A world without borders, your perspective.

by jam 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  jam

  Michael Clemens has some interesting ideas about free

  movement of labour throughout the world.

  " A modest relaxation of barries to human mobility between

  countries would bring more global economic prosperity than

  the total elimination of all remaining policy barriers to good

  trade-every tariff, every quoto-plus the elimination of every

  last restriction on the free movement of capital."

  Another point " by relaxing both borders and our fear of migration,

  people living in destitution can lift themselves out of poverty faster

  than any development agency or national act.

  Your thoughts , positive and the negatives of world wide open borders.
• 

  kurtbethel

  It sounds nice in theory.

  The reality is that there are always two sets of rules. Under NAFTA, corporations can freely move billions of dollars in wealth across borders, but I still am only allowed one quart of tequila before getting the rest confiscated. Where's my free trade?
• 

  NoStonecutters

  Only bad things can come from world government, not matter how many and what grade of carrots they dangle in front of you.
• 

  Cold Steel

  Not only do I think this is a foolish notion, look at what immigration has done to the United States. We let in people from all nations and cultures, including those who despise us or, if not that, they despise our government. They see nothing special about the U.S. Constitution and are not particularly wedded to our Bill of Rights. In many of their countries, there are limitations on the freedom of speech to protect certain state religions or royalty; thus, they are not avid proponents of the First Amendment. Also, in many of their countries, only the police and military are permitted the use of firearms; so they actually oppose the Second Amendment and vote for gun registration and other oppressive gun controls going all the way up to the complete abolition of private firearms ownership.

  We've also destroyed our way of life by letting people who are too young and who lack wisdom vote. Many U.S. citizens don't pay taxes, and if a republic is to survive, only those who own property and pay into the system should be able to vote. Those on the public dole should not be allowed to vote, nor should those who can't answer basic questions on who George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and the current vice president or speaker of the House are, and cannot produce valid identification be able to vote. And 26 should be the minimum age people are allowed to vote.

  In other words, the borders should be tightened in most instances, not relaxed. Israel, for example, wouldn't last very long with open borders. The poor would flood into the lands of the wealthy and instead of the people of those nations pulling them up, they would pull the people of those nations down. And finally, most peoples don't mix well because of serious political, religious and philosophical differences. This is natural and, to me, not a bad thing. When I was 21 years of age, people knew about the Constitution and recognized a Marxist when they saw one. Now they see a Marxist and don't even know he's a socialist!

  So them's my views. Take 'em or leave 'em. It's too late for the USA. We've sunk too low. As one great man said, "When a people lose the Spirit of God, they lose the ability to act in their own self-interests." This has clearly happened to us as we pile up trillions of dollars in debt and very few seem to be experiencing any alarm. We're told of possible solar or EMP attacks that could knock out our power grids and send us all back to the 1800s in just a few seconds. Has anyone proposed to fix this? Nope.

  Again, eradicating borders would erupt the world in war and destruction. "Diversity" is not a scriptural virtue, but a modern liberal progressive characteristic we all must all receive mandatory training is.

  Poppycock!!
• 

  LouBelle

  i would like the freedom to move around without paying for visas all the time. i am an upatanding citizen, don't have a criminal record and would be an asset to any society.
• 

  prologos

  If you one thinks of dispersing all humans across the globe, would that enhance the quality of life for everyone? I think the case can be made that the maintaining in the past of segregated nations was a great benefit. The culture of the chinese, japanese, the distinctly different european, their competition, sadly even their wars, have helped create the benefits we have at this late(wt parlance pardon me) latest date.

  Great as the desire of disadvantages citizens of the world to move to developed countries may be, if unchecked, it would underwhelm us all. Rich countries could be really poor if indebted, can not afford to be foolish in extending benefits to those that have not earned them.

  Great symphaty can be felt for illegal immegration, but by breaking the law in breaking borders we are creating a society of scofflaws, of tax non compliance. There is a need for good workers, let the succesful countries decide who moves in according to need. Welcome only bona fide refugees, remember the Jewish people. in the 30s. They would have gladly accepted internment and some did in the US even.

  so I prefer the status quo. with nations protecting their unique identity with selective arrivals.
• 

  smiddy

  It`s a pie in the sky dream , it will/could never happen

  smiddy
• 

  jam

  I beleive world Government is inevitable and with world Gov relax

  borders.

  Robin Hanson (his facts)

  In 1951 nearly half of Americans thought the UN should be

  strengthened to make it A World Government with power to

  control the armed forces of all nations including the USA.

  In 1993 58% of 1200 adult American citizens polled thought

  that to have practical law enforcement at home and abroad,

  a limited democratic world government would be essential or

  helpful for effective enforcement of laws. Of those question

  66% felt there should be a world constitution.

  2007 much of the world agree, from 2006-2007 people

  from 19 nations interviewed, US,Mexico, Russia, Poland, Israel,

  China, Ukraine,S. Korea, Franch, Australia, Iran, just a few of the nations.

  I beleive world government will come, maybe not in my life time.

  The UN is a step in that direction.
• 

  Cold Steel

  I had a friend who used to say, "Yeah, I'm for World Government...as long as it's OUR Government!"

  There are a number of people in the U.S. and U.N. that would love to change our Constitution and ultimately advance a world government. They don't want people having guns and being able to listen to right wing AM radio for hours on end without a FREE equal time requirement. Forget the fact that people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck routinely ask administration officials and other liberals for comments and interviews. And recently, Obama called for an unlimited debt limit while his fellow travelers want to tax the wealthy one percent of their net worth each year!

  I've never agreed with that crap on the Statue of Liberty. Unfettered immigration is not something the founding fathers championed. We're letting too many Muslims into this country, and while many of them are good, decent people, their children many times become extremists. In areas of the world where Muslims become the majority, they always suppress the minority. There also doesn't seem to be any such thing as Muslim democracy anywhere in the world. Europe has nearly destroyed itself by letting in huge numbers of Muslims, and it wasn't long enough that they were rioting in the streets, overturning cars and burning anything that would catch fire! And in our cities we hear of honor killings...all these were unknown in the U.S. prior to our throwing open our borders! Further, the penalty for Muslims switching religions is death, which means that if they convert to Christianity there are those who would seek the lives of friends, even members of their own families.

  Diverse cultures infrequently blend and we need to take that into consideration before we let them in. If a woman wants to wear a tent with only her eyes showing, that's one thing. But when they don't want to remove the veils over their faces for drivers licenses and other forms of ID like passports, it adversely affects our society. My wife is a Muslim who converted to Christianity when she came here from Iran just before the Revolution, and she despises the religion. Her family and close friends in Iran are middle class and also aren't religious. They don't fast or do prayers, but they're in the minority. There are many in Iran who would like to move here, but like many cultures that arrive, the draw is either education or prosperity. Of course, they must have something to offer than just the open door.