Some position says that immigration should be free.
Another says, no. Countries should have right to allow who can enter like people have right to decide who can enter his house. After all, you can't have a libertarian country with too many commies and muslims having voting right. And that's actually why you will never have a poor libertarian country. Fine. Let them in, don't let them vote (like in Dubai). Hmmmm....
Well, it's tricky. You don't just live among majority of people without appeasing them. It's like walking on a lonely street, having someone putting a gun in your head, and just ignore it. There is power in number and the majority of people is always more powerful.
So what about some middle ground.
Basically someone argue in USmessage forum whether drug users should be shot or not Duterte style.
In libertarian forum this is a non issue. Obviously not. But well, US message forum is diverse and someone says they should.
And you know what. He has some point. Drug free regions like Singapore does have lower crime rate. I would disagree. I think to reduce robbery government should kill robbers, not drug dealers. However, I do notice that Singapore and Dubai has lower crime and are also very tough on drug.
I would reason that someone that believe killing drug dealers will reduce robbery may prefer to move to Singapore and Dubai. And I think they should have a choice to do so.
So what's the solution? Allow everybody to immigrate anywhere will cause problem. I think people should also have incentive to vote for sensible laws and good leaders. A well governed countries will be more prosperous. It's not fair for some people to pick some mullah or communist dictators as their leaders, mess up their country, and simply immigrate to US. There has to be some incentive to pick good leaders.
Now the incentive is too big. Some wants Shia government. Some wants Sunni. Some wants libertarian. Some wants pure free market. Some wants communism. Too much "steam" not getting out and things explodes. We have terrorism. We have civil war. Then we have war and world war.
One day I want all countries to be like this. Perhaps people that prefer to live in one country can pay the country and say, look, I like your value so much, here is $100k, makes me a citizen.
More well governed countries can obviously demand more money for that citizenship. Who wants to be citizens of Somalia anyway. And people in US, that do not like American value, can just come to some muslim countries and say, hei, my citizenship worth $100k, you like porn and freedom, here, take mine.
Some businessmen in afganistan, for example, may think America is a great country. He may value american value more. Maybe he is an atheist. In US, some ungrateful liberal may want to burn american flag and sympathize with ISIS.
Well, why don't they exchange? The american can sell their citizenship for $100k, and the businessmen in afganistan will happily pay it and move to US. Win win.
Can that happen?
We can more easily check which countries are govern better. Just see how much valuation the citizenship worth. Tada...... Any regions that are more well governed will be "copied" by other regions. The whole world will be prosperous.
Some people may "abuse" the system. Knowing that citizenship worths $100k may make some welfare parasites breed more. But such abuse will be more obvious and can be fixed in democratic ways. Obviously any countries that just grant more and more citizenship to welfare parasites will see their citizenship valuation plummet and will have incentive to simply kill parasites.
Another says, no. Countries should have right to allow who can enter like people have right to decide who can enter his house. After all, you can't have a libertarian country with too many commies and muslims having voting right. And that's actually why you will never have a poor libertarian country. Fine. Let them in, don't let them vote (like in Dubai). Hmmmm....
Well, it's tricky. You don't just live among majority of people without appeasing them. It's like walking on a lonely street, having someone putting a gun in your head, and just ignore it. There is power in number and the majority of people is always more powerful.
So what about some middle ground.
Basically someone argue in USmessage forum whether drug users should be shot or not Duterte style.
In libertarian forum this is a non issue. Obviously not. But well, US message forum is diverse and someone says they should.
And you know what. He has some point. Drug free regions like Singapore does have lower crime rate. I would disagree. I think to reduce robbery government should kill robbers, not drug dealers. However, I do notice that Singapore and Dubai has lower crime and are also very tough on drug.
I would reason that someone that believe killing drug dealers will reduce robbery may prefer to move to Singapore and Dubai. And I think they should have a choice to do so.
So what's the solution? Allow everybody to immigrate anywhere will cause problem. I think people should also have incentive to vote for sensible laws and good leaders. A well governed countries will be more prosperous. It's not fair for some people to pick some mullah or communist dictators as their leaders, mess up their country, and simply immigrate to US. There has to be some incentive to pick good leaders.
Now the incentive is too big. Some wants Shia government. Some wants Sunni. Some wants libertarian. Some wants pure free market. Some wants communism. Too much "steam" not getting out and things explodes. We have terrorism. We have civil war. Then we have war and world war.
One day I want all countries to be like this. Perhaps people that prefer to live in one country can pay the country and say, look, I like your value so much, here is $100k, makes me a citizen.
More well governed countries can obviously demand more money for that citizenship. Who wants to be citizens of Somalia anyway. And people in US, that do not like American value, can just come to some muslim countries and say, hei, my citizenship worth $100k, you like porn and freedom, here, take mine.
Some businessmen in afganistan, for example, may think America is a great country. He may value american value more. Maybe he is an atheist. In US, some ungrateful liberal may want to burn american flag and sympathize with ISIS.
Well, why don't they exchange? The american can sell their citizenship for $100k, and the businessmen in afganistan will happily pay it and move to US. Win win.
Can that happen?
We can more easily check which countries are govern better. Just see how much valuation the citizenship worth. Tada...... Any regions that are more well governed will be "copied" by other regions. The whole world will be prosperous.
Some people may "abuse" the system. Knowing that citizenship worths $100k may make some welfare parasites breed more. But such abuse will be more obvious and can be fixed in democratic ways. Obviously any countries that just grant more and more citizenship to welfare parasites will see their citizenship valuation plummet and will have incentive to simply kill parasites.
Last edited:
