So it took him 6 minutes and shitonne of gumballs to prove the obvious. Well, at least this was fun to watch.
The brain drain arguement is interesting, but lets not forget that it is the action of Western nations like the United States that are to blame primarily for the povery facing these people.
I agree immigration is not the answer to global poverty, but neither is ethno-nationalism. The idea is to remove the circumstances which would convince people to immigrate to the United States - an incredibly difficult world and would indeed require we give up a great deal of our claims to resoruces, and a certain lifestyle we find attractive.
[QUOTE=Flameon;47826084]I agree immigration is not the answer to global poverty, but neither is ethno-nationalism. The idea is to remove the circumstances which would convince people to immigrate to the United States - an incredibly difficult world and would indeed require we give up a great deal of our claims to resoruces, and a certain lifestyle we find attractive.[/QUOTE]
The only way you can truly remove [i]all[/i] incentive to get to greater countries is to institute some sort of world-wide communistic equality. People from the UK are leaving to other countries to get to places with less taxes, and so on. Stopping immigration isn't going to happen even if there's only tiny, nearly insignificant differences between countries. One will still be marginally better than another, even in the most "ideal" of circumstances.
The problem for me isn't stopping people from immigrating, the problem is making lives less miserable in those places so that immigration is at best an improvement, not a means of survival. That's pretty doable, but people [i]really[/i] don't want to hear the solution. Telling people that impoverished nations must utilize their position and underbid competition, so that they can have their own industrial age and join the rest of the industrialized nations is a thing that activists who typically campaign for people of disadvantaged countries do not want to hear.
They figure they should remain farmers and yet somehow also be materially rich, not recognizing the impossibility of that system.
[QUOTE=s0beit;47827118]The only way you can truly remove [I]all[/I] incentive to get to greater countries is to institute some sort of world-wide communistic equality. People from the UK are leaving to other countries to get to places with less taxes, and so on. Stopping immigration isn't going to happen even if there's only tiny, nearly insignificant differences between countries. One will still be marginally better than another, even in the most "ideal" of circumstances.
The problem for me isn't stopping people from immigrating, the problem is making lives less miserable in those places so that immigration is at best an improvement, not a means of survival. That's pretty doable, but people [I]really[/I] don't want to hear the solution. Telling people that impoverished nations must utilize their position and underbid competition, so that they can have their own industrial age and join the rest of the industrialized nations is a thing that activists who typically campaign for people of disadvantaged countries do not want to hear.
They figure they should remain farmers and yet somehow also be materially rich, not recognizing the impossibility of that system.[/QUOTE]
Fuck, they don't even want to be farmers in a lot of places. Look at the rural situation in places like SA and Zimbabwe. If you're productive, you get murdered.
And as far as the undercutting and what not to industrialize, Africa needs to emulate Asia. They went through the same colonization shit, in some cases like South Korea were way poorer than a lot of African nations after the Korean war and really until the 80's, yet these individual countries in Asia rank better economically than all of Subsaharan Africa.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.