> The main problem with large-scale uncontrolled immigration is that government can't reliably plan ahead for infrastructure improvements and upgrades
Thankfully, the idea that "infrastructure improvements and upgrades" were the responsibility of governments to centrally plan is one that fell out of practice about 35 years ago.
Let's stick with the whole "adaptive ecosystem" model, rather than a "government planning" model, and things will turn out better every time.
> Let's stick with the whole "adaptive ecosystem" model, rather than a "government planning" model
1. Every "adaptive ecosystem" has limits.
2. Without proper government regulation, which includes some "government planning", an "adaptive ecosystem" cannot and will not exist.
3. Abusing 1 and lacking 2, things not only don't "turn out better every time", they turn out really bad every single time.
With that said, abusing immigration enforcement in order to habituate disregard for due process is deceptive and over the limits and it leads to worse consequences than immigration itself.
This is a very vague claim. Everything in nature has some sort of "limits"
> 2. Without proper government regulation, which includes some "government planning", an "adaptive ecosystem" cannot and will not exist.
It's very much the other way around. Governments are institutions that form within the bounds of civil societies that already exist, and already have a sufficient common ground of norms and behavioral expectations to enable formal institutions to be established and sustain themselves over time in the first place.
You seem to be looking at this from the perspective of government being some sort of prime mover, or something that exists outside the ecosystem of society and able to place external constraints on it -- but no, governments are just ordinary institutions within society, subject to the same incentive structures and failure modalities as everything else, and there is no "outside" at all.
> 3. Abusing 1 and lacking 2, things not only don't "turn out better every time", they turn out really bad every single time.
(1) is reality itself, and (2) is a set of aspirational ideals that exist within (1). Pursuing (2) means working within the manifest nature of (1), not trying to supersede it with something else -- treating (2) as a unbounded solution to everything turns it more often into an instrument of abuse, rather than a mitigation for abuse.
> With that said, abusing immigration enforcement in order to habituate disregard for due process is deceptive and over the limits and it leads to worse consequences than immigration itself.
Thankfully, the idea that "infrastructure improvements and upgrades" were the responsibility of governments to centrally plan is one that fell out of practice about 35 years ago.
Let's stick with the whole "adaptive ecosystem" model, rather than a "government planning" model, and things will turn out better every time.