Bryan Caplan

The book was entertaining and informative. Before reading this novel I had no idea that there was an economic factor to immigration. The author writes to the layperson so you don't need to know much about economics in order to understand what he is saying. What Caplan says about the economics is that people who emigrate will get jobs and pay taxes. Their children will be well educated and contribute to society. He believes that this is a win win for everyone even if it costs you something up front when they first arrive.

Some of the author's arguments seemed preachy. In the middle of my read, I realized that he has footnotes at the back of the book for every argument that he makes. However, there is no notation on the page advising that these notes exist or where he obtained his facts. I ended up re-reading the book in order to get his, and my own, facts straight. His data comes from good sources and his arguments for open borders are compelling. Caplan mainly argues that low-skilled immigrants should be allowed unrestricted entry into the U. S.… (meer)

Overall I liked it- an economist makes the case for open borders, illustrated by SMBC's [a:Zach Weinersmith|4094380|Zach Weinersmith|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1494889920p2/4094380.jpg][a:Zach Weinersmith|4094380|Zach Weinersmith|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1494889920p2/4094380.jpg], and though addressed to a general audience, as an economist he makes the argument that allowing free movement of people is primarily a lucrative financial boon globally, that the host country gains needed labor while the workers who come here benefit from quality of life as well as sending money back home which raises quality of life there.

The suggestion of using keyhole solutions to address specific conservative grievances is literal gatekeeping, though, and already contributes to the astronomical amount of time waiting "in line" for an opening, whether it be for skilled workers or people who marry and must prove via documents/social media posts/friend testimony/etc. that their relationship is legitimate.

And of course, so much of discussion over immigration policy is based on old evergreen xenophobic arguments- the same "they won't assimilate because they're too Other/they bring disease and drugs/etc." arguments were applied to the Chinese 150 years ago and repeated for various other groups, so unfortunately addressing the actual "economic concerns" by citizenists may fall on deaf ears. Could be a persuasive argument for that elusive moderate, though.… (meer)