I’m pretty sure neoliberals also actually advocate for open borders and reduced immigration in general, and often accuse the left of being anti-immigration because of concerns regarding wages by unions.
Schengen zone, and to a lesser extent USA, show that capitalism can continue to function with a free movement of labor within relatively large and varied economic zones. This would continue to be the case worldwide, I believe. There remains significant barriers to movement even without borders: time, money, separation from family and cultural support systems, and more. There are people in the US and EU who want to “escape” their current state/country due to local laws but cannot do so despite it being perfectly legal to do so.
I have been trying to gain residency in another country for around 4 years now I’m still a few years away from being able to gain it.
To leave the US on a permanent basis I have to pay taxes to the US on my income that I earn while living elsewhere until I gain my residency, pay a several thousand dollar fee to renounce my US citizenship to gain citizenship where I’m living and because I’m over 40 and have been working in the US for 20 years, sacrifice almost 100k worth of social security insurance payments I made and will never be able to collect. Social Security is not an entitlement, it is an insurance program I will be denied my rightful remittance from.
If you don’t think this is a barrier to labor moving to where opportunity is, then you are the one who is saying things that just aren’t true.
I’m pretty sure neoliberals also actually advocate for open borders and reduced immigration in general, and often accuse the left of being anti-immigration because of concerns regarding wages by unions.
neoliberals advocate for open borders only for capital. Capitalism itself would collapse overnight if there was free movement of labour
Just not true
Schengen zone, and to a lesser extent USA, show that capitalism can continue to function with a free movement of labor within relatively large and varied economic zones. This would continue to be the case worldwide, I believe. There remains significant barriers to movement even without borders: time, money, separation from family and cultural support systems, and more. There are people in the US and EU who want to “escape” their current state/country due to local laws but cannot do so despite it being perfectly legal to do so.
I have been trying to gain residency in another country for around 4 years now I’m still a few years away from being able to gain it.
To leave the US on a permanent basis I have to pay taxes to the US on my income that I earn while living elsewhere until I gain my residency, pay a several thousand dollar fee to renounce my US citizenship to gain citizenship where I’m living and because I’m over 40 and have been working in the US for 20 years, sacrifice almost 100k worth of social security insurance payments I made and will never be able to collect. Social Security is not an entitlement, it is an insurance program I will be denied my rightful remittance from.
If you don’t think this is a barrier to labor moving to where opportunity is, then you are the one who is saying things that just aren’t true.
That sucks, but it’s not responsive to my argument.
It is true. I’m talking about all borders mate.
Why is capitalism perfectly functional within regions of open borders but would not function within a larger region of open/no borders?
Do you have a response to the concept of practical borders applying whether or not there are legal borders?