A World Without Borders

Immigration has recently embarked on the forefront of political discussion in several developed countries in several amazing ways. However, in the increasing tendency of populist, the article published in the previous issue "Diplomatic Issues" provided a simple and powerful case for opening borders. Despite being self-conservative, Nathan Smith is firmly committed to the free flow of people with immigration policies as their profession.

Smith: Freedom increases by stopping immigration control, poverty in the world decreases, and economic growth accelerates

The key to Smith's claim is that "freedom increases by stopping immigration control, poverty in the world decreases, and economic growth accelerates." If the border is open, about 640 million people will enter, the value of the land will rise, the price of labor-intensive goods and services will go down and the stock price will rise. Smith quoted an economic survey to estimate the benefits of an open border as much as twice the world's GDP and the economic prosperity of the 19th century where most of the world's borders could pass freely without a passport It is a precedent for.

However, Mr. Smith warned that the benefits of free movement might not be obvious at first. For example, short-term poverty in developed countries may increase. In the long run, extreme poverty on a global scale will definitely decrease significantly, but its malicious sight in developed countries may cause opposition from the public. Another criticism is that large immigrants may put pressure on Western social security agencies. Smith criticizes these two points and points out that the sharp decline in the world's poverty population will exceed the discomfort experienced by the West. He also pointed out that the open border will bring other benefits, including the implementation of immigration law enforcement that is often mandated "to segregate families and endanger the lives of people."

In the short term, Smith's world without borders seems to be a rebellious brain act rather than an apparent plausible policy choice. For example, "Washington Post" talked about "a new era of walls". They recently calculated barriers to the 63 border that separates the four continents - more than ever

Smith's progress in the 19th century was defeated by nationalistic feelings and two world wars. However, this is not a pre-determined result. A well-structured discussion like him may help pave the way for a more equitable immigration policy. As an economist Alex Star Barak pointed out in the "Atlantic" morally, "a closed border is one of the greatest moral errors in the world".

The concept of BitNation is global, but it has a local impact on someone who participates in their career. Their projects are focused on those who believe that there must be a world without borders. Through this program, citizens can freely navigate the economic structure and choose an economy that fits their needs. The lifetime of BitNation as a block chain project has exceeded most of the time. They handled block chain birth certificates, land ownership records, and notary services. They are developing block chains passports and testing and developing the land ownership of Ghana strictly by block chains

To some extent, the United Nations is one step toward this direction. Anyway, at least we are talking about it. However, despite regulations by foreign borders, the Schengen area (26 European countries that have abolished border control) shows an example of a world without borders. This is a place where 400 million people live without war threats and trade growth. What do you like?

Why are not you advocating 'borderless'? From an ethical point of view, children should not be born on one side but on the other side of the border. Also, our moral principles are opposite to what they could not help to punish individuals. Punishment means responsibility and responsibility for your actions and choices; it is obvious that the children choosing through parents will ultimately stand on one side, not the other, and these choices will not be punished . People who strongly defend autonomy may oppose the compensation that some children receive due to parents' mistakes. "Practice" is to expel all unimported immigrants - parents and children.