to be done would be wise to let workers in. That's true of the US, demonstrably so.

That's the principle. In practice, it works like this: a laborer can come into the country as long as labor jobs are available (this is self adjusting because a laborer doesn't move for nothing). A person that contracts to get work done as agreed upon before the person comes into the country should be allowed in unless there is a valid reason not to. In either case, the immigrant should identify themselves upon entry. ID would include DNA, photo, prints, retinal scan and any other form of ID that is inexpensive and as quick to obtain as those mentioned.

If immigrants come to get welfare in any form, then the country has doomed itself even without immigrants and the immigrants will only speed the demise of the country. Thus, even in that case where the demise will be quick as opposed to slow, the quicker demise is better.

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 3:52 PM  

This is one area where libertarians and anarchists agree. We don't care who comes over the border. The difference is libertarians can't wait to levy taxes on them or disenfranchise them, unless they are indians in which case libertarians would let them have their own government and practice human sacrifice.

Missing the point: the other white meat.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 3:56 PM  

Missing the point: the other white meat.

Sorry, did Josh make a point somewhere?

Anonymous TJ October 01, 2013 3:56 PM  

I suspect that all the immigration into the white western countries could serve a purpose when the economies collapse ... as a distraction for the guilty money power elite ... directing our anger at the immigrants instead of the guilty money power.

There wasn't too much fallout onto the bankers and wall street after the internet bubble market crash. 911 came around and we
got to kill arabs instead of banksters,

Anonymous DonReynolds October 01, 2013 3:58 PM  

Idle Spectator....."If good immigrants are hot water and bad immigrants are cold water, what happens when you mix them together and dilute them? Do you get good, good, good, or bad, bad, so very bad? We don't need a temporal comparison. It's bath time for children."

Let's change it every so slight. Try a mix of dung and ice cream. The exact proportions are not very important. Experiment if you like. So what do you get? good tasting dung or bad tasting ice cream?

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 4:02 PM  

Sorry, did Josh make a point somewhere?

Don't pretend you're only commenting on this thread and not operating from your cumulative experience in this blog when you say goofy things like I quoted. That's just silly.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:03 PM  

But Josh, "good" and "bad" are subjective.

Nope, sorry, you don't get to hand wave your way out.

Answer the question.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:04 PM  

The difference is libertarians can't wait to levy taxes on them or disenfranchise them, unless they are indians in which case libertarians would let them have their own government and practice human sacrifice.

That's a cute straw man you've got over there.

Why are you so committed to the idea that voting equals freedom?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:08 PM  

No country is obligated to let any particular person or group in, but they should have a reason for refusal.

No they don't.

A country that needs work to be done would be wise to let workers in. That's true of the US, demonstrably so.


Given the employment rate of the population, we're not suffering from a shortage of labor.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 01, 2013 4:11 PM  

Just for the record, I have no problem with people going somewhere to work. Americans have worked in virtually every country in the world, including some places that had no government (Antarctica). They did the work, collected their pay and either went home or to the next project. I have no problem with this.

What they did not do is enter the country illegally, protest in the streets demanding citizenship, they did not participate in the elections, they did not insist on citizenship, buy land, or run for public office. The women they debauched, they either married or paid with local currency. They were not known for commiting crimes against the locals or filling up the local jails (except for sailors).

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 4:19 PM  

Sigyn: "Don't pretend you're only commenting on this thread and not operating from your cumulative experience in this blog when you say goofy things like I quoted. That's just silly."

If you think it's goofy then offer a supporting argument. Since all you could muster was weak invective I'll be charitable and assume you are still under the effects of chorionic gonadotropin inundation.

Josh: "Nope, sorry, you don't get to hand wave your way out.

Answer the question."


It could be good or it could be bad. As I said it depends.

Do the unskilled workers want to take stuff or do they want to help out the community? Are there enough resources to go around? Are their women hot and nubile? Do they have diseases? Do they smell? Can they cook? Are they awesome fighters?

I know Vox is fond of finding broad correlations and using them as evidence for his thesis. There is nothing wrong with that, per se. But as is almost always the case, the questions here are more three dimensional than binary, and require a broader approach and a deeper grasp of the issue than your infantile "is it good or bad" question.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 4:23 PM  

Why are you so committed to the idea that voting equals freedom?

Did I say that?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:28 PM  

Did I say that?

You have in the past. Also, disenfranchisement was one of two specific things you pointed out about libertarians that you disagreed with.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:32 PM  

Do the unskilled workers want to take stuff or do they want to help out the community? Are there enough resources to go around? Are their women hot and nubile? Do they have diseases? Do they smell? Can they cook? Are they awesome fighters?

I already told you they were unskilled workers from the third world. If you're not smart enough to figure out how that impacts their ability to provide for themselves, contribute, etc, you're not tall enough for the ride.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 4:48 PM  

I already told you they were unskilled workers from the third world. If you're not smart enough to figure out how that impacts their ability to provide for themselves, contribute, etc, you're not tall enough for the ride.

Most of my family were unskilled workers from the third world. Over the years we have contributed millions and millions of dollars to the economy and generally stayed out of jail with a few minor exceptions.

So yeah, it can be good. Can it also be bad? You betcha. If you truly can only settle for a "yes" or a "no" black-and-white-generalization then it's probably you who can't reach the pedals on this go-cart. Sorry, but it's true.

You have in the past.

I think you are lying. Why do you lie, Josh?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:56 PM  

I think you are lying. Why do you lie, Josh?

I could be mistaken.

Consider this your opportunity to correct me.

Do you think that voting increases your freedom? Do you think that it has a significant impact on your freedom?

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 4:58 PM  

Most of my family were unskilled workers from the third world. Over the years we have contributed millions and millions of dollars to the economy and generally stayed out of jail with a few minor exceptions.

The eternal solipsism of the immigrant mind.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 5:04 PM  

Consider this your opportunity to correct me.

No, no, stupid. I corrected you several days ago. Consider this your own opportunity to provide proof or humbly retract your false accusation.

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 5:51 PM  

If you think it's goofy then offer a supporting argument.

Why would I muster an argument to support your goofiness?

Since all you could muster was weak invective I'll be charitable and assume you are still under the effects of chorionic gonadotropin inundation.

Is that all you've got? "Hurr hurr, you're a pregnant girl"? Bitch, please. I get worse than that from my husband.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein October 01, 2013 5:53 PM  

A post on economic woes in Spain.

Porky and Josh having it out....


I've just gotta say it....



PIIGS in the azaleas!

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 6:15 PM  

Why would I muster an argument to support your goofiness?

Not to support me, dum grrl. To support your own assertions.

Bitch, please. I get worse than that from my husband.

I should certainly hope so. Although being pregnant should spare you from the beatings for a time.

Try to stay out of conversations that you don't possess the mental stamina for. You seem more qualified to opine about apple pie - (although, in the future, you should resist the urge to attach theological significance to it).

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 6:18 PM  

"Porky and Josh having it out....

I've just gotta say it....

PIIGS in the azaleas!


He is as dumb as a shrubbery, isn't he?

Anonymous Susan October 01, 2013 6:24 PM  

Yes, it had to be said. Thank you Tonto.

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 6:36 PM  

Not to support me, dum grrl. To support your own assertions.

Then you should've said so in the first place. You probably should stay out of conversations you lack the basic language skills for.

Anyway, if I feel like pointing out that your statements indicate you missed the point of past and present discussions, I will, and I'm not obligated to provide you a detailed analysis, with dates and links, of your willful obtuseness. You know you're overstating things, and you know it's because you want to be right and therefore everyone else has to not only be wrong, but evil.

It's funny that you criticize me for being a girl, but then you act like the most crazy, PMSing girl that ever there was.

I should certainly hope so. Although being pregnant should spare you from the beatings for a time.

Then you say things like this, proving my point that you deliberately misunderstand people.

You're boring.

Anonymous Porky October 01, 2013 6:43 PM  

Does this mean I can't rub your belly?

Anonymous Sigyn October 01, 2013 7:08 PM  

Does this mean I can't rub your belly?

That'd be a neat trick, seeing as we're on the Internet.

Anonymous Vegas Dude October 01, 2013 8:19 PM  

Just because I reside here in the US, you will use coercive control (force) over what I can buy from other parts of the world. Free trade is a human right. I would rather have unskilled peasants here who believe in freedom than genius-level whites who believe in forcing others to do or not do things that don't directly hurt others. "We" don't exist. I don't want to lumped in with SWPLs and blacks and RINOs and other American trash. Plus, anyone who takes any religion seriously is suspect of irrationality.

Anonymous Yorzhik October 01, 2013 8:30 PM  

No they don't.

Yes they do. Anytime the government does something you have the right to know why they did it. Unless you are into a police state.

Given the employment rate of the population, we're not suffering from a shortage of labor.
Yes we are. If a company will hire illegals before the non-illegals, it means the non-illegals won't do the work.

Anonymous wcu October 01, 2013 8:49 PM  

No, those corporations just want cheaper labor...corporations would hire evil spirits from the underworld if they were available.

Anonymous wcu October 01, 2013 8:50 PM  

No, those corporations just want cheaper labor...corporations would hire evil spirits from the underworld if they were available.

Anonymous Josh October 01, 2013 11:41 PM  

Consider this your own opportunity to provide proof or humbly retract your false accusation.

It's thus rejected. You did not say voting equals freedom. You said voting equals power. I was wrong. Mea culpa.

Anonymous Eric Ashley October 02, 2013 12:16 AM  

Very nice cover.

A friend created the world setting of Amish and Mormons vs. Zombies...which makes sense. Healthy, strong (especially the Amish), and able to subsist on their own, and having a limited geographic area to defend. So Mennonites vs. Z makes sense to me.

Zombies avoids the moral dilemma, but with vampires, it depends. Are they Buffyverse vamps (that is demons animating a dead body) or something capable of redemption?

Anonymous Idle Spectator Cares October 02, 2013 1:25 AM  

Let's change it every so slight. Try a mix of dung and ice cream. The exact proportions are not very important. Experiment if you like. So what do you get? good tasting dung or bad tasting ice cream?

I was trying to do the "find the good in everyone" liberal thing even though clearly some people are dung. Why do you always have to shit dung on my parade?

Anonymous Sigyn October 02, 2013 8:16 AM  

Because they have no memory, Idle.

Anonymous 11B October 02, 2013 11:05 AM  

Yes we are. If a company will hire illegals before the non-illegals, it means the non-illegals won't do the work.

They won't do the work for that wage. You forgot to add "for that wage" to your reply.

Anonymous Yorzhik October 02, 2013 2:27 PM  

No, those corporations just want cheaper labor...corporations would hire evil spirits from the underworld if they were available.

Of course they want cheaper labor. You want cheaper prices which forces them to want cheaper labor. And what is the true value of the labor? As cheap as they can get it for.

Anonymous Yorzhik October 02, 2013 2:32 PM  

They won't do the work for that wage. You forgot to add "for that wage" to your reply.

I didn't mention it because it is irrelevant. If a worker won't do the work for whatever reason, they won't do the work. And a worker not willing to take a lower wage that another worker will take, just means the work is truly worth the lower wage. And paying a higher wage would be morally wrong if the only reason to pay the higher wage is because "that's what the worker prefers."

Anonymous 11B October 02, 2013 2:39 PM  

I didn't mention it because it is irrelevant.

That's not how a market works. If I want someone to mow my lawn for $10, I probably won't get any takers. So I have to either do it myself or up the amount I am willing to pay. The trouble now is employers in certain industries don't want to participate in this process. They'd rather bring in illegals for lower wages and then let society subsidize them with medical care and food assistance.

Anonymous Ted October 03, 2013 8:36 PM  

"They'd rather bring in illegals for lower wages and then let society subsidize them with medical care and food assistance."

Sounds like you oppose a company's ability to engage in free association in order to maximize profits. Do YOU have a solution to this supposed problem?

Blogger lmcquaid October 07, 2013 3:19 AM  

I'm not seeing the necessary connection between free trade and open boarders. Seems like a false dichotomy to place free trade on one side and nationalism on the other. Anyway, good point about Marx.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts