?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
“The plan’s perfect… it will work this time”
Phrobis
interdictor
Wherein I go to town on McCain's recent illegal immigration ad.


  • 1
Point of order for a Republic based on law. You either enforce the law and principles OR you abolish the law, you don't ignore it and the problems inherent in the lack of it's enforcement.

More importantly, you don't enforce it for some and ignore it's enforcement for others.

Sure. But what you also shouldn't do is use the unintended consequence of government interventionism as a pretext for further interventionism. That's a slippery slope much more dangerous than arbitrary application of the law.

Except this is an example of an area where the government is supposed to intervene. Congress IS given the authority to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization... If enforcement of the border regions is inclusive of that then such actions as enforcing traversal of the borders is included. Does this mean that there should be customs search zones 300 miles from the border? no.

If one has the argument that there is supposed to be ZERO border control then I suppose there is something to be said, but is that really an option? Is that the argument?

Further, as to equal application of the law, I chafe at the idea that a citizen who marries a foreign national has to spend thousands of dollars naturalizing their spouse whilst illegals live and work in the US for years and are suddenly upset at proposed enforcement and penalization of their illegal status. That's hardly equal enforcement of the law, in fact it seems preferential against citizens.

(Deleted comment)
Uh-huh. You're an economist. You know where that gets you. All it takes is one gap in the border to let in a near-infinite number of immigrants. And there's a high incentive for any individual to sell passage, since residence in the U.S. has a high relative value. If that value is $X, the border parcel owner can charge a $X-$1 toll and make a healthy profit. Of course, that will give the next guy along the border an incentive to charge $X-$2. After all, the immigrants will still end up in the U.S., so he might as well collect what he can. Pretty soon you get a race to the bottom among all the border parcel owners, and a completely open border.

Meanwhile, none of them have actually produced anything of value. They're merely collecting a toll to access a common. And will continue to profit until the relative value U.S. residence in relation to other nations reaches $0. ie. When life in the U.S. is no better than the worst third world nation. A classic tragedy of the commons. The only innovation is that it's a tragedy of the commons combined with wealth transfer from those who built the commons to a privileged class of toll booth operators.

This is not speculation, it's economic law, and would follow as surely as day follows night. The only people who would propose such a thing are A) those who have some malicious motivation to spoil the common B) useful idiots for the former C) people who intend to be toll booth operators.

Edited at 2010-05-12 11:51 pm (UTC)

And how does that trench upon the power of congress to lay and collect taxes and duties as it pertains to international border crossings?

Last I checked, there were revenue cutters even back in the days of the founding of the republic.

at least the free-market was able to not only prevent the BP oil rig explosion but also allow for the fastest, most efficient clean-up and recovery effort, and not a bunch of in-fighting and delaying among the involved parties while they try to pass the blame onto someone else so they don't have to pay for it. the market works!

(Deleted comment)
so the oil rig explosion was the result of regulation?

  • 1