Yaron Brook on Immigration Policy 2 - Ayn Rand Institute

[MartinPerssonDotName]

What about welfare tourism? The American nanny-state is slowly growing to European proportions.

[fab006]

Ayn Rand was an immigrant, after all.

[cengle54]

So, how do u control who comes across the border when there

s an open border? Probably the first time I disagree with Yaron.

[Kikarok]

@cengle54

He just explained it. In this video.

[howya111]

@cengle54 He said that since everyone would be allowed into the the country as long as they "checked in" and were verified to be either not 1) a terrorist 2) a carrier of an infectious disease 3) or a violent person, then they would be allowed in and that is what he means by open borders. and since the only people who are trying to sneak across are one of the 3 that are not allowed, then anyone who is caught trying to sneak in can do physical harm and should be stopped at any cost.

[FlamingTide]

I'd love a country to try this. I know the EU does to a small extent (with the countries within the EU) and imo it's worked out great. The amount of immigrants in my hometown opening up businesses and keeping prices competative is the only thing keeping us going. I want to see what would happen if that scope was widened to the whole world. Though sadly I dont think this is politcally obtainable right now

[Entropy56]

I think the US should annex all of North America. And then work on Europe next, then Russia, UK, India, China, Thailand, and the rest.

[Entropy56]

Objectivism says that any government that doesnt govern by Objectivist principals is illegitimate and thus not protected by international law or have a right to exist. Ayn Rand said that they are open to attack if it is in the interest of legitimate governments to do so. Annexation is therefore the most moral and practical way to deal with open borders. Look, if we are going to go extreme then lets go all the way. Yaron is a wussy.

[obmax1212]

@Entropy56 You are assuming that Objectivists are condemning Canada. They aren't. Mexico isn't worth spending the money and lives to annex. If you paid attention to the video, you would notice that he states government's only role is protecting liberty. How would the US be protecting liberty by attacking Mexico? It doesn't pose a threat to us.

[MishuTaste]

Mr Brook: do you ever stand in line at the bank, department store, or supermarket? And if so, how long will that line become with an open border policy? Are you willing to tolerate more traffic jams?

[Arjozof]

are you nuts? in a free society, the increased demand from the increased number of people would be met with increased supply of these services, so there wouldn't be lines longer than today - when we don't have free society, mind you.

[BigBishop1]

moron

[richardcadbury]

you certainly are lol

[DantesObjective]

Everytime I listen to ARI video's I hear my own views reflected back at me.

I always used to say: "What right do Americans have to prevent people comming into their country when their very fouding fathers were immigrants themselves!"

[xxdiogenescynicxx]

What about overpopulation? What about demographics? What about balkanization? Do you think our founders would have allowed third worlders come here? Do you think Yaron Brooks would be for open immigration for Israel, just allowing as many arabs live there as they wanted? No, because he knows that it would destroy a culturally homogenous nations.

[Arjozof]

remove welfare and the problem would disappear.

[lashkaretoiba]

"Were" being the key word. what about assimulation? The only way his plan would work is if America became an empire.

[jtorresguevara]

This entire immigration debate has fueled racism from both the left and the right.

To me, the government isn't fulfulling its prime role. That's to protect our rights and liberties. Instead, people who come across our border are criminalized even though it's been proven they greatly contribute to our economy. Then you have the other side catering to those immigrants enticing them & giving them handouts like amnesty, gov benefits, etc. and wasting our wealth.

Yaron's got a great point here.

[drummergrl225]

great

[7NTM61Ic]

As usual, a great uncompromising, principled statement from Yaron Brook.

[rbilkie]

Excellent

[legendre007]

When I click on Part 1 of this, YouTube sends me a weird message saying, "This video is unavailable." If this is a glitch in YouTube's system, I hope YouTube fixes it soon.

[shovelcharge]

It works now

[legendre007]

Thanks for telling me.  :-)

[Youhavethebody]

Keep the videos coming!

Great logic for dealing with people trying to sneak into the country.

I do have a question for anyone who would like to answer:

Would it be feasible to quarantine and then *treat* someone trying to get into the country with an infectious disease, after confirming (to our best ability) that they're neither a terrorist nor criminal/spy? Of course, no one would be obligated to do so, it's just a question I have.

[duke1duke1]

If it's in our interest.

For example, if the person is radiating disease and releasing them could cause an epidemic, then sure, treat them.

I would also hate to hear of a person quarantined in a cell; dying without any treatment.

[philosophyarchitect]

Sure, if it's being paid for by a private citizen and it can be proved they're no longer a threat before they're allowed into the public.