What is it about open borders that upsets people so much...

>Just sell your soul and your nation! Think of the profits!
I just dont understand how people can support capitalism in 2020.

They're used to everyone being retarded debt slaves so why wouldn't they think this wouldn't work?

This is the line to use. I always ask people what they think would happen to America if it were completely identical with Mexico located where the Southwest is now.

There are some things so retarded it takes earning a Ph.D to believe in them.

Industry economists are the ones who failed the job market and can't get actual research jobs lmao. That doesn't mean you should take macro theory papers seriously, ever.

Well Yas Forums, looks like you've been BTFOd

Attached: cover3.jpg (608x790, 280.02K)

Is this satire?

Maybe if wages increased and employment rate wasn’t already so low to begin with, but over population scares me

>Developed nation opens borders
>billions of third worlders flood in

Gee I dunno.

This comic is fucking insane, retarded, and evil

economics isn't a real science .....

it depends on feeling emotion politics people in groups you can't make a hypothesis and test it in the real world

with physics you can do all this and more

just because there is some math and stats doesn't make it any better than sociology anthropology gender studies or any other pseudo science

the scientific method is not a joke my mutt friend

No, just propaganda

No, this is exactly the consensus within economics. You can go read the economic literature yourself

>give up your cultures and people for more capital

>summarizing the consensus within economics is propaganda

>Weinersmith's great-grandfather emigrated to the United States in 1925, and much of his extended family was killed in the Holocaust.[10] Weinersmith was raised Jewish but describes his personal philosophy as "pragmatic" and "probably" agnostic.[8]

Attached: 1493168128537.jpg (640x640, 47.47K)

Worse, it's just your brain on macro. The only figures cited here are value of aggregate productivity, with no discussion of what the means in terms of distribution, real wages, etc. Aggregate value does not inherently tell you anything about poverty levels, and to pretend otherwise is lunacy. The person making the comic is just some internet drawfag and doesn't know/care about any of that, of course, and like most brainlets they take a limited theory conclusion and apply it to push a worldview.

Attached: Screenshot_20200304-210554_Firefox.jpg (698x836, 329.7K)

I know you're being disingenuous, but I was referring to the comic.

He's just the illustrator so why is this even relevant?

no dick tip
supports male genital mutilation en masse
supports israel

>not a kike
makes sense to Americans

Attached: 1572488569772.png (548x626, 27.19K)

You cant dispute all 8 chapters of this

Attached: Screenshot_20200304-210649_Firefox.jpg (719x798, 231.3K)

Every country that took in 3rd world workers has gotten poorer.
Oh yeah by richer they meant the top 1% will become one earth richer lmao now you can get yachts for your yacht.

Here's a cartoon for you ya fucknuckle
BTW we're people, not interchangeable economic units of production.

Attached: 1576640632251.png (940x300, 153.03K)

Attached: Screenshot_20200304-210759_Firefox.jpg (540x2711, 998.04K)

>hi im a filthy traitor and someone pls shoot me in the fucking skull
i'd love to do this for you, faggot OP

Attached: Screenshot_20200304-210907_Firefox.jpg (664x795, 351.03K)

>Academic economists overwhelmingly support more open borders
>why does the public remain opposed to it?
Dictatorships are more in tune with public opinion than democracies are.
bitchute.com/video/jeroq1tZ2v6W/

it's not a real science ....
he is making a judgment call that open borders and increased efficiancy is good

every country that would lose it's highly trained scientists and doctors obviously loses but modern economists are not interested in national borders and in most cases are in a high income country that would suck dry the well trained from other countries

NOT A SCIENCE

Exactly, foreigners are people with human rights. As human beings, they have a prima facie right to not be harassed by the government as they pursue a better life. Opponents of open borders fail to provide an overriding reason to restrict these prima facie rights

Attached: Screenshot_20200304-210951_Firefox.jpg (719x813, 402.1K)

>if the continental US were as packed as a low-density city like Los Angeles, everyone on earth would fit

Someone else post the rest gtg

theres atleast 4 different schools of economics. you have to be very specific.

So it is satire.

You're assigning normativity to the positive statement that removing factor frictions between countries improves productivity. Failed econ 101 and have a grudge?

>Weinersmith

Attached: 6HnX7ABwaqF3XQM.png (1000x1070, 395.93K)

>Weinersmith

Every fucking time.

Attached: The Noticer (2).jpg (742x1280, 87.79K)

>why is it relevant that he went out of his way to draw a cartoon book for children and idiots to tell them to vote blue
do you think they would have stumbled on this guy's pro-immigration argument otherwise

what a beautiful future

This only works in a world where all people are good and not fleeing away from a crime/murder or running to murder, rape, or steal

((((((((((((((Academic Economists)))))))))))
Ah yes, hordes of poor and retarded spics would be amazing for the economy!

I think that it would lead to competition between governments in a more meaningful way.

The American experiment has shown how people will leave cities with bad policies for other better ones et al.

It fails to punish the runners quickly enough though because declines are generational.

If I want to hurt others on the national scale, I would state as such. Sadly, I am not interested in that sort of sadism.

Attached: fhu111bdj -- 2657 -- dmy111qwb'.jpg (730x600, 69.61K)

>The boot is on our throats, but we have ice cream and they don't so no backtalk

>technology doesnt cause poverty
So those automated cashiers arent putting lots of low IQ people into poverty right?

can you tell me the amount of years it would take for every foreigner who would benefit from moving to a developed country to move if they had america levels of immigration? can you tell me how we would support that many people and update our infrastructure for them?

>money is more important than the soul of the people
I bet the author is a Jew

>Academic economists overwhelmingly support more open borders so why does the public remain opposed to it?
There is more to managing a society than how much money can be squeezed out of the people

Attached: original.jpg (800x924, 82.61K)

And we can move to the african shitholes that are now empty?

Wait a minute....
>everyone on earth moves to USA
>USA is now the only country on earth
>NUMBA WAN NUMBA WAN
based

Attached: 1493156772342.jpg (245x284, 22.83K)

So their argument is that with open borders so much money will need to be printed it's essentially worthless? I swear lefties are stupider than the stupidest nigger or woman

This book is such fucking bullshit I went through the freely available sections and immediately pointed out 2 hours worth of things to a group of diehard fucking communists who suggested it, who realised it's literally trickle down economics repackaged for exactly the kind of bleeding heart dumbasses they are.

In volume yes all humans can fit in the city of Paris literally all humans on earth can fit in Paris, as for infrastructure well yh just yikes.

This comic didn't mention money at all, try reading more carefully instead of projecting your preconceived ideas onto it

>>they have a prima facie right to not be harassed by the government
That government represents the people which it serves, and not anyone else. Those people entering illegally have no rights.

How did you become so stupid?

Attached: pdq111cac -- 1904 -- gwd111tlc'.jpg (2717x1826, 742.59K)

thats probably what would happen, poor people leave and flood rich countries, the well off people dont want to deal with that shit and sell their property at its original value and buy shitloads of dirt cheap undeveloped land to build their new towns on

Attached: bullshit.png (584x673, 612.19K)

Government is, as Murray Rothbard calls it, a gang writ large. It doesn't "represent" you or the "people". It only exists to enslave and exploit you.

Because there is more to existence than "muh economy"
Open borders is the elites way of keeping a broken system limping along because immigrants lack debt which enables these Jews to give them loans with high interest rates that they don't understand so they can buy shit they don't need. This gives the illusion that GDP is increasing but it isn't. Eventually this new de facto slave caste will become debt saturated and everything will collapse. Elites don't care so long as they get their lives of hedonism.

Furthermore people who promote open borders never think beyond the initial idealistic faggotry because they only care about money or looking virtuous to other faggots. They never carry their idea to its ultimate conclusion. Anyone advocating open borders is advocating ethnic and cultural genocide on a scale beyond reckoning. We have borders to determine whose laws apply where because not all cultures share the same values or morals. In order for open borders to work you would need to subjugate every other culture on the planet, destroy and remake them into something more compliant. Not all peoples will like this and will refuse to compromise with opposing cultures which will result in war death and misery.

Open borders globalists are the greatest threat to humanities ascension to greatness by destroying global diversity.

Attached: 1341239007038.jpg (637x469, 48.66K)

Attached: 1514747491179.png (488x463, 27.41K)

Yes it is, the real mechanisms behind it are all just kept from plain view. You cant just tell people you're manipulating them based on established psychological techniques in order to affect your desired outcome. What's more you cant tell them that if you want to truly succeed you have to be willing to break any law or practice that would result in you losing capital. It's definitely a science, just a shitty one.

What are you suggesting? That public at large wouldn't benefit if the world's GDP doubles or triples?

These people are absolutely disgusting and deserve death. I would we rather face a nuclear holocaust or airborne Ebola or mass migration to space than to experience the reduction of the human race to the status of 25 billion internally screaming corporate drones in a global historyless suburb. No wilderness, no free range, no escape - pure spiritual death, on a level previously thought impossible. Perhaps we really will live to see horrors beyond our comprehension that Tesla warned us about...

Attached: [Screams internally].jpg (2048x1536, 334.62K)

ye

Because get out of my country faggot

Those rights don't exist retard.
When you found a country it has a constitution and laws. Some work better than others, but they are tangible.
Now niggle me this:
Most of the 3rd world did not have industrial civilization 100 years ago. They lived in tribes. 99% of their existence was tribal hunter gathering. They adopted European-American machines and economies but those places never had wealth to begin with. They live in filth and danger as a result.
Why should they continue? Why invest capital in something that doesn't give returns?

The "public at large" is not a homogenous entity, and even if global GDP increases that says nothing about distribution of wealth. It also says nothing about a dramatic number of other wealth (infrastructure, security, etc) and non-wealth factors (all the sperging in this thread), it's only a static theoretical outcome. The comic's baby brain conclusion is all too unfortunately common.

GDP != increased wages and QoL

you wouldnt see a penny of the profit the capitalists will make by destroying your wages and raising your rent with open borders

It's fucking full of this shit. Even if you ignore the globalist kikestorm implications of cultural genocide their conclusions for depopulating the world to fill the west with an endless dystopian metropolis is;
>Well, whoever's left behind will get remittances!
>The hand of the free market will make sure they get paid!
>They'll need housing and services and food and stuff, that'll happen, just look at uh.....don't look at the Calais migrant town of huts and shacks.

>literally not an argument

Murray Rothbard is literally who, and you are literally appealing to academia because you're an NPC without a thought of your own.

The government is a gang, and is OUR gang yes. That 'gang' exists because I fund it and tolerate it as a necessary evil.

You don't like it, but your opinion doesn't matter. Foreigners are not a benefit to the country, except for the very skilled and intelligent.

What you've willfully misunderstood is that it is YOU being exploited by pop culture to promote your competing with someone so that you're both paid less.

Attached: fta111nfb -- 2351 -- uys111fuf'.jpg (1196x883, 414.8K)

Open borders for thee but not for me

The government represents the rights of the citizens who live in said nation, not border hoppers you fucking idiot. No illegal immigrant can use the Bill of Rights as a defense because they are not a citizen.
They may have basic human rights to not be murdered outright by the Geneva Convention but beyond that they have no rights to anything in a country that is not their own.

Of course the public isn't homogenous, but generally the goal of economic policy should be maximizing total welfare, not worried about step on the toes of a particular interest group. If you're so worried about the particular distribution of additional income, why not redistribute the gains from the "winners" to the "losers" instead of preventing the policy altogether?

>It also says nothing about a dramatic number of other wealth (infrastructure, security, etc) and non-wealth factors (all the sperging in this thread)

Any potential negative externalities are overwhelming by a 150% increase in GDP. Can you think of any other situation where people would reject a policy that would increase GDP 150% just because they're worried about potentially bad side effects (that probably could be addressed with keyhole solutions)?