[blrs]

I think Milton Friedman nailed it when he said that the biggest obstacle to a freer immigration policy is the welfare state.

"[Throughout the history of the U.S.] you had a flood of immigrants, millions of them, coming to this country. What brought them here? It was the hope for a better life for them and their children. And, in the main, they succeeded. It is hard to find any century in history, in which so large a number of people experienced so great an improvement in the conditions of their life, in the opportunities open to them, as in the period of the 19th and early 20th century.

You will find hardly a soul who will say that it was a bad thing. Almost everybody will say it was a good thing. ‘But what about today? Do you think we should have free immigration?’ ‘Oh, no,’ they’ll say, ‘We couldn’t possibly have free immigration today. Why, that would flood us with immigrants from India, and God knows where. We’d be driven down to a bare subsistence level.’

What’s the difference? How can people be so inconsistent? Why is it that free immigration was a good thing before 1914 and free immigration is a bad thing today? Well, there is a sense in which that answer is right. There’s a sense in which free immigration, in the same sense as we had it before 1914 is not possible today. Why not?

Because it is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. And you cannot have both. If you have a welfare state, if you have a state in which every resident is promised a certain minimal level of income, or a minimum level of subsistence, regardless of whether he or she works or not, produces it or not. Then it really is an impossible thing.

If you have free immigration, in the way we had it before 1914, everybody benefited. The people who were here benefited. The people who came benefited. Because nobody would come unless he, or his family, thought he would do better here than he would elsewhere. And, the new immigrants provided additional resources, provided additional possibilities for the people already here. So everybody can mutually benefit.

But on the other hand, if you come under circumstances where each person is entitled to a pro-rata share of the pot, to take an extreme example, or even to a low level of the pie, than the effect of that situation is that free immigration, would mean a reduction of everybody to the same, uniform level. Of course, I’m exaggerating, it wouldn’t go quite that far, but it would go in that direction. And it is that perception, that leads people to adopt what at first seems like inconsistent values."

You can read the rest at: http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2008/02/what-milton-friedma...

[knowtheory]

And yet Canada's population growth is almost entirely due to immigration (population growth by birthrate in Canada is flat or ever so slightly negative).

Edit: actually the natural growth rate is every so slightly positive. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_of_Canada_by_year#Co...

[neilk]

Immigration to Canada in the 21st century is not the situation you had in the USA pre-1914. At Ellis Island, as long it was deemed that you weren't insane, diseased, or a criminal, and could support yourself, you could get US citizenship in an afternoon.

Although Canada has the most liberal immigration policy of all industrialized countries today, it will still take an applicant years to become a Canadian.

[knowtheory]

Hey Neil,

I do not disagree on any of those counts, the fact still remains that impediments to immigration are not caused (either solely or entirely) by welfare states. And more to the point, they can have considerably more liberal policies than less progressive states.

So when i hear people attack socialized systems, especially in oblique manners such as this (rather than highlighting specific policies that need to change), my bullshit radar goes off.

[baltcode]

Thank you! Isn't the whole idea of fairness that people should be able to work to support themselves. Isn't that a basic human right? So to all the people clamoring for amnesty for Vargas but think Indian and Chinese workers don't deserve jobs, please think about the logical inconsistencies. The free market has benefited a lot of people. Its about time it also benefited the underclass of workers, who are not part of exclusive unions, whether they be SEIU, or protectionist parties in different nations.