Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Frost's avatar

Bryan Caplan and Richard Hanania like to see themselves as "scientists" in opposition to the irrational yahoos on the other side. A true scientist, however, first tests a new proposal on a small sample of consenting participants. The requirement of "consent" is critical. If there is no consent, the experiment cannot go ahead.

If the results are promising, a true scientist will then try to replicate the results with a larger sample. If the results are still good, the proposal is tentatively accepted — although it is still subject to review and criticism. In fact, criticism is always encouraged.

This approach has little in common with what people like Bryan Caplan and Richard Hanania are advocating. Where is the consent? Where is the preliminary testing on a small scale? And where is the freedom to criticize?

Expand full comment
Compsci's avatar

“Calling the children “natives” doesn’t change the fact that they are an expense that only arose because their parents were allowed into the country in the first place”

Bingo. A couple of decades or so ago, I saw the CA stat’s for immigrants wrt to their current wages as low level manual laborers and the estimated expense of just two of their children attending public school in CA, K-12. Two children attending public school for 12 years was projected at that time to cost $300k and that was not including inflation projections. The typical (low) household income was well below any conceivable tax rate able to recoup such a taxpayer footed expense across even a lifetime of menial wage household income.

The knock on (beneficial) effects of such immigration is little more than wishful thinking. As “Realist” has succinctly noted, cost in $$$ pales to cost in IQ dilution of the nation. Those costs will live on forever and be subtly hidden.

Expand full comment
25 more comments...

No posts