Even without reductions in entitlements, however, the U.S. should remove all impediments to immigration.
By opening the borders, the U.S. would eliminate the costs of enforcing immigration restrictions. These include the expenditure for border controls plus the corruption and disrespect for the law engendered by imperfect enforcement of existing restrictions.
By opening the borders, the U.S. would signal its desire to help those seeking a better life. This would plausibly combat terrorism better than any policy currently being pursued.
By opening the borders, the U.S. would encourage other rich countries to open theirs.
By opening the borders, the U.S. would provide humanitarian assistance to many in desperate need.
On top of these benefits, increased legal immigration might generate political pressure to scale back entitlement programs. So the standard Libertarian view on the relation between entitlement and immigration policies is perhaps backwards.
Opening the borders does carry the risk that a flood of immigration might overwhelm the economy. This concern is understandable but likely exaggerated. Historical experience does not suggest immigration would be dramatically larger than occurs now. And if the borders were open, many immigrants would not migrate permanently. Instead they would earn income here for a period and then return to their country of origin. This occurred frequently before the imposition of immigration restrictions early in the 20th century.
No immigration policy is perfect. But open borders is the best tradeoff available.
Comments