Murray Rothbard explains the absurdity of immigration laws

Rothbard wrote:

>The loss to everyone as consumers from shackling the inter-regional division of labor and the efficient location of production, should not be overlooked in considering the effects of immigration barriers. The reductio ad absurdum, though not quite as devastating as in the case of the tariff, is also relevant here.

>As Cooley and Poirot point out: If it is sound to erect a barrier along our national boundary lines, against those who see greater opportunities here than in their native land, why should we not erect similar barriers between states and localities within our nation? Why should a low-paid worker be allowed to migrate from a failing buggy shop in Massachusetts to the expanding automobile shops in Detroit. He would compete with native Detroiters for food and clothing and housing. He might be willing to work for less than the prevailing wage in Detroit, “upsetting the labor market” there. Anyhow, he was a native of Massachusetts, and therefore that state should bear the full “responsibility for his welfare.” Those are matters we might ponder, but our honest answer to all of them is reflected in our actions. We’d rather ride in automobiles than in buggies. It would be foolish to try to buy an automobile or anything else on the free market, and at the same time deny any individual an opportunity to help produce those things we want.

>The advocate of immigration laws who fears a reduction in his standard of living is actually misdirecting his fire. Implicitly, he believes that his geographic area now exceeds its optimum population point. What he really fears, therefore, is not so much immigration as any population growth. To be consistent, therefore, he would have to advocate compulsory birth control, to slow down the rate of population growth desired by individual parents.

Reminder that all the economic models libertarians point to to prove their economics assume 0 immigration between countries

>Murray Rothbard's parents were David and Rae Rothbard, Jewish immigrants to the U.S. from Poland and Russia

Hmmm

>(((Rothbard)))

Total nonsense

Because we're generally all the same culture in this country? Our standards of living aren't wildly different either.

This kike advocated selling children off in the free market. Complete piece of filthy kike shit

What part was nonsense? His thinking is solid, it's rational. Please provide a logical rebuttal or GTFO.

>The loss to everyone as consumers
This is the handicap of the jew; he is only able to view the world in terms of economics. Stability, security, values, culture, family - these terms are meaningless to the merchant who is only concerned with selling his wares and occupying more market stalls.

Yes lets compete with hordes of people from other nations who's failed socialist policies and our own misguided charity lead to them breeding like rabbits.

The one thing that turned me off to libertarian ideology was how much they revered the market. It's like a religion (I know cliche). "The market will solve all, trust in the market!" or like molenyuex "don't study physics build an iphone".

If GDP was the only thing I cared about, I'd agree with the kikes on this.
It isn't.
I don't.

>Rothbard

I don't listen to Jews.

Economically, he's probably correct.

Jews just don't understand how anyone else could treasure their culture more than wealth.

If you want proof the unrestricted all-knowing free market will just fuck up and kill people, see: Nestle baby formula scandal

What lolbertains and asscaps fail to realize is that an economy and government are only as strong as the average family unit.

You can't fault his logic or the economic sense it makes, the only real objection people can have is this cultural social engineering one which is quite vague when applied collectively rather than individually.

Doesn't matter though no amount of logic will overturn the fears people dream up to justify immorality and statism.

>Be an-cap
>Not even realize Rothbard changed his views on immigation
Read Nations by Consent by ROTHBARD you brainlet

>economics
>science
Bwahahhahahahaha

> Nestle baby formula scandal
No it's not.
> unrestricted all-knowing free market
No one says the market is omnicient what we say is that the dispersed knowledge the market (which is the people) uses and the signals prices give us allowssociety to tackle social problems with the best use of knowledge and resources with the best incentives compared to the alternative of central planning. It gives us the opportunity to meet our individually desired goals, which may include my baby not dying from the food I feed it.

This does not mean people aren't fallible or can't make mistakes but the way a market works punishes them when they come to light and people have recourse, whereas with the state we have to basically suck it up and accept every scandal & failure without recourse.

Nestle can fuck up a baby formula, the government can pull us into war on false pretenses, allow products to go through its controls that harm us and all manner of fuck ups that it isn't held accountable for.

I don't see how bureaucracy can possibly be any better at protecting people and giving them recourse.

Ya but rothbard is an Ancap and there would be far less immigration today if America had open borders but no welfare or public property. The only way anyone would be able to immigrate to a part of America worth a shit is if he did well in his country, if he did well(so literally no niggers at all ever) there then he will most likely be a productive and benefitial member of your society. Don't forget an immigrant would have to afford the ride here(no refugees), afford some shelter (no section 8), get a job(no welfare), and then overcome prejudice(no affirmative action). Jews fear the Ancap paradise because they would have to play fair.

Ayn Rand = no kids
Murray Rothbard = no kids
Ludwig von Mises = no kids
Hans-Hermann Hoppe = no kids

> Hayek had kids
> Friedman had kids
> Car or foooooOOOod

Population growth is effectively controlled in the host nation and he doesn't address our welfare state. His reasoning is sophomoric

>I began to rethink my views on immigration when, as the Soviet Union collapsed, it became clear that ethnic Russians had been encouraged to flood into Estonia and Latvia in order to destroy the cultures and languages of these peoples.

>To be consistent, therefore, he would have to advocate compulsory birth control, to slow down the rate of population growth desired by individual parents
This difference is that limiting births is completely totalitarian, where as you if you have border controls you are capable of living in a libertarian society within the borders of the nation

The differences between a (presumably white, Anglo-Saxon, Christian) worker from Massachusetts and Michigan are negligible. Putting everything in economic terms doesn't work when the third worlder that comes to a new nation doesn't integrate, has too many children, is prone to crime, and can't speak the language.

His primary argument is that it will get you riches. Not terribly compelling.

this is also the conclusion i have come to

Daily reminder, Hoppe is the real ancap. Hoppean libertarianism is Fascism's greatest ally.

How can you learn anything from a literal happy merchant irl?
Look at him!

> Open Borders
> Welfare State
Pick one. Having both will flood your country with people looking for handouts.

>(((Rothbard)))

Another kike telling us why we should invite in every mud hut savage on the planet and give them free shit.

I don't know why I was a libertarian for so long. There is more to life than economics and money.

BASED anti-white kike

...

>why does interdisciplinary theory matter?
>this shitheads ideas of politics.

BASED JEW

Wait, you're saying the GDP goes up when you just mindlessly sacrifice everything else to it? Wtf I'm a libertarian now!

Keep that knuckle-dragging Hebrew and his philosophies out of Norway, Iceland, Finland and I guess Sweden & we can all get along fine.

Often overlooked but largely the #1 reason the wall is now a conservative policy.

I’d obviously prefer not wasting the money on a wall but at this point it’s really the only logical solution to stop further bleeding from the welfare state.

Rothbard was not pro-open borders absent the abolition of the welfare state.

I agree with the sentiment, which is why we cannot accept immigration of low skill individuals.

A borderless society would never be able to afford any kind of a social safety net. Neighbors would constantly be leaching off of their richest neighbors. An endless supply would devalue labor to the point that upward mobility would become nearly impossible. Wages become so depressed subsistence is difficult.

The scarcity of labor increases its value leading to higher wages, better stratification of wealth, and a more satisfied society.

I don't think democracy can function if 99.9% of the people are living hand to mouth.

>EU patch

too late

Totalitarian population control is good.

> A borderless society would never be able to afford any kind of a social safety net
Kind of wrong though unless we assume all safety nets must be done through the state and be federal/blanket rather than community based & means tested.

Friendly/Mutual Aid Societies and charities do this all the time you can choose who gets it and why.

Shitskins will always want to move to white countries because we can maintain a higher standard of living. Even without welfare, they would come. In fact, only half of immigrants take welfare anyway.

The entire libtardarian movement is created by Jews, just as Communism. Jews own polar opposite political ideologies. Both equally toxic for white people

What kind of retarded fucking cuck do you have to be to think a country with majority 5 foot 80 IQ criminal beaners, who will vote for big government, is good.

The delusion is fucking obscene

It ignores humans as humans exists. The model of humanity Rothbard proposes is rootless, cosmopolitan, asocial and culture-free. In other words, I should be just as willing to live in Bangalore as I should in Boston (and care just as little for the local community) as long as I can make money which becomes the primary value in a human life.

How is it Jewish?
Are you simply ignoring the history of Libertarianism, Fascism & Socialism?