Thread by @LPTexas

Immigration is a human right.

What about a person's property right to sell to whoever they want to? Like an immigrant?

And doesn't that immigrant now have rights to that property?

https://twitter.com/DecentralizePod/status/1369744504358658054?s=19

Immigrants come here and lower crime rates. So technically our borders are keeping crime rates higher than they would be

cato.org/blog/illegal-i…

https://twitter.com/yaboyono/status/1369745161505280003?s=19

Ah, okay.

But immigration doesn't change the borders for those rules at all. We may need geographical borders, but that doesn't mean we need inter-personal borders

https://twitter.com/yaboyono/status/1369745976869724161?s=19

Excellent question.

Government does have a role in keeping dangerous people out. An Ellis Island style immigration system, where there is a check for criminal past, disease, and self-sufficiency is perfectly compatable with libertarian borders.

https://twitter.com/FinEssentials/status/1369746646725181443?s=19

All four of those things require property to be taken from one person and given to another.

Immigration does not.

https://twitter.com/lockoutdays/status/1369747400668176391?s=19

Yes. If we had an Ellis Island system with none of the arbitrary caps and restrictions that we currently do have, it would be illegal to skip that process.

https://twitter.com/FinEssentials/status/1369751340545622016?s=19

1) Government can place restrictions on people who are an actual threat.

2) Government can place restrictions on the diseased.

3) Government can place restrictions on people taking from other people (welfare)

Regardless of if they are immigrants.

https://twitter.com/HolyMeekrob/status/1369754571900338180?s=19

Immigrants are not the ones who take the property to pay for welfare.

Government is.

We don't round up poor Americans and put them in jail or kick them out for being on welfare. Libertarians shouldn't do it to immigrants either.