Open Borders Hypothetical

[Infected Mushroom]

Please consider the following hypothetical:

A supernatural entity wants to make a deal with you. If you take it, your country will institute (you pick) either totally open immigration or heavily relaxed pro-immigration and pro refugee reforms.

However, you (and only you) will be given a new social, legal, and political responsibility to pay for the housing of and live together with a randomly chosen family of four from the developing world who don’t speak your country’s language. You must live under the same roof and everything in terms of housing is paid by you (if you already own a big house, then good for you I guess). This arrangement must be sustained for at least 20 years after which they or your can leave and go separate ways.

So for example, if I take the deal. Then I would end up with a new socially enforced obligation to provide housing for a family of immigrants/refugees AND live with them under the same roof for at least 20 years.

Do you support open immigration? Do you support pro-immigration and pro-refugee reforms? Would you take the deal?

No. I don’t support pro-immigration policies. I also think the costs imposed in the hypothetical would be unacceptable.

[The Two Jerseys]

We need a magic wall, these supernatural beings aren't sending their best...

[Ethel mermania]

I dont support open borders to begin with, so no deal

[Saralonia]

Mi casa es tú casa, compas
My house is your house, pals

(I accept the deal)

[The Orwell Society]

I dont support open borders to begin with, so no deal

Same here

[Nipponkyo]

We need a magic wall, these supernatural beings aren't sending their best...

[Based Illinois]

The bottom option just BTFO'd literally everything else

[Nipponkyo]

The bottom option just BTFO'd literally everything else

[BEEstreetz]

So, hypothetically, I could take this deal with Bill Cipher, let's say, for the sake of argument, even if I'm homeless?

[Infected Mushroom]

So, hypothetically, I could take this deal with Bill Cipher, let's say, for the sake of argument, even if I'm homeless?

Theoretically (maybe) but why incur a socially enforceable personal debt?

[Finalis]

i like my borders, so this is a hard no for me.

[Hiram Land]

It would be nice if, alongside, we can build more homes and more farms to feed the immigrants and house them. I do live in America so it's kind of a hard sell due to... reasons.

[BEEstreetz]

So, hypothetically, I could take this deal with Bill Cipher, let's say, for the sake of argument, even if I'm homeless?

Theoretically (maybe) but why incur a socially enforceable personal debt?

So even if I was in the lümpenproletariat class, if I chose the option to take care of this family, I myself would still have to provide them with standards which are above the line of poverty, despite me myself being way below the line of poverty? And I'd have to do this with loans?
But then the question is, who would lend me these loans as I'm presumably also unemployed? The national bank? So they'd also give me a job, right?

[Infected Mushroom]

Theoretically (maybe) but why incur a socially enforceable personal debt?

So even if I was in the lümpenproletariat class, if I chose the option to take care of this family, I myself would still have to provide them with standards which are above the line of poverty, despite me myself being way below the line of poverty? And I'd have to do this with loans?
But then the question is, who would lend me these loans as I'm presumably also unemployed? The national bank? So they'd also give me a job, right?

I mean, it didn’t occur to me anyone would want a debt/obligation they wouldn’t be able to meet.

[Christian Confederation]

Without borders a nation ceases to exist. Throwing the figurative door wide open to anyone and everyone weakens the nation culturally and economically. We can only suport so many people. We are failing our own so there is no reason to bring in more people until our own are cared for. A majority of Americans "live" pay check to pay check yet we allow hundreds of thousands of outsiders in and make the competition for jobs harder for those looking. This isn't like back in the day when we had untamed virgin land out west, we have conquered our continent wide nation and settled everywhere we realistically can Without turning the US into a dystopian hell hole that is all city.
If it were up to me we close all imigration, kick out any and all who entered Illigally that haven't assimilated into our society. Not to mention any that entered and refused to work like every other able Bodied American is expected to. Then we cut all unnecessary overseas spending, pay back our debt, give Johnny Taxpayer a break, and focus on our internal issues. Once we are better off we assess if Conditional Imigration should begin. And I'm not talking about America, every nation should do the same. Have Sweden for the Sweeds, Russia for the Russians, Germany for the Germans, England for the English, Brazil for the Brazilians, and America for the Americans. Globalism and multiculturalism are failed ideologies destined for the trash bin of history, Nationalism and Traditionalism is the future.

[BEEstreetz]

I mean, it didn’t occur to me anyone would want a debt/obligation they wouldn’t be able to meet.

I know someone like what I've described that would do it.
Anyway, I'm personally voting for option 4 where I support immigration because I recall a superpower being built on it. Refugees as well. I'm not housing them though, not my responsibility how the state chooses to deal with them.

[Thermodolia]

I dont support open borders to begin with, so no deal

Same. This really isn’t that thought provoking of a hypothetical

[Infected Mushroom]

For those who said “I support open immigration but I refuse to play a role in supporting that system,” how do you square this inconsistency?

[Kivoas]

If they can pass my country citizenship test or apply to work in my country. They're allowed access, children found on our borders automatically gain citizenship and will be housed in our youth camps. If the immigrant background check show's they're criminals. Then they'll be deported.

[Great Heathen Air Force]

For those who said “I support open immigration but I refuse to play a role in supporting that system,” how do you square this inconsistency?

There's no inconsistency. You've contrived a scenario where people are punished for tolerating immigration. It's not inconsistent for people to oppose being punished.

Although really the only sensible thing to do is to find the dumbass who put this policy in place, and get rid of them. It's a dumb policy.

[Infected Mushroom]

For those who said “I support open immigration but I refuse to play a role in supporting that system,” how do you square this inconsistency?

There's no inconsistency. You've contrived a scenario where people are punished for tolerating immigration. It's not inconsistent for people to oppose being punished.

Although really the only sensible thing to do is to find the dumbass who put this policy in place, and get rid of them. It's a dumb policy.

My thinking is that, if you’re unwilling to personally care for refugees (because you mind the costs), why should you demand a whole country do so? Isn’t that inconsistent?

[Great Heathen Air Force]

There's no inconsistency. You've contrived a scenario where people are punished for tolerating immigration. It's not inconsistent for people to oppose being punished.

Although really the only sensible thing to do is to find the dumbass who put this policy in place, and get rid of them. It's a dumb policy.

My thinking is that, if you’re unwilling to personally care for refugees (because you mind the costs), why should you demand a whole country do so? Isn’t that inconsistent?

Immigrants aren't normally refugees. And typically can provide for themselves. There's generally no cost associated with allowing them to do so.

Refugees are an entirely different scenario. Unrelated to open immigration. If that's what you're focusing on you should probably have specified that you were talking only about refugees.

One would think that as someone who has allegedly moved to another country, you would have a better understanding of this. Shockingly you come off as someone who has absolutely no knowledge of the subject at all.

[Armeattla]

There's no inconsistency. You've contrived a scenario where people are punished for tolerating immigration. It's not inconsistent for people to oppose being punished.

Although really the only sensible thing to do is to find the dumbass who put this policy in place, and get rid of them. It's a dumb policy.

My thinking is that, if you’re unwilling to personally care for refugees (because you mind the costs), why should you demand a whole country do so? Isn’t that inconsistent?

The collective - even when small, but even moreso when large - has much greater capabilities than a single individual.

[Free Algerstonia]

save america, stop socialism, build the wall

[Washington-Columbia]

save america, stop socialism, build the wall

I'm no master of Economics or Social Issues, but I'm sure Immigration is definitely not Socialism.


And building a wall wouldn't completely stop immigration.