All Episodes
Previous Next
April 4, 2006 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
34:05
175 Immigration Part 1

The moral science of human movement

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, good morning everybody.
It's the 4th of April 2006 and it's time for a morning drive and I am not going to be able to get to Human Nature this morning because I am going to take a slight detour to a contemporary event.
Now, the contemporary event is, as you know or may know, there's a lot of issues heating up down south along the border between the United States of America the people's state of Mexico.
So I would like to talk a little bit about immigration just so at least my perspectives or what I could consider to be the DRO-based perspectives on immigration could be clearer.
So immigration, first and foremost, is one of these words that is put together to differentiate it from something that is morally acceptable.
So immigration is pictures, sort of images of multi-generational families arriving at a country on boxcars and requiring lots of services and quarantines and so on.
And so immigration is a word that is used to differentiate it from the ordinary human act of moving.
Moving is all it is.
I mean, does it really make a difference if you move from New York to Houston or whether you move from Niagara to Buffalo, from the Canadian side of Niagara Falls to Buffalo?
Obviously, there's a bigger temperature difference when you go to Houston.
There's probably a bigger cultural difference.
So, is there really any way that we would be able to call immigration other than the simple act of moving?
And when you simply call it moving, then you understand that there really is no significant moral issue.
Can you imagine that if you wanted to move to Houston, that you had to go through a multi-year process to be able to move there?
Can you imagine that if you wanted to move to Houston, that you couldn't get a job for the first couple of years?
That you had to go through a rigorous process of vetting?
That you had to get lawyers?
Can you imagine how crazy that would feel?
How fascistic that would feel?
Welcome, my friends, to the world of the immigrant.
Now, you cannot get rid of a human being's desire to live free.
We all know, we all know, that we only have one life to live.
And the degree to which we live it in slavery is the degree to which that life is meaningless.
Because you can't create meaning in the face of compulsion.
You really, really can't.
I mean, I know you can read, I think it was Victor Frenzel's Man's Search for Meaning, where he talks about concentration camps, and yeah, you can find some crazy spiritual stuff out of extreme subjection to violence, but that's just calling the scar tissue that comes out of brutality, spirituality, which is actually what spirituality is to begin with, so I don't really believe that that gets you anywhere.
But human beings are always, always, always going to want to be free.
And they will do anything to become free.
See?
I am tying the one in human nature to come.
But human beings really do want to become free.
They will do just about anything.
And other human beings who deny them that right to be free are fascists.
I mean, I don't know how to put it any more delicately.
There is no other way to put it that I can think of, and it is a stone evil to say to another human being, I can tell you where to live, and I can tell you where not to live.
Because, you know, just using the argument for morality, it's pretty simple to figure that out.
Does everyone have that right?
Can I tell you where to live?
Can I tell you where not to live?
Can we both stand in a room pointing at each other and saying, thou shalt not live here, thou shalt live there?
Well, of course, that would be a ridiculous right to have, so it can't be universal, and because it's not universal, it's not moral.
So, the history of immigration, I'll just sort of touch on briefly here, because I'll need some more statistics to talk about it, if it's of interest to people, but The history of immigration has basically been an enormous tide.
It's like a tidal slosh of people racing around the world looking for any scrap of freedom that they can find.
Immigration has been the only competition that governments have really faced in terms of, I mean, other than sort of coups, which are pretty rare throughout Western history, but The only competition that governments face is immigration.
Immigration moving.
And so when people do move from one country to another, they are voting with their feet and they are saying, I want to be in a place that has some kind of freedom.
Now, when that country does actually have freedom, then there's no problem.
I mean, if you look at the millions upon millions upon millions of people who voted with their feet and moved to America in the 19th century.
That's the greatest immigration in history.
It's the greatest movement of human beings in history.
Well, if you look at that, you don't see any particular strain in the economy.
In fact, the economy in the 19th century in America was far more stable.
Far more stable than it is today.
But what happens is when you start to get government control over the economy, then you start to get the creation of a number of things.
We'll call special interest groups the first group that gets created.
The special interest group is those who represent and profit from the transfer of wealth to a particular group.
So, I'm not even going to say that they represent that group.
They certainly don't.
I mean, they really don't represent that group.
For instance, I mean, in the upcoming series on Social Security, we'll briefly be talking about, well, sorry, you'll be listening to, I probably won't be briefly talking about it, but is it in the interest of old people for there to be Social Security?
Well, of course not.
Now they're completely dependent upon a government system which is going to collapse.
So, of course it's not to their interest.
Are there groups, the American Association for the Retired People or whatever the heck it's called, that constantly push for higher benefits?
For sure!
Sure, because they get well paid for doing so, both by the government in certain situations and by members of their groups who've been subject to, you know, I guess at that point, 60 years or 70 years of propaganda.
Sure, they're well paid to do it, but it's not to the benefit of the remembrance, for heaven's sakes.
I mean, as we talked about in the series on racism, it's scarcely to the benefit of the black community, that they have social leaders out there calling for more socialism, because that is simply going to diminish the opportunities at the lowest end of the economic ladder, which is what they need to climb to get out of their squalor, those who are in that situation.
So you get these special interest groups, so one thing that people become concerned about is the creation of special interest groups.
That makes them fearful of outsiders coming in.
It makes them fearful.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what is really going on though, which is that people are afraid of welfare recipients.
People are afraid of people who are going to get Medicare and Medicaid and all of the enormous showering of government programs that are currently burying the will and initiative of the American people alive in its socialist tomb.
So people are very much afraid of other people coming in and not working.
You see, this is what violence breeds.
Fear.
Violence breeds paranoia.
Violence breeds hostility.
Violence has significant after-effects on the personality.
And violence which continues and escalates only makes that worse.
This is the brotherhood of man that is generated by government programs, by the forcible redistribution of wealth.
We become a bunch of jackals snapping at a barely-meated carcass, snarling at each other, pushing each other back, biting at each other, all because we want to get the diminishing returns, knowing that when it's gone, we're going to starve.
So we're all trying to get as much food as possible so that when we do begin to starve, we can hopefully sort of survive until we can get to the next kill.
This is the togetherness of the species that comes about from centralized violence.
This is what the state does to people, and it does not human nature.
See?
I'll continue to tie it in for you.
You know, that's the kind of interweaving show, the kind of quality interweaving that I hope that you've come to expect from these morning drives and afternoon drives.
So when you begin to put social programs in place, then you begin to create a category of the needy.
Those who need the benevolence and money of others.
Benevolence in quotes, right?
And once you begin to create that forcible distribution, then you will become terribly afraid of those who have needs coming along, right?
So you start to hear these stories, which is, you know, one guy comes over and he's like an itinerant farm worker.
He's an apple picker.
And, you know, Ahmed, apple picker, I don't think that's a real name, so I don't think I'm going to offend anyone.
If it is a real name, wow, I'd really like to hear your story.
So, Ahmed Applepicker comes along, and he's working for Peanuts, or perhaps, dare I say it, Apples?
No, I'm not going to say it.
And then he uses the leverage of the existing immigration system to bring over his ten elderly parents.
Because he was raised in a commune?
His pregnant wife, his ten elderly parents, his do-nothing loafer brother-in-law, all these people.
So you get one minor, minor, minor boost to the economy, which is Ahmed Applepicker.
Doing his thing under the hot sun, getting the apples, and then you end up with this enormous drain on the economy because all of these other people are coming along and taking all this welfare and all these social services and so on.
Now, everybody gets sort of down in their gut that the government is not going to stop this.
I'm not saying this is what always happens.
I mean, it would be far from accurate to say this.
I actually think that, in my experience, immigrants work a heck of a lot harder than most people in Canada who seem to loaf their way through high school without jobs and then loaf their way through university without jobs and then spend a good sweet deal of time, you know.
I mean, hey, I don't mind particularly.
Worked my way through high school and university and then worked to get into my master's, worked for a year to save up money for my master's, and then I've been working very hard since I got my first job when I was 11, right?
So it's hard for me to, I mean, it might just be sublimated envy, I don't know, but it's kind of hard for me to...
Sorry, I just have sympathy for those people who didn't have jobs, so maybe I'm being too cruel.
But what I was reminded of was a story of a friend of mine who's an economist, who was always sort of the golden intellectual boy of the family, and his brothers, while very nice, were not considered to be quite as academically gifted.
I was at lunch with them some years back, and he's the eldest, and the middle child had a story where he's saying that He was cutting a hedge, and he was up on top of the hedge, because it was such a tall hedge, and he's cutting the hedge, and it's windy, and the bits of hedge are being blown into his eyes, and there's dust up there, and it's, you know, it's just terrible.
And he's looking over, and his eldest brother is sitting by the pool under a nice big umbrella, and he's reading a book, some sort of book on economics, and their mother is bringing him iced tea and a pitcher, It was just this feeling that this eldest brother could do no wrong and was always catered to, and I thought it was a funny story.
He was fairly good-natured about it.
I'm sure there's some truth in there that the family's not picking up that would be worth discussing.
But that's sort of how I feel about some people who seem to have this loaf-about mentality.
And I think I talked about it once before, somebody I knew when I was in the theatre world.
Who did a degree in theater, then did a master's in theater, and then got government grants to do theater in Yellowknife, and then got government grants to go and study theater in Germany.
At some point it was like, dude, do you ever think about giving back?
Like, do you ever think about maybe getting a job and giving something back to the taxpayers that they actually want?
Rather than just taking all their money and calling it a career?
I mean, what a parasite!
So, Anyway, so back from the Segway.
I've managed to pull myself back from the riptide and we're now striking towards the shore again.
So the issue of government programs is really what has a lot to do with making people fearful and hostile towards outsiders.
And it's also because people don't have a very strong understanding of economics.
So they think that people who move from Mexico Or wherever.
And they think that those people then are going to need things and take things and so on.
And that really seems to me not the case at all.
It really does seem to me to be the case that when people move from a poorer country to the United States, They are bringing an enormous amount of suppressed or repressed demand with them.
I mean, as soon as somebody moves into the economy, it's not just what they can give, it's what they want that makes them valuable to trade with.
Now, let's say that we're talking in the absence of a welfare state, right, in a free society.
In a free society, if you move and bring your ten parents and your do-nothing brother-in-law and your pregnant wife to a free country, then, by God, you're going to need some goods, right?
You're going to need to work really hard in order to be able to provide for your family and to take care of your near baker's dozen of itinerant parents.
And so you're going to bring all of those needs, and so other people are going to have to provide.
You're going to have to trade for them.
So the poorer that someone is, and the more dependence that someone has in a free society, the more you want them to move to where you are, because they are really, really, really, really Going to work hard.
And if they find that they can't make ends meet, then they're going to go to some local charity or whatever their church or whatever nonsense they belong to and try and get some help from them.
But they're not going to be preying on you.
The idea that they're going to turn to a life of crime is, you know...
Not too predictable.
People who move to countries with more opportunity don't tend to be interested in a life of crime.
Those who are interested in a life of crime are either petty criminals in Mexico, or, if they're really ambitious, they join El Banditos.
They join the government.
In order to really prey on people in a structured and safe manner.
You don't want to become some criminal and people can shoot back.
You want to be some bureaucrat or politician where you have the army behind you and you can't be touched.
That's where you want to go if you are an enterprising thief.
You don't move to LA and start picking people's pockets or holding them up or anything.
That's just not how it works.
Now, the other thing too is that In an advanced economy, as you're probably aware, there's lots of jobs that need to be done that aren't automated for whatever reason.
And it's not like the average American wants to do them.
I mean, I don't see... You know, you open those little matchboxes and they say, what do you want to be?
Do you want to be a security specialist, a security guide, a bookkeeper?
You know, those little checkboxes.
I don't see, and maybe I don't think it's just because there's not enough room to print it, I generally don't see something like, do you want to be the guy selling oranges on the median?
That's a career for you!
I also don't get a lot of that stuff from the internet, like where, make thousands in your spare time, sell citrus fruits for medians.
All the exhaust you can breathe!
I mean that really is not... Now obviously it's something that people want because it's nice to have a couple oranges to take to the office.
So it's a useful service because otherwise they wouldn't be there.
But I don't see that there's a whole lot of courses in business school leading you to managing a fleet of people handing out oranges and medians.
So it's something that needs to be done.
You think of fruit picking, you think of really base construction work, like putting up, like not the sort of craftsmanship of putting up monster homes, which of course, I mean, could be a vast numbers of people who move to the United States who are excellent at that.
But I'm thinking about people who are moving because they have no opportunities whatsoever.
In their home country.
So they moved to the United States.
And maybe they have no skills.
Let's just say they were a farmer.
And they grew coffee.
Which, you know, is not big if they moved to Minnesota.
And so they have to do something else.
And they don't have money for school.
So they become a construction worker.
Like a totem.
A baggerman totem kind of construction worker.
Who's moving stuff around.
Or a road worker or whatever.
Well, there are people who will come and do that, and it's not like those jobs are in big demand.
Now, interestingly enough, those jobs are in large demand when they're unionized.
I mean, unions, you've got to understand, the relationship between unions and immigrants is not kissy-kissy.
It's pretty hostile.
Well, it's pretty hostile one way.
It's not like the average Mexican farm worker has any luck opposing the The big unions, I mean, there's just not a chance.
He'd just get rubbed out, right?
He'd pull a hoffer and vanish.
But unions who have pumped up wages for menial positions because they'd rather shaft the consumer and get paid a lot and of course they have an interest in raising wages not because they care about their workers but because more wages means more union dues and also more wages means that you desperately need the union more.
I mean let's just say that there's some job in the free market which is a A totem kind of construction job, where you're just moving stuff around, that's going to pay you like six bucks an hour.
Because, you know, it's really not that valuable, and it doesn't require any skills in English, and it doesn't require any skills in anything.
It's just like, you point, you move, right?
The snack-and-court-wood kind of jobs.
So, six bucks an hour, and then you get some union in there that boosts that thing to 14 bucks an hour over time.
Well, of course, if you're that guy, and you're now like 40, and you've been basically stacking cordwood for 20 years, and you've got yourself to $14 or $15 an hour through the union...
Well, you're obviously pretty hyperinflated when it comes to real world wages.
You're not actually doing that well.
Now, of course, you'd be okay if you got rid of the government.
You could still get by at six bucks an hour pretty well.
But in the situation that you're in, you're really desperately dependent upon the union and the government protection because you know that if the union gets busted and the market becomes open that there's going to be swarms of people who are going to be more than happy to work for six bucks an hour and count themselves happy and lucky and feel that it's a great step up in life.
Now you're 40 and you've spent your entire career stacking cordwood and you don't really have any skills that are worth that much because you've been sort of drugged by this.
You've been bribed into becoming a hyper undeveloped human being.
You've been bribed into You're becoming a sort of narcoleptic skill vacuum.
You're probably watching TV and drinking and so on.
You've sort of bummed your life around, right?
And so what's going to happen if you're in this situation?
Your wages have been hyperinflated.
You've got this lifestyle.
Your brain has been decaying.
It's going to be very tough for you to retrain.
You become entirely dependent upon this money.
You're worse than a drug addict, right?
At least a drug addict has an identifiable problem that methadone can help and they can fix.
But you have a problem which is dependent upon the income of violence, and so it's kind of hard.
I mean, you're basically sort of like a guy who gets his... you're like a mafia wife, really.
That's your basic, I guess, moral standpoint.
Although I guess in some ways it's even worse than a mafia wife, because, like I say, if a mafia wife, if the mafia goes bust, she can maybe find somebody else to marry.
You're really wedded to violence and you're getting great profit from violence and so there's going to be lots of problems for you if the union ever loses control or if the minimum wage ever gets erased.
So you've become completely dependent on the brutality of state and union power.
So you're going to be very hostile.
I mean, you're not going to be hostile towards European immigrants, and you're not going to be hostile to, I guess, the Commonwealth immigrants, right?
But you are going to be hostile towards people who have a similar skill set to yours who are coming in who are going to be worth a lot less.
One of the things that, and I'll just sort of, this is not a side, but it's something that we sort of need to talk about for a minute or two before I continue.
I got an email from a very kind and smart listener, as all are, who has recently moved to Europe and he had went through some significant I guess doubts about the validity of the free market.
And we'll talk about this more another time.
But he was saying that the last time he was in Europe there were no particular problems.
But now there are beggars on the street and there are huge problems because Eastern Europe has opened up and a lot of manufacturing and a lot of jobs have moved over to Eastern Europe.
And my particular opinion about all of that is that that is just awful.
That is just awful.
I mean, in general, of course it's terrible when the free market opens up when people have been used to getting the fruits of violence through preferential legislation.
It's brutal.
It's absolutely horrible.
You're not going to believe what's going to happen to the old people when Social Security goes bust.
It's going to be dreadful.
That's exactly why you don't want government programs to begin with.
I mean, if quitting heroin was just snapping your fingers, then heroin would be fun to try!
I mean, the fact that it's so addictive and so destructive is exactly why you can't have it to begin with.
It's exactly why you have to fight against it being set up to begin with.
And the longer it goes, the worse it gets.
So, I mean, people say to me, you know, what's going to happen to Social Security?
Are we going to have no money?
Are the old people going to have to double up and triple up?
And they go, yes, it's going to be terrible.
It's going to be terrible.
I mean, they were around when the system was put in place and didn't fight against it, so my sympathy level isn't enormously high, but it is going to be terrible.
And that's exactly why violence should not be allowed.
I mean, of course it's going to be awful.
Some guy says, I want to quit crack.
Yeah, it's going to be terrible.
It's going to be absolutely horrible.
But that's why you should, you know, look kids, you have a video of somebody trying to quit crack and vomiting and dying and feeling like they're going to die.
And you know, sometimes dying.
And you say, hey look kids, this is why you shouldn't get involved with crack because it's pretty bad.
And this is the same thing with government programs.
So this person who's out in Europe Well, he's looking at the effects of what happens when a free market opens up relative to where you are, and you've been enormously privileged, and the laws don't relax in order to allow you to compete.
So if you suddenly have Eastern European workers willing to work for half your wages, but you don't drop your minimum wage, then of course a lot of people are going to become unemployed.
But my God, to blame that for the free market!
Oh my lord!
How unjust could that be?
It's ridiculous.
Of course people want to blame other people who are willing to work for less because they've been raised in government schools and so economically they're retarded.
And morally they're retarded, bordering on corrupt.
And the same thing occurs with people's perception of immigration.
Immigration is viewed as a threat.
Why?
Why?
Because people's wages are inflated.
That's the unjust part.
There's also this fear that when you get enough people moving to a free country, they're going to bring along all of these desires for socialism and they're going to then vote socialism in because they are from a more totalitarian society and so on.
Now, I think the key word in there is from.
From.
From, from, from, from, from.
Because they're from that society and they've left it, we might think that they value freedom just a little, little, little bit.
I think.
I mean, if I leave the Mafia at grave danger to myself and trek all the way to cross to another town and set myself up and get a job, am I bringing a Mafia infection?
To my new town?
Hey, you know what?
I got out of the Mafia because they were going to kill me and they're still looking for me, but I got out and I'm not even in the Witness Protection Program.
I've left.
I've given everything up.
I've left everything behind and I've set up a new life here.
Are the people really worried that I'm going to start a new Mafia?
I mean, how crazy is that?
I mean, what you want is these people are like, you want me in that town in case the Mafia ever comes, because guess who's going to be fighting the hardest against the Mafia?
The guy who's going to be fighting hardest against the Mafia is the guy who knows the most about the Mafia, who can see it coming.
I bet you dollars to donuts that the people who've come from totalitarian regimes are the ones who hate government power the most!
And when did we really get socialism?
In the 20th century!
Was there a huge bulge in immigration from totalitarian countries during that time?
Of course not!
That all happened in the 19th century!
And who set around getting us the worst totalitarian system in the world, which is the public school system?
Well, my friends, it was the wasps who were afraid of the Catholics.
I mean, this is obvious, right?
I mean, people set up barriers to immigration and they get things like state school going.
School!
I think I've hit a new high.
It's a high C in the podcast, quite pleased.
It's a passionate squeak, I promise you.
It's the home country that sets up government programs to protect their own, to keep others out, to have the excuse to keep... Because everybody recognizes that culture is just scar tissue deep down, right?
And that if you get a lot of other cultures that come in, that keeping your own children in your own culture is going to just start to appear like bigotry, right?
It's just going to start to appear like silly, right?
You won't be able to use the argument for morality anymore if it's based on culture.
So, that's pretty important.
I mean, most parents will bully their children into doing this, that, or the other based on the argument for morality.
When you get a lot of different cultures coming in, then the argument for morality starts to become kind of wrong, right?
It becomes kind of silly.
Which is why you get such conflict in the second generation of people who have more freedom than the first generation of people who come in as immigrants.
So, what's happening right now?
Well, I don't know what particular political moves are afoot.
I do believe that the government does want to start stationing troops in America.
The government does want to start stationing troops in America.
And the best way that it can do that is to provoke a border crisis.
There's no doubt about that.
If you provoke a border crisis with Mexico, then you can have an excuse to station troops in the country.
And that's something that the government is fairly keen on doing.
Well, for obvious reasons, right?
I mean, it's going to cement their power internally.
Now, there's always some risk.
I mean, governments have a problem stationing troops internally, to some degree, because they're worried about a coup.
I don't think that's particularly the case in America, because there's still a lot of propaganda.
It's certainly not the case for the next 20 years, the lifetimes of these politicians.
But my guess is that they are provoking a border crisis in order to get troops stationed in America.
And, of course, the best way to do that is to say that we are seriously considering, absolutely curtailing, and criminalizing, and this and that, then what you're going to get is you're going to... I mean, people aren't just going to get up and leave America, right?
But if you say that, as of this date, and they're going to put it in the future, right?
They're going to say, as of this date, six months from now, or twelve months from now, or even three months from now, There's going to be a crackdown, there's going to be this, and anybody who comes into the country after that time will be considered a criminal.
I mean, there'll be something that's time-dependent or something like that, or at least there's rumors that it's going to be imminent, even if they don't say specifically what time it is out into the future.
So what's going to happen is you're going to get a massive, massive swell of people who are sort of sitting on the fence, so to speak, about whether to move to America or not.
So you're going to get this enormous, huge, massive swell of people coming across the border because they're afraid that there's going to be some sort of clampdown that's imminent.
So people who've sort of been humming and hawing and saying, well, I'm keeping my options open, I'm thinking about it.
Well, you're going to get them suddenly saddling up and riding hard for the border because they realize or they feel or they fear that something is going to happen that's going to make it much more difficult.
Especially if they grant any kind of amnesty, right?
Probably what's going to happen is they're going to end up with some kind of amnesty.
Of some kind.
And so that's going to cause a massive influx of people coming across the border.
It's going to be like now or never, right?
So what's going to happen is then the government is going to say, well, you know, we're concerned about immigration.
And so now if you look at the statistics, if you look at the statistics, immigration has doubled.
Illegal immigration has doubled over the past couple of months.
And so we've got to seal these borders.
Seal these borders.
I love this, right?
Because, of course, what's going to happen is, and this I'm taking from Harry Brown, what's going to happen is pretty obvious, right?
I mean, you're going to have to start carrying national ID cards.
I mean, this is all perfectly inevitable and perfectly predictable.
And you're going to start carrying national ID cards, and is that going to affect the illegal immigrants?
Well, of course not!
I mean, of course not!
All it means is that you're going to end up carrying a national ID card, and you're going to be able to be stopped on the street, and you need to see your papers and so on.
Now, the one thing that the government does love about political correctness is that you can't exclude whites from laws, right?
So, it's not a lot of white Mexicans who've moved to the United States.
There are usually some visible signs that you're Latino.
And so, a sensible law, if you were sort of dictatorial but not politically correct, would be to say, if you look Mexican, then we can stop you, right?
But of course, discrimination, you have to be everyone, right?
The wasps are going to get it, everyone's going to get it, and blacks are going to get it, and Chinese are going to get it, if you just come over the border from Mexico.
And so, everyone's going to have to carry these ID cards, you're going to get the army, it's going to be stationed in the country, and do absolutely nothing for illegal immigration, because those people are going to come across anyway.
Because of course, the more people that are interested in coming across, the more That there's going to be these underground railroads to get them over, right?
And the more demand there is for this kind of service, the more people are going to come over.
And therefore, the more there's going to be people who help them come over.
There's going to be nothing but fake ID cards floating around.
There's going to be all of these ways to bypass the laws.
There's going to be all these experts who pop up on how to tie these things up in court indefinitely.
There's going to be All of these.
I mean, the people who come across are going to have an entire network of people who are going to help them.
I mean, that's for sure, right?
But that network is not going to spring up to help the average American who's going to have to start carrying an ID card.
And there's going to be all those problems.
I mean, it's not going to do a damn thing.
It's actually going to increase, right?
Because the more this underground railroad is set up to help immigrants over the border, the more they're going to come, right?
Whatever the government does is going to absolutely increase immigration.
I mean, other than to Well, actually, you know, anything, because, you know, America's still a pretty sweet place in a lot of ways, right?
So, I mean, compared to the other hellholes in the world.
So, whatever the government does is going to increase immigration.
It's going to increase the negative effects of immigration in some ways, but for sure, what you're going to get is, with that increased immigration, is you're going to get a better pipeline, right?
A wider, a bigger, a more helpful pipeline of getting people into the country.
So, whatever is going to happen is going to be horrible for the average American Joe who's going to end up with ID cards and the troops stationed domestically for the first time in US history.
And it's going to do nothing but increase immigration overall.
But the only thing I can say about that is that increased immigration is probably the only way that the American economy is going to survive for more than 10 or so years, in my particular opinion.
And we'll talk about that a little bit more this afternoon.
▲
Export Selection