Why have no Libertarians or Republicans made any attempt to form a market based solution to the current immigration problems in the US? They haven’t even mentioned that they should should try, let alone actualy try, to solve this problem with the solution that they claim is the only solution to anything. Instead they cry that President Obama hasn’t done enough and that the armed forces should be sent to “millitarize the border”, - their words. If this were to be done the same right wingers would be suicide bombing the border guard claiming the illuminati were bringing totalitarianism and death camps. And anyway, these would be govevernment solutions. Why do they abandon their own ideology instantly when faced with a problem to solve?
First of all, you lose me with this:
That’s more than a little bit crazy.
Anyway, I’m a right winger. So I’ll attempt to answer your question…
Some things don’t lend themselves to market based solutions, because there is no profit in them. The military is one example. The “product” that the military provides isn’t something that the private sector could provide like a good or service. It has to be done by government. Providing a secure border is another example of this.
Securing it’s borders is one of the fundamental jobs of any government. Just about every country in the world does this. Most of them do a better job than we do.
Crazy is not understanding humor. Also ignoring any facts that get in the way of your opinion is a little wacky, too. Right wing terrorists kill whoever is unlucky enough to be standing near them or has been deemed a “globalist” or “shill” at a rate of about once per week now, which is steadily increasing. So please get over your self delusions if you are going to hurl insults.
To my main point, don’t ever state market forces as a solution without further qualification. They are used by the right as an end to themselves to shut out debate. If you are going to do that, you don’t get to qualify them on the other hand. You can’t have it one way and not the other. If market forces are a stand alone reason then they have to answer for everything. If they need to sometimes be qualified, like you did here, then they always need to be qualified. Otherwise you are just an abusive jerk with an opinion but nothing substantive to back it. It’s O.K. for children to act that way, but not adults.
The reason conservative have not been advocating for a market solution is that they do not believe in a government that does nothing, but one that does what a government is for, enforcing the laws. The laws say that immigrants have to do certain things to be admitted to the country and those that do not are comitting a crime. It is the government’s job to fight crime, so this belongs to the government.
The reason libertarians have not been advocating for a market solution is that illegal immigration is a market solution. To a libertarian is someone from latin america wants to come here and work and someone wants to hire him, then there is no problem and therefore no solution. Seethis column from Reason magazine.
I’m not sure how much research you did before asking this question but the answers are pretty easily found.
So you were just kidding, but not really?
The current situation is the market-based solution. Immigrants cross the border to take better-paying jobs than are available back home; employers hire illegal immigrants to save money on labor costs, and consumers get cheaper agricultural products and construction works. The entire process is driven by the market.
If anybody were really serious about shutting down illegal immigration, they’d be proposing jail time not for the immigrants, but for the employers who hire them. Shifting the law enforcement focus from brown to white people doesn’t sell too well to the anti-immigration crowd.
They want all the immigrants to stay in their home country and build stuff for pennies an hour so the US corporations can make more money off of them, now that off-shoring is a good thing to do again.
It would seem to me that the true Libertarian solution would be to have totally open borders. If immigrants can out compete the native workforce than they should do so. Giving preference to US residents over others is an artificial restriction on the market that should be removed. This is one of those issues where you can distinguish the true libertarians, from the conservatives who jumped on the greed is good bandwagon and want legal pot.
“Current immigration debate in the US - why no market solutions proposed from the right?”
William F Buckley-era conservationism was about market solutions with government being the umpire, groundskeeper and stadium manager.
so say auction off X number of skilled worker visas, and Y number of unskilled worker visas.
Today’s Fox News conservatism is more reactionary----basically government should do nothing (ie Clean Air/Water Act, federal road spending, etc), cut taxes to zero, keep a big military (which goes against traditional conservatism from 1776 to 1946 as the thinking was that a standing military is a tempting tool for a future tyrant) and be a bulwark against cultural change. See Kansas for today’s conservationism made real-life at the state gov’t level.
“does what a government is for”
That’s the childish belligerence I was talking about.
“Reason magazine”
You can name only one fringe source, then accuse me of “not doing my homework” a typical abusive cliche.
Am I kidding or not?
Yes, I was obviously being snarky and there is a real issue. Is this hard for you to understand?
Frank Gardener-
Hello and welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board. I’m one of the moderators of the Great Debates forum. I hope you’ll enjoy your stay and participate in many threads in a multitude of ways.
Be aware, however, that insults or personal comments are discouraged on the SDMB in general and in Great Debates in particular. If - in the future - you decide you absolutely MUST insult another poster, please do so in the BBQ Pit forum. That’s what it’s there for.
In the meantime, I encourage you to read the rules and to poke around a bit.
Jonathan Chance
Moderator
Great Debates
Dear Moderator,
Did you have a problem with “That’s more than a little bit crazy.”, or just me defending myself?
Clearly he didn’t have a problem with either, or he would have specified something. It’s a word to the wise, is all.
As for “Reason” magazine, the article is interesting, and you did ask for a Libertarian perspective, after all.
But it’s the right answer. The right – and damn near everyone on the left, too – believe that governments exist to enforce laws.
You might as well ask why the right don’t favor a free market approach to murder, arson, vandalism, and rape. They don’t, because the “market” for those things is best dealt with by being outlawed entirely.
I probably should have been nicer to you about it. I didn’t realize you were new here.
But I didn’t insult you. Insults aren’t allowed in this forum. If I were to call you crazy that might be construed as an insult. But I simply called that one sentence from your post crazy.
Because, well, it was. If you take that one sentence out of your Original Post, or OP, it reads much better and would probably get a better response. Because that’s in there it poisons the well and doesn’t help you get reasoned responses from people.
I encourage you to read some threads and you’ll get a better feel for how this place works.
According to Michael Pollan in The Omnivore’s Dilemma at least one American meatpacking company advertised in Mexico that it was seeking employees in the United States. The truth is that there are certain industries that rely on and encourage foreign laborers to come work for them. There are people on the right who really want that labor whether it’s illegal or not, and, of course, others who want to keep them out at any cost. It’s kind of a complicated issue.
I would like to see a return to the Bracero Program which was an agreement between the US and Mexico regarding temporary laborers or something like it. It won’t eliminate the illegal alien problem but it may help mitigate some of the problems and would probably help to strengthen our relationship with Mexico.
No, that is the Anarchist’s solution. The Libertarian solution still requires that immigrants go through some form of checkpoint, so that they don’t import things we don’t want - like contagious diseases, contraband and criminals.
An open border between Canada and the United States is plausible - it would be possible for both nations to become good enough at catching criminals and eradicating disease for the other to trust anything crossing the border without inspecting it themselves. It is not possible for this to be true of Mexico, because Mexico is a shithole.
I would call system under which we take all immigrants who pass a basic background check and disease screen an open border, at least in comparison to what we have now. Certainly the conservative’s desire for the deportation of undocumented immigrants who have been living as productive Americans does not match Libertarian ideals.
To answer the OP, not all conservatives are libertarians. There are different types of conservatives and some of them have on problem with government action. So they’re suggesting government programs to solve what they see as an immigration problem.
As for the conservatives who are libertarians, my guess is they probably don’t see this as a problem. I think most libertarians would favor the free movement of people so they probably would support pretty open borders.
Could you clarify for us who are these terrorists that you’re referring to here?