Is there anything wrong with open borders if you get rid of welfare and other freeloader-friendly social programs?

Is there anything wrong with open borders if you get rid of welfare and other freeloader-friendly social programs?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=qyfrBZddlsg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Yeah, invasion by foreign nationalists as well as the undermining of the national culture and population.

Libertarians are the biggest cucks.

>hey you can't fuck my wife we didn't sign a contract
>oh yeah, sure, we can trade
>what a steal 50 goldbergs for letting that kind capitalist fuck my wife

No. A larger population is a more productive population. Culture is ever changing, and no one is forced to give up their values just because their neighbors might have different ones.

Yes. They vote. You'd have to abolish voting to make open borders work. Otherwise the immigrants will vote to turn your country into the same kind of shithole they came from.

Yes, because borders all serve to protect nation security - e.g. vetting who comes in and who goes out of your country.

Yes, it will still attract shit world dwellers.

Yes. Abolish your borders completely and find it out.

>Is there anything wrong with open borders if you get rid of welfare and other freeloader-friendly social programs?

What in fuck? You think all those unemployed people are going to contribute to society?
You're basically asking if there would be problems with thousands of desperate people suddenly living in your neighbourhood or city.
Yes. So many I can't believe you'd even have to ask.

>A larger population is a more productive population

This means absolutely nothing and can be proven wrong as quickly as you can say China versus USA.

Open borders means new borders. If you allow your borders to dissolve someone else will take advantage and advance their borders on your former territory.

Buy property in the ghetto and don't put up a fence or protective measures. Pretty soon it'll be full of squatters, druggies and everything of value will be stripped from it. If you have something worth protecting, do so.

>Let in hordes of poor people from socialist countries
>They vote in a socialist government for the gibsmedat

What do you mean we have invaded you, I was just taking my army for a walk. Open borders.

Yes, the imported larger voting demographic can vote for welfare and other freeloader friendly social programs

Yes. Cultural problems abound.

Good luck telling that to the muslims.

>Is it so wrong to leave you home's doors and windows open to thieves if you dont own anything nice?

>larger population is good goyim
Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.

Open borders aren't a libertarian ideology, but a marxist one. Libertatians hold prooerty, property lines, and defending your property in high regard. Shill somewhere else.

in a monarchy maybe not

in a democracy they'll just vote in freeloader programs

It's not the only factor obviously but all other things being equal more people = more productive potential.

>Is there anything wrong with open borders if you get rid of welfare and other freeloader-friendly social programs?

Low IQ people migrate to high IQ countries. So eventually, they will dumb down the country,
and vote for socialism regardless.

The solution is eugenics via genius sperm banks. We need to export sperm to the developing
world and let the low IQ people hybridize themselves with this sperm, so their offspring become
smarter, and able to build a better society for themselves. Instead of fleeing to Europe, they will
stay in their home countries. They will also have a lower birthrate because intelligent people
have fewer offspring.

Yes. Mud people have low IQs and high propensity for crime, violence, and general degeneracy. They also vote overwhelming for left wing political parties.

Anybody advocating open borders is a de facto far left socialist.

No, with the state neither encouraging immigration, nor interfering excessively in it, the market would give us an optimal level of immigration with maximum economic benefit and minimum unwanted side effects. We would have fewer and higher quality immigrants.

Also note that under Johnsons plan it's only the work permits that are easier to get, not citizenship. And it's one-strike-you're-out with re-entry forever barred for offenders.

Being more productive is not the same thing as being rewarded for being more productive. Why can't you fucking liberal faggots and theoretical academics see that?

Even if average productivity of a worker goes up with immigration, the worker sees none of the gain from the productivity.
In fact, every extra dollar that the employee generates from higher productivity goes the his employer because more people gives less incentive for employers to raise wages.

In addition, the wages that the worker was earning before gets transferred to the employers as well, because more labor competition gives more leverage to employers in wage negotiation.

In essence, while each worker may generate more money, the vast majority of the share of the money that he generates goes to his boss and not him.
Are you starting to see the picture?

How about non-natives must become a citizen and reach a certain amount of taxes paid to be eligible to vote?

If you open borders and legalize drugs the cartels will now smuggle our dank out and still remain as entities. Can't have that.

Also, what I'm saying is exactly backed up by facts and reality, not theoretical nonsense from the libertarian and liberal corporate cocksuckers.

While GDP per capita in the US (Productivity per person) has gone up, wages have declined.

nothing, its a system that is historically proven to benefit the white race and especially the white male.

>Instead of fleeing to Europe, they will
>stay in their home countries
Higher IQs won't get rid of their parasitic nature. If anything, they'll be more resolved than ever to flee their shitty living conditions.

More horsecrap from a corporate slave.

The "equilibrium" point for the world would be a 4 digit salary.

Of course your billionaires and retarded economists trying to chase higher GDP at all costs would consider that a success.

>doesn't understand the difference between currency and money.

>Is there anything wrong with open borders if you get rid of welfare and other freeloader-friendly social programs?

Drugs.

/thread

/thread

>In essence, while each worker may generate more money, the vast majority of the share of the money that he generates goes to his boss and not him.
>Are you starting to see the picture?
You're the one spouting Marxist sympathies, yet I'm the liberal?

I didn't say anything about nor advocate any specific economic system (which is what handles distribution of wealth). All I said was that more people equal more productive power.

Johnson 39 percent
Trump 31 percent
Clinton 30 percent

FINAL BOSS
SCREENCAP IT

Convert it into usd, you faggot.

GDP is a fucking corporate propaganda tool used to get normal people with no understanding of finance and economics cheering for something they think will help them when it only hurts them.

Corporations fund economists to push this theoretical nonsense, and insecure economists who want to be seen in the same light as science professors roll with the bullshit because they use stochastic differential equations and measure theory on their failed models to look smart.

That's why you have garbage like the comparative static analysis on GDP.

You said from the start that there are no issues with open borders. I'm proving you wrong.

Open borders decrease wages and increase profits for businesses.

You are only as free as the people you live around.

If people who don't share your views on freedom move in, it is a problem.

Rajneeshpuram is a good example.

Cult moves into town.
Takes over local government.
Brings in immigrants/homeless to expand their political power.
Poison restaurants food to make people sick and keep them from voting.

youtube.com/watch?v=qyfrBZddlsg

It really depends on the group that wants to be your neighbor.

((( 1 post by this ID )))

you guys never learn. neither do I.

but the obvious answer to OP's question is contained in that map from a few months back showing the path from syria to germany, labeled NO WAR, NO WAR, NO WAR, NO WAR, NO WAR, NO WAR, BENEFITS.

>Higher IQs won't get rid of their parasitic nature.
Sure they will. Because there is lots of opportunity in these developing countries. Remember colonialism? A bunch of high IQ whites set up shop in these developing countries and made billions of dollars.

Instead of foreigners, it will be mixed race locals who will become the business and political leaders