Hacker News Reader

> Certainly not near as much weight as the load on local welfare systems, personal history, culture fit, and so forth.

Why do you think this? I personally believe the opposite and think world wide semi-open borders would be for the best. (By semi-open I mean that you still need to pass background checks etc). You could also disqualify people from accepting welfare if they have recently moved into the county.

View on HN

What you end up then is "pushy" cultures become the norm, and "more open" (from a lack of better term, I know that's not really accurate) get phased out.

Essentially, everything will be China given long enough (I'm obviously exaggerating). There might be a few people of middle eastern descent too. Maybe.

>would be for the best

The best for who? Do the people who live in countries with valuable infrastructure and institutions benefit from having to share them with immigrants that will be net-consumers of those services? (Note: I'm not saying all immigrants are net-consumers, I'm specifically asking about the subset of immigrants that are net-consumers.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com