Categories:
Labor Mobility, Immigration, Outsourcing
May 28 2020
Just over 5 weeks ago, co-blogger Bryan Caplan wrote: Why then are nominal pay cuts suddenly on the table? You could say, “Workers have suddenly become more logical,” but as far as I can tell, they’re crazier than ever. But psychologically speaking, there is one radical and unprecedented change in ...
May 28 2020
I was challenged with listing 5 books to improve one's understanding of the Russian Revolution and the Soviet experience. I hesitated at first because that is such a big subject with such varying views, and while I have my own very strong priors, I didn’t think it was right to just list books that would reveal thos...
May 28 2020
READER COMMENTS
Brett
May 28 2020 at 4:10pm
I sort of figured that if “Hong Kong but abroad” was going to happen anywhere, it was probably going to be either London or Vancouver.
Mark
May 28 2020 at 5:35pm
I totally agree. It strikes me that the US (at its best) supports freedom and pluralism at the individual level, while China (at its best) supports freedom and pluralism at the country level. I think there are merits to both of these world views, and the way to reconcile them is national sovereignty plus open immigration, so countries can decide what policies they want and people can decide what countries’ policies they want to live under. In fact, if the US government criticizes a foreign country for persecuting its own people, then that should be treated as a legally binding admission that all people from that country are being persecuted due to nationality and are therefore eligible for asylum in the US.
However, the section of the Vox article on place-based visas strikes me as fanciful, and even a bit paternalistic. I doubt many Hong Kongers would leave Hong Kong and come to America under the condition that they have to stay in Buffalo or Dayton for five years, where they will have no social network, no job, no good Asian food, and likely at least a little discrimination.
Scott Sumner
May 28 2020 at 7:17pm
I agree that they should be free to settle wherever they like.
Mark Z
May 29 2020 at 12:00am
Indeed, even by conventional arguments against immigration, Hong Kong is a small enough country (and a comparatively high skilled, and with a low-crime rate) that the whole 7 million could move here and live wherever they want without having the usually feared consequences for people already here (this requires a term, ‘Native Americans’ already being taken; domestic-born Americans? Domestics?).
Brian
May 29 2020 at 1:25pm
Now about native. Then the original natives become “First Nations people” which is the term used in Canada.
P Burgos
May 29 2020 at 1:32pm
Why limit it to Hong Kong? You cannot get to a billion people in the US with just Cubans and Hong Kong residents.
Scott Sumner
May 29 2020 at 7:56pm
I agree.
Stefano Cirolini - from Italy
May 30 2020 at 3:09am
How much of Hong Kong wealth and success depend on its location? That cannot be exported.
David Hanig
Jun 1 2020 at 11:00am
Obviously, some portion is, but human capital probably accounts for most of Hong Kong’s success. Some of the wealth and success of the United States also depend on its location, and entrepreneurial spirits from Hong Kong will be able to find opportunities, just as Cubans, Russians, Ethiopians, and Venezuelans have.
Comments are closed.