• Abundance114@lemmy.worldBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    The initial premis of the argument that I replied to was questioning why people who were born in the U.S. are entitled to something that those who are not born in the U.S. are not.

    I’m all for net tax payers entering the U.S. through legal routes. Methods that protect the immigrant from exploitation from employers.

    • some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Thanks for clarifying.

      Immigrating to the US legally in 2026 is a slow, restrictive, and broken process. Opening it up wouldn’t be the end of the world.

      • Abundance114@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I would love reform. Any changes that get smart productive people into the U.S. would only help us.

        At the same time dont you feel it harms foreign countries? We’re literally brain draining other countries keeping them in poverty or preventing them from developing.

          • Abundance114@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            So you’re okay with immigration that builds up our society despite it harming the immigrants home country?

            • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Hmm, maybe you have a point. Oh wait, I know of something that would help reduce those harmful effects!

              Open borders

                • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  That’s just like, openly, demonstrably false. Poor countries greatly benefit from having open borders to wealthier nations, as it removes barriers to bringing that wealth back into those poor countries. Closed borders only serve to keep rich countries rich, and poor countries poor.

                  Next to no one is fleeing to Mexico for economic opportunity.

                  You framing it as "fleeing"really drives home your biases. If there were an open border between the US and Mexico, we’d see two-way movement way more often, as it’d be way easier for Mexicans to come to the US seeking economic opportunity, build some wealth, then take that back across the open border to Mexico to their family/dependents/community. We see that pretty much everywhere there’s an open border or some sort of economic cooperation zone.

                  • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    11 hours ago

                    i also take issue with the paternalistic approach that the countries of the global north should decide for the countries of the global south what’s best for them. i think the process of decolonization needs to be collaborative by the global north at the behest of the guidance of the people of the global south to avoid fascist genocidal dictators like Edie Amin and Pol Pot taking over the fascist mechanisms created by the global north. but this idea that we need closed borders in the global north, strictly enforced, for the benefit of the global south, seems like it can’t lend itself to good results based on that it is inherently replicating the roots of colonialism