Some expected effects of letting migrants come legally rather than illegally:

-Immigrants would travel to the US on reputable airlines.
-Human smuggling networks would lose billions of dollars in revenue.
-Thousands of deaths of immigrants would be prevented along the journey.
-Thousands of crimes against migrants would be prevented.
-Many more immigrants would free themselves from all manner of despotism.
-Freedom of religion, speech, association, property ownership, education, etc. would increase.
-People living in poverty would fall.
-More immigrants would return to their home countries for visits or permanently.
-The number of legal violations would fall by millions.
-The black market in fake identification documents would almost disappear.
-Billions of dollars of law enforcement spending would be freed up.
-Children would stop being traumatized by arrests and incarcerations.
-Families would stop being separated by government border policies.
-Tens of thousands of fewer children would unnecessarily enter the U.S. foster care system.
-The rights of property owners and citizens near the border would be better respected.
-America would be a larger & more influential country.
-Its reputation around the world would improve.
-The U.S. government’s moral authority to demand changes in other countries would grow.
-Americans’ private social influence around the world would expand.
-U.S. social capital would increase.
-U.S. culture would receive an infusion of new ideas, practices, foods, and music.
-The U.S. crime rate would fall.
-Americans could buy from, sell to, hire, and be hired by a larger and more diverse number of people.
-Jobs would be filled more quickly, speeding up economic expansion.
-Increasing economic growth would increase tax revenues.
What's the list of negative effects look like? Would these supposed negatives overwhelm the positives? Linguistic diversity would grow--is that negative or positive? If negative, how many children should drown in the Rio Grande to keep linguistic diversity marginally lower?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Bier

David Bier Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @David_J_Bier

15 Apr
Please comprehend how incredible this is: These kids who came in 2014 have faced a political & legal environment intended to cause their deportations for nearly every day of the last 7 years. Obama said point blank: "They'll get sent back."
DOJ created a "rocket docket" for kids to carry out Obama's deportation promise. There was intense pressure on IJs to deny. Some prominent lawyers were even telling kids to give up and accept voluntary return. Obama's DOJ had 3-year-olds in courts alone to kick them out.
The whole system was slanted to begin with. No right to attorney. Absurdly narrow interpretations of asylum law. That's before we even get to Trump with all the anti-asylum IJ appointees, the IJ completion quotas, and even more pressure to deny and deport.
Read 6 tweets
13 Apr
We don't need new laws to end the "border crisis." In fact, we already have laws on the books right now that *require* an end to the "border crisis." 8 USC 1158(a) explicitly allows any immigrant arriving here to apply for asylum legally at a port of entry law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/… Image
8 USC 1225(b)(A) explicitly *requires* that 1) inspectors at ports of entry cannot immediately remove someone seeking to apply for asylum and 2) requires that they refer those applicants for an interview with an asylum officer in the United States. Image
If these procedures were being followed, and immigrants were notified that they were, there would be no crisis. No one would be crossing illegally to apply for asylum. Just follow the laws already on the books.
Read 6 tweets
13 Apr
Amid Crisis, Biden Admits 0.2% of Central American Families & Kids Legally. Biden is not only making no efforts to encourage migrants to apply at legal crossing points. He is actively preventing them from doing so and working with Mexico to keep them away cato.org/blog/amid-cris…
Every administration has had a policy of trying to keep asylum seekers from applying to ports of entry in furtherance, but under Obama in 2016 and Trump in 2017, nearly 1 in 5 Central American kids & families came through legal ports of entry. Trump ended that. Biden's kept it. Image
The policy of blocking asylum at ports drives migrants to cross illegally and creates the "border crisis" of hundreds of thousands of arrests and thousands of kids in cages. Yet the Biden administration continues to claim that the better policy is to keep immigration illegal!
Read 4 tweets
18 Mar
Why didn't Fairness for High Skilled Immigrants Act, the bill that received the most votes last times, get a vote before or with these other bills? Obviously partly b/c it's not as high priority for the Dems as these other bills, but it's more complex than that. Work is ongoing
A reason these bills saw a vote when they did is b/c they had an April 1 deadline to get a floor vote w/o a hearing. Fairness has the votes to pass on suspension of the rules so there's no worry about that issue with this bill. So no deadline ultimately delayed the vote...
Unlike those other bills, this bill passed the Senate last Congress. That may seem good! Lock for a vote again! The problem is that the House disagreed with the Senate changes, and they are trying to work out the differences now so we don't end up in this back-and-forth again
Read 5 tweets
18 Mar
My latest long piece that explains how the Biden admin let the child migrant crisis develop. It chose to:
-keep kids in border cells
-separate kids from extended family
-expel kids w/ parents, causing them to come back
-keep legal crossings closed
cato.org/publications/i…
1. It chose to keep kids in CBP jails in double the numbers of 2019's kids-in-cages disaster in order to maintain social distancing at ORR shelters. This made no sense and led directly to children languishing days-weeks in CBP jail cells. The space was there the whole time
2. It continued expelling kids with parents to Mexico even after it was obvious that it was causing thousands of children to come back alone. This policy is separating far more families than were separated under Trump's family separation policy in 2019.
Read 6 tweets
1 Mar
In the same breath, Sec @AliMayorkas denounces Trump's "cruel" remain in Mexico while telling those wanting to come to "wait in Mexico" or be forced back to wait. Naturally, "wait in Mexico" isn't "cruel" in his opinion c-span.org/video/?509417-…
He continues to cite the CDC's bogus border declaration with a straight face as being about COVID-19. Even though health experts say it is baseless. apnews.com/article/virus-…
He continues to act as if there is no overlap between his returning of families with kids and the number of unaccompanied kids who are coming. It's causing family separation and a major humanitarian crisis.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!