|
|
|
|
|
|
by 8xde0wcNwpslOw
2911 days ago
|
|
|
Universal income, unrestricted immigration. Which is it that you really want? Both of course, people tend to want it all, and dreams to pay for it all. In 100 years it'll supposedly all work out fine, despite "short term" problems, no need to compromise. I'm sorry you have to withstand the opposition from those who have to weather the problems in the meantime. Perhaps a loaner crystal ball could help us weave our reservations. |
|
|
Very few people actually want totally unrestricted immigration, and most of them -- the only consistent ones -- are either unitary world government proponents or full on anarchists. Otherwise you're inviting seven billion people to vote in your country's elections, and then nothing stops them from voting for the same sort of wealth redistribution policies or anything else to the detriment of the existing population. It's not pick one: open borders or redistribution of wealth, it's pick one: open borders or democracy.
The ideological inconsistency you're observing is realpolitik in action. People who want more socialist policies don't want unrestricted immigration, they only want just enough immigration from socialist-leaning countries that they have the majorities needed to pass their policies. Meanwhile people on the right are trying to keep the same people out for the same reason -- Republicans don't oppose immigration because they're "racist", it's because those immigrants disproportionately vote for Democrats. Neither party will be consistent because consistency loses them votes.