Open borders doesn’t mean driving them here. It just means if for whatever reason they arrive it’s cool. Maybe they wanna see the Grand Canyon.

It allows for free travel.

Take your false dichotomies and shove em

LOL yeah maybe, and the little I've looked into older immigration policy, apparently prior to 1973 people used to just cross the border and get jobs pretty regularly. I'll throw a link up to the podcast I heard it addressed in when I can find it.

But the big charge against immigration is that it results in "brain drain" in many countries. India generally feels like talented citizens generally leave for the US to start businesses. It's not a front-line platform-plank issue, but immigration to the US can be seen as a monopoly on talent.

Alright well, I tried to have a civil conversation. Maybe another time.

Posing open borders as advocating against the welfare of the countries we'd open our borders to may be civil but it sure ain't anything approaching rationality. The alternative you impose implies interventions as well, which have historically not gone very well. I'll make a podcast saying the same to get the point across.

cool

Can I get in on this passive-aggression with some false dichotomies?

They're taken. You can have moving the goalposts.

Who says those are my only two choices? I sense a dilemma, and not a true one!

Nah, I was just offering one of the hotter options that are still open. You could take the fallacy fallacy if you wanted.

I took it literal when you said ask.

As for Guatemalans and all those south of our border step one should be to do no harm. Once we figure that out hell yes I support no strings attached humanitarian aid.