[adrenalinelol]

There's also no reason you can't have borders indefinitely. Open borders have the draw backs of depressing wages. In an era where income-inequality is one of the top issues in the political debate, this is an area that's a non-starter until it can be done in a way that won't exacerbate said issue.

[mozumder]

> Open borders have the benefit of increasing wages.

Here, I fixed your mistaken statement for you.

If you want to make money, you better make sure the people you are trading with are also rich.

Open borders are a good way to do that.

[RobertoG]

Have you been around the last 40 years?

Why do you think that everyday more people is against globalization and they are becoming more nationalist? something in the milk?

[mozumder]

> Have you been around the last 40 years?

Yes I have. Third-world Asian countries have been doing great.

> Why do you think that everyday more people is against globalization and they are becoming more nationalist? something in the milk?

So you're saying the vast majority of the world, which are currently benefitting from massive incomes due to globalization, is against it?

You should tell the billions of people across the developing world that. I'm sure the average Bangladeshi, who had their incomes go up by 5x over the last 20 years, is going to appreciate you telling them that globalization is a bad thing.

[RobertoG]

I'm not saying they shouldn't get improvements, quite the opposite, I'm saying that we should be able to do better and without reducing the quality of life in countries where capital formation is already developed.

After all, Bangladesh it's [not so impressive](https://www.google.es/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&m...)

And I'm not sure neither about the [5x over thing](https://www.google.es/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&m...)