Libertarians Are Worthless IF......

I would contend that closed borders are very unlibertarian (and regardless of what ideology you cling to, disturbing as well). The main issue is welfare. Cut that off from them, and porous borders pose no problems.

In fact, if our economy were functioning correctly, that would be the ideal situation. We'd be begging mexico to send more because we'd be so starved for workers.
 
Josh_LA said:
says the guy who resorts to cussing and big bold letters to make his point.
Click to expand...

Says the guy who would have no remorse over killing innocent people who cannot defend themselves. Says the guy who doesn't know shit about monopolies or basic economics, yet proceeds under the impression he does. Says the guy who is a poster boy, whose every word is a defense or justification of indiscriminate violence in all it's forms. Says the guy who has admitted he does not want a free society. Says the guy who has no principles, or convictions. Says the guy who will take any position he can, making endless contridictionary statements in an attempt to weasel out of reality. Says the guy who wouldn't hesitate or feel remorse of killing and robbing people if it wasn't for his fear of government power. Says the guy who has no problems with the Nazi's exterminating those who cannot fend for themselves. Says the guy who despises civilization and hopes for tyranny. Says the guy who is immoral to his core & it seems, wishes to be the personification of evil.
 
Dude looks like a lady Erica, this buds for you...

troll_b_gone.gif
 
erika said:
You've done a wonderful job being a false opposition group, keeping the borders nice and open while the country is quickly overpopulating. Well done. The LP is one of the most worthless groups in California. Most people cannot stand their open border rejectamenta.
Click to expand...

Most people can't stand moronic trolls, yet you are still here...
 
I wonder if my perspective, aside from my libertarian perspective, is influenced by by history. Texas had an open border with Mexico up until the early 1900's, with free movement of people across the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo. Through my school years, out in the Big Bend, we still had open borders. at least in the sense that we could come and go aross the border without checkpoints, etc. I really don't think this was truly shut down until Homeland Security.
 
Number19 said:
I wonder if my perspective, aside from my libertarian perspective, is influenced by by history. Texas had an open border with Mexico up until the early 1900's, with free movement of people across the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo. Through my school years, out in the Big Bend, we still had open borders. at least in the sense that we could come and go aross the border without checkpoints, etc. I really don't think this was truly shut down until Homeland Security.
Click to expand...

I'd like to ask the restricted borders anti-Libertarians to explain just when and why the "negative aspects" of open borders started to show up? Was "it" starting to get "real bad" by around, say 1912? I'm just looking for cause and effect opinions.

+++++++++

Maybe there is confusion with this issue and the intent of the first amendment that should be used to force all Borders book stores to remain open 24x7.
 
My story from the last time this issue came up...

There is an illegal immigration crisis plaguing the U.S. today, but the remedy proposed by most closed-border advocates is, unbeknownst to them, the entire cause of the crisis to begin with.

Our Immigration system is cumbersome, unwieldy, expensive, and riddled with quotas and double standards. I know because of a near first-hand experience with this grossly inefficient system.

True story: About six years ago, my dad met a resident-alien South Korean gentleman named Mr. Park, befriended him, and soon grew enamored with the prospect of starting a martial arts school with him. Mr. Park is a 5th degree Grand Master in Tae Kwon Do, with certificates and accolades galore from almost every major Tae Kwon Do academy in the world, including The Kukkiwan in Korea. He's one of only about 50 men in the entire country with his extensive accreditations, so we assumed getting his green card and other papers in order would be a breeze...right?

Well...not exactly.

First, Mr. Park was told he'd need a sponsor. Of course, my dad was more than willing to vouch for his prospective business partner, so this wasn't much of a hurdle. But in the ensuing months, all manner of application fees, processing fees, immigration attorney gratuities, and assorted hoops he had to jump through because of the government's monopoly on Immigration and Naturalization, ended up costing us around twenty-thousand American dollars.

What we were putting out to get Mr. Park's green card was just barely enough to keep our heads above water financially, because, as most entrepreneurs know, the first three years of a new business are usually the most trying and least profitable. All of these exorbitant fees for immigration bureaucrats ended up bankrupting our school. It folded after two years, meaning that all we paid in to the process ended up being for naught anyway. Mr. Park is living in another state now, my dad hasn't been able to get back on his feet since, and we ended up losing far more money from our venture than we took in from tuition during the school's brief history.

The Immigration bureaucracy stifles entrepreneurship, harms the economy, stagnates the creation of wealth, and hurts far more people than it has ever helped! It's time to realize that our country's immigration problem is caused not by ruthless scofflaws who get their jollies from spitting on our national heritage. It is caused by a corrupt and ineffectual governmental behemoth that exacts brutal and exploitative fees on human beings (many of whom have families, hopes, and dreams just like us) and preys on the desperation of Third-World refuse frantic to escape the Hell of plutocratic dictatorships or pestilential war-zones.

Just like outlawing guns insures that only outlaws will possess them, placing excessive strictures on the flow of the destitute into a rich and free nation insures that those among them who do harbor criminal intent will be over-represented in the numbers of such people who do finally get here illegally. That is why we've seen such an explosion of Latino gangland violence on our streets. The Latino population in the United States is over-represented by those whose regard for the law was not sufficient to bar their illegal entry into this country.
 
(I didn't have the time to read this entire thread, so forgive me if these points have already been brought up.)

First of all, I am not an anarchist (though, I certainly do not condemn anarchists). I am a minarchist. I believe that some government has to exist.

The libertarian approach to immigration is often misunderstood.

Are our rights given to us by God (or nature) at birth, or are they given by the Bill of Rights as privileges to American citizens? The answer to this question should be obvious to any libertarian - our rights are inalienable, we are born with them. Since our rights come from God (or nature) and are inalienable, they are not exclusive to American citizens. Is freedom of movement a right? I consider it a right. So, if we are truly the land that recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals, any peaceful individual who's foot touches our land should have their freedom of movement recognized. HOWEVER... and this is a big however...

1. Your rights end at my property line. If a land owner on the border doesn't want people crossing his property, he has the right to put a stop to it; as long as he doesn't hurt anybody who don't intend to hurt him in the process.

2. The Bill of Rights, the document that recognizes (not grants!) and protects our rights under law, was made exclusively for the federal government. The states are not bound to it! Now, our states have their own bills of rights, but if you feel that immigration could damage your state, you can work to change your state!

I hope this makes it a little better. :)
 
erika said:
A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.
Click to expand...

You're right, I think. Anytime someone has something of value, others will try to show up and parasitize it.

The real question is however: how to enforce this without destroying ourselves with pointless laws?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
Right-Wing Obtuseness on Immigration
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
15K
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
C
Why Libertarians Loathe Tariffs
Replies
3
Views
893
TheTexan
TheTexan
PAF
The Nervousness of Corporate Surveillance Pseudo-Libertarians
Replies
0
Views
782
PAF
PAF
Occam's Banana
"It's the communism, stupid."
Replies
0
Views
561
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
PAF
Javier Milei Versus the Antiwar Cause
Replies
7
Views
1K
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Back
Top