Good Immigration Policy as a Replacement for Eugenics

[JasonBlack]

(06-16-2022, 12:55 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I don't think I agree with Jason's analogy. Admission to the country is not a personal preference. We don't have to associate with any of the people who come here.

I think some qualifications are good, if we can determine them. We don't want to admit people with criminal records or terrorists. Perhaps we want people who can hold a job, if they are of working age, and not victims of drugs or alcohol or mental illness. People who want to come here should be tested for covid or other diseases, and receive vaccinations (and no anti-vaxxers allowed). Beyond that, and perhaps not even then, I don't think we even know what someone is capable of. Certainly not by using genetics; to apply such a standard IS eugenics. People are more elastic and changeable than we can know.

We should remember too that refugees are not immigrants. This may be a temporary status of someone escaping from conditions that could cost them their lives where they came from. We should not impose conditions upon them that are little better than those from where they came from. People should be treated humanely by the USA, and not on the basis of race or ethnic group either.

I'm glad we at least agree on that. What I don't agree with is the premise that people are more or less equal, and that, in the long run, the most prosperous countries are going to be the ones who attract the most quality people to open up shop. Additionally, the question with refugees is still "are they a net benefit or a net hindrance?". This is a complicated, difficult to answer question in most instances, but imo, it's still the most fundamental one we need to answer. There is no reason why the basic principle of "people become happier when they associate with higher quality people" can't be expanded to the level of the nation state.