2016 March 26 Saturday
Belgium: The World's Wealthiest Failed State Due To Immigration

"The country of just 11.2 million people faces widening derision as being the world’s wealthiest failed state"

The cultural code of silence in the heavily immigrant district, as well as widespread distrust of already weak government authorities, has provided what amounts to a fifth column or forward base for the Islamic State.

Donald Trump is derided in the mainstream media for saying he'd put an end to Muslim immigration. But look at what the conventional wisdom of our sanctimonious rulers has given us. Belgium has a fifth column (even the New York Times admits it) of ISIS/Daesh supporters living safely and plotting with the help of a surrounding community that keeps its secrets. We should want these sorts of people living in our midst?

Our elites and the elites in Europe are grossly irresponsible, incredibly foolish, and deluded. These people rule us.

The human race did not evolve to handle the complexities that result from the jet airplane, mass media, and the internet. Wishful thinking, status signaling, and an averse to truths that cause discomfort give us increasingly dysfunctional government.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2016 March 26 10:18 AM 

Engineer-Poet said at March 26, 2016 3:00 PM:

Our elites are not irresponsible.  They are treasonous; they claim our citizenship but work for the enemy.

Wolf-Dog said at March 27, 2016 9:17 AM:

The elites have tremendous mobility too! They can liquidate or transfer their assets within weeks, renounce their US citizenship and move to another country.

The trade deficit is such that the imported goods are priced only slightly lower than if they were made in the US, and the elites pocket the a substantial portion of the difference.

But one thing is certain: this won't end well.

Alex Tabarrok said at March 27, 2016 1:56 PM:

Man is born free, yet everywhere he is caged. Barbed-wire, concrete walls, and gun-toting guards confine people to the nation-state of their birth. But why? The argument for open borders is both economic and moral. All people should be free to move about the earth, uncaged by the arbitrary lines known as borders.

Not every place in the world is equally well-suited to mass economic activity. Nature’s bounty is divided unevenly. Variations in wealth and income created by these differences are magnified by governments that suppress entrepreneurship and promote religious intolerance, gender discrimination, or other bigotry. Closed borders compound these injustices, cementing inequality into place and sentencing their victims to a life of penury.
The overwhelming majority of would-be immigrants want little more than to make a better life for themselves and their families by moving to economic opportunity and participating in peaceful, voluntary trade. But lawmakers and heads of state quash these dreams with state-sanctioned violence—forced repatriation, involuntary detention, or worse—often while paying lip service to “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Wage differences are a revealing metric of border discrimination. When a worker from a poorer country moves to a richer one, her wages might double, triple, or rise even tenfold. These extreme wage differences reflect restrictions as stifling as the laws that separated white and black South Africans at the height of Apartheid. Geographical differences in wages also signal opportunity—for financially empowering the migrants, of course, but also for increasing total world output. On the other side of discrimination lies untapped potential. Economists have estimated that a world of open borders would double world GDP.

Even relatively small increases in immigration flows can have enormous benefits. If the developed world were to take in enough immigrants to enlarge its labor force by a mere one percent, it is estimated that the additional economic value created would be worth more to the migrants than all of the world’s official foreign aid combined. Immigration is the greatest anti-poverty program ever devised.

And while the benefits of cross-border movements are tremendous for the immigrants, they are also significant for those born in destination countries. Immigration unleashes economic forces that raise real wages throughout an economy. New immigrants possess skills different from those of their hosts, and these differences enable workers in both groups to better exploit their special talents and leverage their comparative advantages. The effect is to improve the welfare of newcomers and natives alike. The immigrant who mows the lawn of the nuclear physicist indirectly helps to unlock the secrets of the universe.
What moral theory justifies using wire, wall, and weapon to prevent people from moving to opportunity? What moral theory justifies using tools of exclusion to prevent people from exercising their right to vote with their feet?

No standard moral framework, be it utilitarian, libertarian, egalitarian, Rawlsian, Christian, or any other well-developed perspective, regards people from foreign lands as less entitled to exercise their rights—or as inherently possessing less moral worth—than people lucky to have been born in the right place at the right time. Nationalism, of course, discounts the rights, interests, and moral value of “the Other, but this disposition is inconsistent with our fundamental moral teachings and beliefs.

Freedom of movement is a basic human right. Thus the Universal Declaration of Human Rights belies its name when it proclaims this right only “within the borders of each state.” Human rights do not stop at the border.Today, we treat as pariahs those governments that refuse to let their people exit. I look forward to the day when we treat as pariahs those governments that refuse to let people enter.

Is there hope for the future? Closed borders are one of the world’s greatest moral failings but the opening of borders is the world’s greatest economic opportunity. The grandest moral revolutions in history—the abolition of slavery, the securing of religious freedom, the recognition of the rights of women—yielded a world in which virtually everyone was better off. They also demonstrated that the fears that had perpetuated these injustices were unfounded. Similarly, a planet unscarred by iron curtains is not only a world of greater equality and justice. It is a world unafraid of itself.

Jim said at March 27, 2016 2:49 PM:

Alex - Suppose that Israel were to open it's borders to anybody who wanted to enter? The eventual consequence would be massive slaughter involving a huge number of deaths, perhaps hundred of thousands, perhaps more than a million. Obviously the Israelis are not going to open their borders because they are not bat-shit crazy unlike yourself.

Willie said at March 29, 2016 5:57 AM:

Nice one, Alex. Thanks for the laugh.

Great Britain lifted the "iron curtain" on immigration from Somalia, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The result? People from those countries are, at best, half as likely to be employed as are white Britons.

Immigrants from Third World countries only tend to do better because they're being imported into a system that works (and oftentimes due to straight up welfare). That system works because of the people who created it. Replace the people who created it with a different people and suddenly it might not work so well. How do you protect the system created by what is now a minority without destroying democracy? Tell us, Alex. Please tell us. It might actually matter. Your plan is an irreversible experiment. Admit hundreds of millions of immigrants and there will be no way to get rid of them short of genocide. Feel free to demonstrate the beauty of your batshit crazy ideas in another country.

Willie said at March 29, 2016 6:06 AM:

There is much essential infrastructure essential to a healthy economy (and a happy people) - roads, schools, parks, clean water, even prisons. In a country the size of the United States the value of such infrastructure - all owned by the government in trust for the people - comes to trillions of dollars. This is also known as property. Borders exist to protect that property. They demarcate owners from non-owners.

Good little libertarians obsess about the importance of defending "private property," but miss the fact that property includes ownership in what the government owns on our behalf.

william said at March 31, 2016 4:14 AM:

Belgium is irreversibly damaged. I have been there 30+ times. There is a single mindset among the populace easily manipulated. They cower when confronted with the word 'racist' in response to any discussion on immigration or religion. They defend anything non-Christian and attack Christianity like it's their obligatition. An American priest once share with me Belgium is one of the worst places for them in Europe. Belgium people can't believe anyone in America could have Republican values unless they're racist. It's perfectly normal to them to surrender your paycheck to the gov't in exchange of a big set of perks.

Regardless, they let 500,000 illegal immigrants become citizens last decade - about 5% of their population.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©