The article presented many interesting points, but the
consequences of what was discussed are very significant. It’s one thing to make
general claims, but it’s another thing to prove them. One of points that I
really disagree with is that the article claimed that if someone moved into the
U.S. they would make a few times more than they would in their country of
birth, but that assumes there is no mass movement of people in the U.S. in the
levels the article suggests. The number and gravity of assumptions made by the
author is outstanding, so until the claims about how everyone would get paid
more are supported I would just simply think these are nothing more than ideas.
I do agree that barriers for working somewhere should be removed, but at the
same time it would obstacles that nobody really knows. There are many security
issues with completely opening all borders, so who knows how it would work out.
Another issue is whether all countries will open up their borders because even
if half the world does there would still be great discrimination. Another issue
many countries would not like to give up their sovereignty. The world would be
like one large country or state with no borders, but this is where geopolitics
can get messy with sides arguing about how wealthier countries are getting
crowded while poorer countries would lose population. Some countries would get
flooded and then, I believe, living standards will fall in those wealthier
countries until some sort of equilibrium is reached. The point where equilibrium
is reached is very important, and that equilibrium may result in consequences
that are hard to imagine. The economic aftermath would be very significant, but
I am not sure if such a shock would be good or bad. Gradually moving towards
opening borders seems more appropriate than doing it instantly. I am an opponent
of doing great reforms without really knowing what the benefits and costs are.
The article did not present those consequences, and rather spoke about
discrimination. Obviously, discrimination is bad, but it doesn’t mean discrimination
would end with what the author proposed.
No comments:
Post a Comment