Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Open Border Dilemma
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 Send TopicPrint
Normal Topic Open Border Dilemma (Read 347 times)
genepool
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 904
Joined: Dec 19th, 2014
Open Border Dilemma
Sep 22nd, 2019 at 9:17am
Print Post  
How would open border libertarian address antagonistic/stupid traveling voters’ problem?

Imagine people that vote in ways that you don’t like or vote in ways that result in things that you don’t like.

These can be Venezuela voting for socialism or middle eastern voting for Syariah.

I am not saying that they are necessarily stupid.

However, they’re antagonistic to your value. Many of you don’t want socialism/Syariah. Also, you don’t like poverty in Venezuela and civil wars in the middle east that is obviously due to their voting’s behavior or due to people’s way of thinking.

Under the open-border policy, those people can mess up their country, move to your country, and vote the same way.

How would you handle that?

With vetted border policy, things are far from perfect. At least the issue is partially solved. Citizens that vote “right” will enjoy the benefit of their votes. Those who vote capitalism, like South Korean, got rich.

I’ve heard it’s happening in US. People are shitting on the street in California and then move to Texas and vote liberal.

Again, I am not saying that liberal in the US is more stupid than the conservative. I like Obama, Trump, and Andrew Yang. I don’t like Clinton and Bush is insane.

However, the fact that people move from California to Texas shows that something is “wrong” in California and “right” in Texas.

Due to open border policy among states, the wrong idea spread to the whole country.

Each resident can vote socialism or theocracy or prohibit abortion or whatever and then “move” to a more sane state and well, rinse, repeat.

At the end, bad ideas spread while good ideas are not copied because smart voters are happy to live in their state and don’t go anywhere.

In a free market, customers can’t vote. You can cook the most delicious burger without fearing that the profit goes to those who like it but don’t go to the trouble of creating it.

In a democracy, customers, or even “visitors” can vote. If you make a well-governed good state, everyone will come in, and pretty much control it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12274
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #1 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 10:34am
Print Post  
genepool wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 9:17am:
How would open border libertarian address antagonistic/stupid traveling voters’ problem?

Under the open-border policy, those people can mess up their country, move to your country, and vote the same way.

How would you handle that?
Easy.    Only allow citizens to vote.

genepool wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 9:17am:
In a democracy, customers, or even “visitors” can vote.

The US is a republic. 

We elect Representatives to make our laws and policy.   If we tell our representatives that we don't want customers or visitors to vote, then they must make it policy that customers and visitors don't vote.

If we catch people cheating, harsh criminal penalties may be imposed, including up to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to $10k for citizens and possible deportation for non-citizens.

I personally know two widows who vote for their dead husbands. That is a form of voter fraud.

With my Guest Visa® plan, holders of the card may vote in LOCAL elections only - NOT in State or General elections.
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Biq Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 993
Joined: Mar 17th, 2019
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #2 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 11:06am
Print Post  
genepool wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 9:17am:
How would open border libertarian address antagonistic/stupid traveling voters’ problem?

Imagine people that vote in ways that you don’t like or vote in ways that result in things that you don’t like.

These can be Venezuela voting for socialism or middle eastern voting for Syariah.

I am not saying that they are necessarily stupid.

However, they’re antagonistic to your value. Many of you don’t want socialism/Syariah. Also, you don’t like poverty in Venezuela and civil wars in the middle east that is obviously due to their voting’s behavior or due to people’s way of thinking.

Under the open-border policy, those people can mess up their country, move to your country, and vote the same way.

How would you handle that?

With vetted border policy, things are far from perfect. At least the issue is partially solved. Citizens that vote “right” will enjoy the benefit of their votes. Those who vote capitalism, like South Korean, got rich.

I’ve heard it’s happening in US. People are shitting on the street in California and then move to Texas and vote liberal.

Again, I am not saying that liberal in the US is more stupid than the conservative. I like Obama, Trump, and Andrew Yang. I don’t like Clinton and Bush is insane.

However, the fact that people move from California to Texas shows that something is “wrong” in California and “right” in Texas.

Due to open border policy among states, the wrong idea spread to the whole country.

Each resident can vote socialism or theocracy or prohibit abortion or whatever and then “move” to a more sane state and well, rinse, repeat.

At the end, bad ideas spread while good ideas are not copied because smart voters are happy to live in their state and don’t go anywhere.

In a free market, customers can’t vote. You can cook the most delicious burger without fearing that the profit goes to those who like it but don’t go to the trouble of creating it.

In a democracy, customers, or even “visitors” can vote. If you make a well-governed good state, everyone will come in, and pretty much control it.


Your question is a very good one.  Chief's answer is good, but the problem is that government decides who gets to be a citizen and who doesn't so they will let people become citizens who will benefit government.  That is the real reason for the left's insistence on open borders, not any humanitarian sentiment and certainly not out of love for freedom.

Theoretically, if a libertarian nation truly limited government to protecting rights, it wouldn't matter that much who staffs the government.  Unfortunately, as the framers knew, restrictions on government depend entirely on government's willingness to honor them.  Since the majority of framers became representatives, senators or senior administration officials, they understood that the constitution could not limit them if they chose not to be limited.  They likely assumed that future central government officials would either honor their stated limits or be wise and selective in dishonoring them. 

Had the southern framers anticipated Lincoln wiping his backside with their document, they may have tried to put real limits, or  more likely would have stuck with the Articles of Confederation which did limit government and figured out a way to repay France without turning the country into a kleptocracy.

Jeebus!  After fighting off the King o' England, the founders sold out our property rights to pay back the King o' France.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11753
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #3 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 12:48pm
Print Post  
genepool wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 9:17am:
I’ve heard it’s happening in US. People are shitting on the street in California and then move to Texas and vote liberal.


Pillaging has always been the superior survival strategy to sustainability. Libertarians only define certain things as property, leaving everything left to be pillaged until they are made to see that it is property.

They don't think the better living conditions in an area that are built up by people choosing sustainability are property. They don't think that belongs to the people who contributed.

So that resource will be pillaged.

It should be pillaged.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Industry
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 397
Joined: Jun 14th, 2019
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #4 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 1:36pm
Print Post  
People say they should be allowed in cause the only reason they are poor is that US has all the resources.

What if that is true?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11753
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #5 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 1:46pm
Print Post  
Industry wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 1:36pm:
People say they should be allowed in cause the only reason they are poor is that US has all the resources.

What if that is true?


Well then... you'd run into a Lockean Proviso issue. At least, I imagine so. No one here is very clear on how the Lockean Proviso applies to, well, anything.

It basically says you can't claim the unowned unless you leave enough and as good for others. No one's really willing to have a discussion about that, though.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Biq Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 993
Joined: Mar 17th, 2019
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #6 - Sep 22nd, 2019 at 3:03pm
Print Post  
Industry wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 1:36pm:
People say they should be allowed in cause the only reason they are poor is that US has all the resources.

What if that is true?


We know that this is not true.

The only relevant difference between the natural resources on the continent of North America and those of any other continent except Antarctica is that the resources of North America were never under control of feudal war lords and did not pass to the control of socialist dictators. 

If other nations want to be as wealthy in products and as rich in opportunities as the United States, let them abandon their modern feudalism, their Soviet-style socialism and their Western European-style socialism and allow more economic freedom.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49891
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #7 - Sep 23rd, 2019 at 8:26pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 1:46pm:
Well then... you'd run into a Lockean Proviso issue. At least, I imagine so.
Your entire existence is based on imagination, isn't it?

No matter, no one I ever met liked running into provisos... Certainly not me. Shocked
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49891
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Open Border Dilemma
Reply #8 - Sep 23rd, 2019 at 8:30pm
Print Post  
Little Biq Man wrote on Sep 22nd, 2019 at 3:03pm:
The only relevant difference between the natural resources on the continent of North America and those of any other continent except Antarctica is that the resources of North America were never under control of feudal war lords and did not pass to the control of socialist dictators. 
Woof woof. The native tribes of the Americas were at times passed from warlord to warlord.

I'm also pretty sure that dictators existed in the Americas, most likely early on. It's a common fault of human political economy. Cry Cry Cry
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Open Border Dilemma
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy