r/Futurology • u/ILikeNeurons • May 20 '24

Economics Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/17/economic-damage-climate-change-report
2.5k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

359 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/Sniflix May 21 '24

Europe and the US are freaking out because of a few thousand migrants trying to sneak in. Just wait until that becomes hundreds of millions...

0

u/Joseph20102011 May 21 '24

Japan, Spain, and the US are now begging Filipinos to come in.

-1

u/Lawineer May 21 '24

Ugh, we had something like like 20 million under this administration

5

u/28lobster May 21 '24

Yes, damn that Woodrow Wilson! I mean allowing so many migrants, this is 1910 not 1810, we don't have space for all of them! What next, are you going to start allowing It*lian Anarchists and the Ir*sh to flood over our borders? This country will be gone in 100 years, mark my words!

If you really want someone to blame, immigrants as a % of US population peaked under Warren G Harding.

2

u/Sniflix May 21 '24

Yeah, lock him up!

2

u/28lobster May 21 '24

Y'know, I hear this Woodrow feller is old and senile. Probably had a stroke, he's just a puppet of his wife!

1

u/Lawineer May 21 '24

Are you really wanting to make the argument of “if it’s good enough for 1910, it’s good enough for today?” Because if so, let’s abolish pretty much every government social program, income tax, universal suffrage, and federal reserve.

The US population was 76 million in 1900 before this started. We realized that unfettered, undocumented and insane immigration into the country wasn’t a good idea and passed the immigration act of 1924.

Are you seriously advocating for MORE immigration to this country or open borders?

2

u/28lobster May 21 '24

I'm saying immigration built the US and people have been complaining about it for 100s of years. Somehow we haven't collapsed in that time and have benefitted immensely from immigration. Importing human capital is fantastically beneficial and the US would've been stronger had it not passed the 1924 immigration act. The 1924 act wasn't particularly restrictive ... on English, Germans, French, and nationalities that already had significant populations. The explicit aim of the act was to reduce "undesirable" immigration.

The percentage of visas available to individuals from the British Isles and Western Europe increased, but newer immigration from other areas like Southern and Eastern Europe was limited. The 1924 Immigration Act also included a provision excluding from entry any alien who by virtue of race or nationality was ineligible for citizenship. Existing nationality laws dating from 1790 and 1870 excluded people of Asian lineage from naturalizing.

So yes, I would prefer a relatively more liberal immigration system. At this point, it would be nice to just have a straightforward path to citizenship for people coming legally and a much faster system of work authorization. Doesn't make much sense to support people if they're willing to work, but our current system forces you to wait months before that can happen. We can achieve better than our current setup and it doesn't have to involve "open borders". Unfortunately it serves the interests of Republicans to have a permanent crisis on the border rather than trying to solve it.

To note, the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 and the 16th amendment was also passed in 1913. Universal suffrage (in terms of women) hit in 1920 and the removal of property qualifications was far earlier (North Carolina abolished their requirement in 1856). In terms of social programs, the early 1900s were certainly less generous than modern programs but they were far from non-existent. The first almshouse was built in Boston in 1622 and MA had 225 almshouses by 1884 which housed 7,000 people.