Sheep Tag Community

A lot of people "challenged" me on this topic, but most seem to dodge when its time to walk de walk.

But anyway, if anyone is interested Ill start off, I think immigration should be free, because I think it would be better if every human could chose where he or she should live.

You honestly think Shoop doesn't believe in documented immigration, including where people are living/earning their living?

'Even in countries with greater social mobility (Europe) there are huge problems assimilating a relatively small amount of amirs.' Hehe, not bad.

In my opinion, immigration should be possible but not without back-ground checking, and proper reasoning as to why somebody is coming to a different country. Here in the Netherlands we're stuck with a lot of Marokish, Turkish and Polish people, and some parts of those are welcome, others are not.
If somebody moves here to work from a different country, that's alright, but this should be thoroughly regulated. If there's to many Polish workers in the Netherlands, the Dutch will be out of jobs. Asides from that, a lot of immigrants from Morocco and Turkey are here on extended leave to be with family or whatever. But they are here only because the living conditions are better. Though I do not mind people to go to a country where the living conditions are better, I do mind when those people compromise the well-being of that country.
Over 70% of Dutch Marokish people under 18 have commited a crime, 15% of which have a criminal record. Easily 50% of all burglaries, assaults, **** and other such felonies are caused, or include immigrants from mostly Morocco and Turkey. That's why I'd say, sure allow them in, but don't hesitate to put them back if need be.
Perhaps they should have some sort of probation of a few years (5?) where if they commit a felony they get sent back?

BEER
Like Chakra says, obviously you still document where people are living and earning. You pay taxes where you live, this is also the place where you vote, send your children to school, get healthcare, etc.

drew
Well you raise a very different point about taxes than BEER, but I dont think its really relevant to this issue. We are going to have the problem you describe regardless of free immigration or not. No country says no to multimillionaires moving in with their taxmoney, especially not low-tax countries like Monaco. That is their whole plan, to attract such people regardless of where they are from. If a normal country opens up for free immigration wont affect that at all.

I dont know exacly what you mean with choose a local government that fits you, but as I said you will pay your taxes where you live.

Like you mention yourself the problems in USA with extreme segregation can often be traced back to other underlying problems, such as your lack of social security (which creates the need of a personal safetynet = organized crime, China Towns, lack of social mobility, etc). In a society with high social wellfare you will experience very little of this despite big immigration.

Other countries have different problems, for instance in many European countries the history of strong unions is a problem with too big job-security leading to a labourmarket hard for immigrants and young people with little job-experience to enter.

But it is important to remember that neither of these problems are actually caused by immigration, and that both should be fixed regardless of immigration or not. What you need are laws that makes it relativly easy (not too easy ofcourse) to fire people, but on the other hand a very strong social security network for unemployed people in order to create a dynamic labour-market while taking care of people in need both for the sake of itself and to avoid criminality, extreme poverty, segregation, and to keep demand up for basic goods and services.

Shyamora
I think I adressed parts of your concern aswell, and even though I am not 100 % familiar with NL:s laws a fair guess is that you also have relativly high job security which is a problem for immigration. It also seems to be like the culture in NL seems to be very prejudgmental towards certain groups of people, which is a problem itself and a risk becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. If more people reason like you "I have nothing against all Marocans, I just think a lot of them dont behave well", how will an employer reason when he choses between you (assuming you are a "ethnic NL") and Marocan? Obviously he will pick you. This is essentially racism, and even if you think you have good reasons to make the assumptions you do, it is still exacly how for instance anti-semitism was justified. There is nothing in Marocans that makes them more likeley to commit crime, it is just difficult to come to a new country and culture and it is just that poverty often leads to a higher rate of criminality. If you instead focus on what you can change about your country in order to make it easier for immigrants to find jobs, intergrate, feel welcome, etc, you will find that immigration is the best economic boost there is and something that will boost the labour-market for everyone and reduce the total unemployment as you get new ideas and a younger population with a lot of people willing to take the jobs most Europeans are too lazy to do.

And your arguments are that "BNet people are against my ideas", and you havent heard of my ideas before?

How about you say something thats relevant to the topic instead, why do you think immigration should be restricted for instance? What are the problems you are talking about, and why do you think immigration is the cause of them?

Also, I dont base anything of what I say on media or what people say in media. This is my own theory, I dont give a **** what people "in media" think or what people on BNet think. The only thing I care about are the arguments.

Why would it lead to anarchy? And why would everyone wanna move to the same country?

All you need is a civil registry with the names, personal digits, where you live, etc of all citizens. (Obviously you will need citizenship if you want to move to the country permanently).

Here is the basics of how it works in Sweden : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_registration_in_Sweden

First of all, its simply not true that everyone want to live in the "best country". Most people prefer to stay in their old country, for various reasons including culture, patriotism/nationalism, friends, family, job, etc.

Second of all, what country is the "best country"?

Third of all, why would there have to be "better and worse countries"?

And to try your theory out, what country do you think is best in the world, why do you think its best, and why havent you moved there yet?

Beer, you are sounding incredibly silly. There is no way to objectively quantify a "best" country as there is no way to objective way to balance factors, such as social nets, opportunity, etc. Racists will clearly view countries with open immigration--thus probably more immigrant populations--as a negative, as they'd have to live with racists.

Give me your top five countries and see how many people precisely agree with you.

Further, there are reasons to stay where you are, such as job security, family/friends, and other ties that hold you to where you are. Moving from Finland to Norway isn't going to give you a huge change, even if Norway is viewed better than Finland. Many people simply don't want the hassle of relocation.

There are still people who want to live in the extremely underdeveloped, war-torn areas in Africa/Asia. These people already get priority immigration to many places, such as Europe, Australia, and the US, yet they stay. This is either because they view the current situation as fine or because of the costs of relocation.

Difficulty of keeping documentation is a joke of an argument. As already stated, governments are already having to face the issue of constant relocation of businesses as well as their personal. Obviously if you work somewhere, it wouldn't be difficult to require a social security number or some form of identification that proves you officially reside in your country.

Drew brings up excellent points in regards to the tendency of immigrants to form communities. While I think Shoop responded well, I think he lacks the perspective of how hard the current problem is and how easy it would be to solve. Shoop's answer is to completely reconfigure the US labor market, something that simply isn't going to happen. Arguing for it is nice, but it won't happen.

At a intercity level, especially those in the Eastern US, you can see how racially segregated the population is.

,

, and many other cities have very clear and observable areas. This pattern diminishes greatly the further west you go, but it doesn't go away.

Worse, in some states, specifically Florida, there are entire towns that are 95% - 100% immigrant, non-English speaking that the rest of the state doesn't even know exist. They are about as isolated from the system as possible.

Mexicans don't simply live with other Mexicans because of economic security. Most of the time when an immigrant moves, it's not because they completely hate their country and culture--so when they come they still seek it out. Economic situation being neutral, people still prefer to live near people with similar social values, language, and other cultural elements.

Being a federalized system, Shoop, there are some states with tax policies that benefit specific individuals, and wealthy enough people, as well as companies, relocate to take the benefit of these. Further, each state has subregions that exist within a similar federalized system: counties tax you differently. Many of our metros even have subdivisions, with the "inner city" being starved to death while rich suburbs get fantastic schools and other government-provided commodities. This leads to people trying to be very selective in choosing where they live.


I am completely open with free and, ideally, unhindered immigration. However, since some people in this thread seem confused about obvious issues, and because Shoop may different in some areas, I'll state limitations. Countries should, of course, be allowed to block entry to those with violent criminal records. They should have to go through mandatory health screenings, including vaccinations. Countries should attempt to provide some means to assimilate foreigners, such as offering cheap/free and extensive language programs and education opportunities.

Guess that's it for now. Overall, I agree with Shoop's argument, both for moral as well as philosophic reasons.

Edit: Should people be forced to live in Somalia?