Hacker News Reader

Comment by popinman322 | Hacker News Reader

It's a bit more nuanced than that. While we probably should improve/expand asylum infrastructure, and similar programs, we can't just open the borders. We have a lot of social programs that are already strained (mostly by legislation designed to hobble them) by our current population; until those are sorted out we don't have a strong enough foundation for faster/more immigration.

View on HN

I disagree. Let's move fast and break things. Status quo is not going to improve our welfare in either the literal or policy sense. Economically speaking, immigration is the most profitable policy decision a government can make.

Extremism is very rarely a solution to unsatisfactory status quo.

Being an extremist, you are vastly more likely to unite the country against yourself and roll back any progress on your cause than you are to advance it.

Breaking things in this context would put peoples' lives at risk. There are already millions of newly unemployed citizens in the US. If the system is strained too far those who are already at risk could lose access to shelter, food, and clean water. Not to mention anyone who's unemployed likely doesn't have good access to healthcare right now.

So fix the programs that provide those things. I’m a hard libertarian on this issue. The government should not be telling us where we can travel or live. We wouldn’t accept it from our government and nobody should accept it from other governments either.

Things are already broken man.

If they get much more broken there's going to be riots in the places rich white people live.

Now that I think about your idea more, I agree. Destroy the entire social safety net, bring in 20-50 million refugees and hope America survives the civil war.

I’m going to assume you’re being sarcastic because there is zero evidence that’s a good idea

Reply on news.ycombinator.com