Jeune Street

As the immigration debate heats up in both the US and the UK, Matthew Yglesias advocates focusing on principles rather than minute policy details:

When the topic comes to immigration I’m much more interested in that more abstract level of conversation than in narrow debates about forging a legislative compromise. The bottom line, for me, is that this is an issue fraught with misunderstandings. People wildly underestimate the extent to which immigration is a positive-sum interaction that leaves almost everyone better off. It’s true that as is typical in life some individual people are harmed by high levels of immigration, but those people are a distinct minority. It makes dramatically more sense to try to improve the living standards of native-born Americans through higher taxes to finance more and better public services than it does to try to improve the living standards of native-born Americans through trying to prevent people from moving to the United States to do work in exchange for money.

The debate on immigration, it is often said, generates more heat than light. It is so wrapped up in xenophobia and fear that the core principles relating to human dignity are often forgotten. This debate is not going away, as least as long as our discourse on the subject is so immature. I can't agree more with Yglesias:

We’ll be talking about migration in 2020 and 2030 and 2040 and 2050 and beyond and it’s important to not just promote good bills, but sound, humane ways of thinking about the issue.