
Hell Yes, Mayor Bloomberg. I’m With You. - razin
http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/15/hell-yes-mayor-bloomberg-im-with-you/
======
Bud
The only thing I disagree with in this article is Arrington's assertion that
"the issue of illegal immigration over our Southern border must be separated
from the issue of immigration of people who want to come here to build
companies."

I don't really see why we need to separate those issues. They are the same
issue. We should discard isolationist policies in both cases and move toward a
more enlightened policy in both cases.

After all, one can't always tell with certainty which immigrants are the
"good" immigrants and which are the "bad" ones, in advance.

~~~
ajkessler
It's certainly a thorny issue though. If you're going to run any sort of
welfare state, it's pretty hard to argue for totally open borders; it simply
leads to financial ruin, as much of Europe has found out over the last 30
years (which is why European countries have swiftly and brutally tightened
immigration policies). If you're giving away a lot of free stuff, you're
forced to guess at which immigrants are going to be productive and contribute
to your society and which are just there for the freebies.

I've always found this cognitive dissonance interesting (particularly and
recently evident in France): those who feel it's morally wrong not to support
the poorest of their societies have no problem refusing to do the same for
those who were born on the other side of an arbitrary stripe on a map.

~~~
joebadmo
"Give me your tired, your poor,/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe
free,/ The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

While I don't grant your premise (that open borders in a welfare state lead to
financial ruin), I think the US has a special consideration in that it was
founded not on a race, ethnicity, or culture, but an ideology of self-evident
truths. And immigrants.

~~~
anonymous246
1) Was the US a welfare state when that poem was written? From seeing "Gangs
of New York", I think not. :)

2) You do realize that Asians were excluded from immigrating to the US until
very recently, right?
[http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/immigration_c...](http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/immigration_chron.cfm)

~~~
chriserin
That's a nice resource but I don't think it shows what you intended it to
show. From that timeline all I gather is that the United States has always
wavered between xenophobia and the need for labor.

~~~
rubashov
There were essentially four brief periods of high immigration in American
history, usually lasting on the order of 20 years or less. Outside of those
periods essentially zero immigration was the norm. From 1924 to 1965
immigration was zero (somehow business and technology advanced in America; not
sure how). There were many such periods farther back.. Allowing only
immigration from Western nations was the norm.

We are now in the fourth decade of an unprecedented experiment with
extraordinarily high immigration. The length of this wave and the volume of
newcomers dwarfs all previous waves. This is also the first experiment with
high numbers of non-Westerners, who to all indications do not appear to be
assimilating and intermarrying as previous waves did.

The lesson to take away from the history of American immigration is that
immigration waves should be followed by long periods of zero immigration for
assimilation.

~~~
lawtguy
Looking at the US Census data from 1850 onward (they didn't ask where you were
born before the 1850 census), the percentage of the US population was a steady
13-14% from 1860 to 1920. In 1950 (they didn't ask in 1930 or 1940), it's down
to 9% presumably from the changes in immigration law in the 1920s. Then it's
around 5% for 1960-1980 and from 1990 starts to rise up to 12.48% today.
That's roughly where the percentage of immigrants was for the 6 decades before
1920. That doesn't to me look like "an unprecedented experiment with
extraordinarily high immigration"

~~~
rubashov
Despite reaching replacement level fertility in the 70s, the population has
continued to explode, and this is due entirely to immigration. This is
historically unprecedented.

[http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/sustainability/bigge...](http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/sustainability/biggest-
population-boom-ever.html)

------
StudyAnimal
Two questions. What counts as an advanced degree? And why is starting
companies considered important separably from say working in one?

Starting a company and moving to another country are both fairly large life
disruptions, and doing both at once would decreases the success of either
working well.

If I manage to get a green card I would probably focus first on just getting a
job to move to and get myself stable before starting a startup, whereas I am
already stable here and could consider starting a business where I already
know my way around etc.

------
StavrosK
I find it interesting where he says "we wouldn't have become a superpower
without the contributions of immigrants", rather than consider that almost
every American living today had immigrant ancestors.

At which point does he draw the line of immigration? At which date does he (or
any American) consider himself "American" rather than an immigrant?

~~~
bluekeybox
I suppose at the point where one feels closer to the "generic" American
values/culture than to that of your forebears. I think it's the truest
definition, however it is often hard to prove/demonstrate, so the arbitrary
definition "have be born in this country" is used instead.

~~~
hugh3
_so the arbitrary definition "have be born in this country" is used instead_

That hardly seems arbitrary -- it's what the word means. If you were born
outside the country then you have immigrated, therefore you are an immigrant.

~~~
bluekeybox
Well it may seem a bit arbitrary to those who grew up in the U.S. but were
born elsewhere (or even to those who were born in the U.S. but grew up
culturally isolated).

------
davidw
I heartily agree, but would still place this article firmly in the "politics"
category - it's not just about startup visas or things like that.

For exhibit A, we have some guy commenting already "If you're going to run any
sort of welfare state, it's pretty hard to argue for totally open borders; it
simply leads to financial ruin, as much of Europe has found out over the last
30 years", which is of course complete bunk, as "much of Europe" is most
certainly not "financially ruined".

~~~
graphene
I read that as saying that Europe found out that they had to strengthen border
controls to _avoid_ ruin, not that they were _already_ ruined.

------
sigzero
Everything Bloomberg talked about is correct except it applies to LEGAL
immigration. ILLEGAL immigration is the problem.

~~~
rubashov
Legal immigration is a huge problem. We are taking in vastly more people than
the nation can culturally assimilate, and statistically these legal immigrants
are net economic tax drains.

Even if the legal immigration screening were fixed and we stopped bringing in
so many economic losers, the cold hard fact is this country is full. _MOST_ of
the US is facing fresh water crises in the next couple decades. We will become
net importers of food within the next 20 years as prime farmland is consumed.
We already have become net importers in most categories.

The USA is overpopulated. Net immigration should be ZERO.

Did you know the US would not be an oil importer if immigration had been
stopped in 1970? Instead of being in a position to peacefully mind our own
business we're spending trillions on wars for oil.

~~~
rayiner
You realize the US is facing an enormous labor shortage in the coming decades
as the baby boomers retire?

~~~
rubashov
That's not really true. Social Security is insolvent, but so what; the sooner
that gets shut down the better. There's no evidence that boomer retirement is
creating a labor shortage. The boomers are retiring now and wages are not
increasing. Japan's boomers are 10 years ahead of ours and their retirements
have not created problematic labor shortages.

Even if there were labor shortages, impending water shortages rather plainly
remove the option of continued population growth.

The native population of this country decided the land was full in the 1970s.
Native born birth rates leveled to replacement. The current immigration
paradigm is a political agenda at odds with democracy. Poll after poll shows
pretty much everybody agrees we don't need more people. What we have here is a
political alliance between certain business interests and certain ethnic
interest groups to benefit at the expense of the majority.

------
fernandotakai
As a guy who works for an american company, living in south america, i say:
make this happen. please.

------
lbarrow
He's certainly the only Republican I'd ever seriously consider voting for.

~~~
andrewpi
Actually Bloomberg is not a Republican. He changed his status to Independent a
couple of years ago, but got permission from the Republican party to run on
their ballot line during the last mayoral election.

------
mbesto
I'm with you too. But who's the gatekeeper?

~~~
fredoliveira
he's describing a meritocratic system. The gatekeeper is still the US
government. The acceptance criteria is still merit in one shape or the other.
It's all just easier.

------
hootmon
Yet another harangue from a capitalist running dog. Move on nothing new here,
nothing to see. We all know immigration is a capitalist codeword for labor
exploitation, keep those wages low, benefits nonexistent, and jobs to a
minimum, so they will be docile and subservient.

------
hessenwolf
American pyramid scheme does rhyme with American dream; this seems like a way
to keep newcomers working to feed the incumbents.

This worked fine when Europe was heavily in debt post world war and China was
a backwater, but Europe is now ticking along fine, China is doing well, and we
are all looking abit wryly at America's lack of social safety nets.

Grrr... Hands off our entrepreneurs. Grow your own.

~~~
StudyAnimal
Personally I am keen to get the hell out of Germany with its 50% tax PLUS 13%
compulsory health insurance. Social safety net is one thing, but it is
ridiculous here, even rich families get government money for having kids.
Foreigners get unemployment benefit. Utter insanity and no one wants it to
change. America, please let me in!

And don't get me started on trying to start a business. Europe is purging its
entrepreneurs like some sort of viral infection.

~~~
hessenwolf
Ha ha. I am moving to munich germany on sunday and i will find out for myself.

