Hacker News Reader

Comment by mozumder | Hacker News Reader

The immediate goal of everyone in this country should be to open the borders and open trade.

There is no excuse.

Borders serve no useful purpose in a globalized economy. Can you imagine how terrible it would be if the states had hard borders between them?

People act like having open borders mean invading marauders of foreigners, but did everyone from Ohio invade Maryland because of the open borders the states have? In reality, most people would stay where their family and relatives are.

"My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, sometime in the future with energy that's as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere." - Hillary Clinton

Let's start by making annexing the states of Canada and Mexico into the US, and work other countries from there.

Do it.

View on HN

Open borders without a transfer union leads to Greece and Italy. But when did evidential practice ever impact neoliberal economic theory

You know we tried this during the Mexican-American war. It turns out the Mexicans are still pretty sore about this.

If borders were a purely economic construct I might agree with you. However, they aren't, not even primarily. Remove modern notions of economics, look into deep history, and borders still exist.

As for Mrs. Clinton, she dreamed she could be President twice. We all know how that worked out for her and unfortunately us.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who would be happy to ban Californians from moving into their state

I think Canada and Mexico might take issue with this plan.

I'm sure we can work out a deal that'll make everyone happy. It might take some changes in our laws as well, but it can happen.

Yep. Another 9/11 will get everyone on board.

Why would it not? The government didn't bar whites from traveling after Oklahoma City..

Borders serve a purpose. As a matter of fact people from Southern America (for example) hold other educational backgrounds, belief systems and an overall different attitude than people from the North. While we all are humans and we all should treat each other with respect we shouldn't forget that we all are different. In some cases we are more compatible to each other in some we aren't. Someday we might have a world without borders, but that isn't until we have solved education, wealth and access to those for the whole planet.

> People act like having open borders mean invading marauders of foreigners, but did everyone from Ohio invade Maryland because of the open borders the states have?

Because Ohio and Maryland are not that different. However El Salvador and the U.S. are and it might lead to huge problems (like the U.S. already has)

Also as you like Hillary Quotes so much: "Can't we just drone this guy" - Hillary Clinton on Julian Assange

I live in literally the most diverse area of the US, and no, people from South America and Ohio really aren't different at all.

You could swap out our actual Peruvian home builders for someone in Ohio (if they wanted the job) and it would be the same.

Like I said, there is no excuse. Cultural differences aren't big enough to warrant borders and impose trade restrictions.

Interesting. Let put this into action. How about you try to hitchhike across western europe or japan and document your experences. Then try to hitchhike across the middle east or subsaharan africa. Let me know how that one goes for you. I hope you don't encounter any differences.

> I live in literally the most diverse area of the US, and no, people from South America and Ohio really aren't different at all.

Maybe you should leave your echo chamber every once in a while. I also live in the most diverse area of my nation, and while it is all fun and games when I am around well educated, well mannered people from different countries it is less fun when I have to cross the street in a diverse area with less high educational standards. The former by the way are already eligible to cross the border at any time (because they are legally able to obtain a visa) the latter aren't and really shouldn't.

That said, the cultural differences in the Americas might be less grave than Europe and the Middle East, or the U.S. and the Middle East for example. It really boils down to religion and education (in most cases), both of which are pretty similar in the Americas.

People could (and probably would) still live in communities with common cultural and religious ties, even in a world without national borders. And, in this world of international borders, people from disparate backgrounds manage to immigrate and integrate just fine.

National boundaries don't really map to the borders of cultural and religious identity (as can be readily seen in the Middle East), so your argument here (which seems to be that the former is needed to preserve the latter) doesn't seem well supported.

> National boundaries don't really map to the borders of cultural and religious identity (as can be readily seen in the Middle East), so your argument here [..] doesn't seem well supported.

That is because we already let immigration happen. And it supports my thesis really well, as this immigration lead to severe problems amongst groups of different cultural backgrounds.

> People could (and probably would) still live in communities with common cultural and religious ties, even in a world without national borders.And, in this world of international borders, people from disparate backgrounds manage to immigrate and integrate just fine.

Those groups living clustered together isn't integration but segregation.

>That is because we already let immigration happen

It's also because national boundaries tend to be more about resource allocation and political necessity than the preservation of culture or religion. Look at the problems caused by the British Empire carving up the Middle East after World War 1.

Now perhaps you might argue the national borders there should correspond more to local tribal and cultural identity (and maybe they should) but the point is they don't, and they rarely do anywhere.

>And it supports my thesis really well, as this immigration lead to severe problems amongst groups of different cultural backgrounds.

At one time, Americans felt that Irish and Chinese immigrants could never properly integrate... to say nothing about free Africans. Yet all of those groups have been unambiguously integrated.

I work around Indian and Middle Eastern immigrants. Hindus and Muslims. It's remarkable how unremarkable they are given how incompatible "Western culture" is supposed to be to them. There aren't always "severe problems" with immigrants from different cultural backgrounds. Sometimes there are, yes, but it isn't a rule of nature.

>Those groups living clustered together isn't integration but segregation.

Those aren't boolean states. Someone can maintain a connection to their heritage while still being a part of greater society.

> At one time, Americans felt that Irish and Chinese immigrants could never properly integrate... to say nothing about free Africans. Yet all of those groups have been unambiguously integrated.

The Irish are not so different from the people that made up America back then. The Chinese who come here flee a communist/socialist regime, they are more than happy to assimilate to capitalism and the American way of life.

> [..] There aren't always "severe problems" with immigrants from different cultural backgrounds. Sometimes there are, yes, but it isn't a rule of nature.

As I acknowledged above.

> Those aren't boolean states. Someone can maintain a connection to their heritage while still being a part of greater society.

Right, but living in segregated communities inside another country is not maintaining a connection to heritage but simply not integrating.

The cultural differences between urban, suburban, and rural US are at least as great as the overall differences between the US and other countries, and I suspect you'd be weighing every word carefully if you tried making those same arguments for strong borders to keep the city people out of the suburbs or vice versa.

Aren’t you proving the GPs point? Around people with the same education your experience is fine, so get everyone in the same schools and we’re good.

We would have to go to a more libertarian free-market model to make open borders work which seems like the opposite direction people want to go - especially those advocating for open borders.

lol

Reply on news.ycombinator.com