Question for the open border folks China hypo

[Lord Coke]

This has nothing to do with the actual outbreak so please don't merge this thread.
Edit we are doing central america rather than china for simplicites sake
Let's say the outbreak in China gets much worse and 100 million Chinese flee China for the United States. How many Chiense are we obligated to take in? Let's assume that at this point there is a full fledged outbreak and millions are dead in China and we are able to safely screen every person who wants asylum to ensure they are not sick. but there is no way for them to go back to China and be safe. How many do we obligated to to take in? Let's say most of them come from a part of China that is mostly full of unskilled laborers and most will not have jobs they can do in the U.S. Do we need to take them in still if that is going to be a huge drain on our system and hurt it for native Americans? Remember the Chiense we send back have a high likelyhood of dying. Do we let them all in? Do we let in the young ones who are less likely to die in China but are more likely to work? Do we take in the disabled first who are most likely to not survive in their home land but can't contribute here? The elderly? This is just a hypothetical but one that will help flesh out the positions of everyone on the forum.

 

[loyalyolayal]

 

[trac209]

Ah how about fucking none ....in times of plague you don’t take anyone .

 

[7437]

Why would unskilled labor be unable to work?

 

[K-Bag]

Let every single one of them in.

 

[Lord Coke]

Why would unskilled labor be unable to work?

I doubt our economy can support 100 million new unskilled workers. I wasn't suggesting that they could not work at all just that there would be no jobs. Maybe I should tighten the OP to make that clear.

 

[Lord Coke]

Why would unskilled labor be unable to work?

I doubt our economy can support 100 million new unskilled workers. I wasn't suggesting that they could not work at all just that there would be no jobs. Maybe I should tighten the OP to make that clear.

 

[ocean size]

This has nothing to do with the actual outbreak so please don't merge this thread.

Let's say the outbreak in China gets much worse and 100 million Chinese flee China for the United States. How many Chiense are we obligated to take in? Let's assume that at this point there is a full fledged outbreak and millions are dead in China and we are able to safely screen every person who wants asylum to ensure they are not sick. but there is no way for them to go back to China and be safe. How many do we obligated to to take in? Let's say most of them come from a part of China that is mostly full of unskilled laborers and most will not have jobs they can do in the U.S. Do we need to take them in still if that is going to be a huge drain on our system and hurt it for native Americans? Remember the Chiense we send back have a high likelyhood of dying. Do we let them all in? Do we let in the young ones who are less likely to die in China but are more likely to work? Do we take in the disabled first who are most likely to not survive in their home land but can't contribute here? The elderly? This is just a hypothetical but one that will help flesh out the positions of everyone on the forum.

It's kind of a false dilemma, because there is no way to take plague refugees in insane numbers like that without risking bringing it here. So the reason we wouldn't is not to prevent an economic drain, it is to prevent defeating the purpose of allowing people to escape the virus.

If coronavirus was the reason for someone's asylum claim, sending them some sanitiser and face masks would be a good mitigation.

 

[RetiredSlave]

Screening 100M people would take years. Just the travel alone would take that long. Scenario is busted imo.

 

[7437]

I doubt our economy can support 100 million new unskilled workers. I wasn't suggesting that they could not work at all just that there would be no jobs. Maybe I should tighten the OP to make that clear.

Ah. Well in that case, screening 100 million people is impossible. It would take forever. Same with the logistics of shipping 100 million people here. And that's before the basic impossibility that none of those people were sick either. Those would be plague boats.

 

[Lord Coke]

It's kind of a false dilemma, because there is no way to take plague refugees in insane numbers like that without risking bringing it here. So the reason we wouldn't is not to prevent an economic drain, it is to prevent defeating the purpose of allowing people to escape the virus.

If coronavirus was the reason for someone's asylum claim, sending them some sanitiser and face masks would be a good mitigation.

If there is a mechanims to screen the person then why not? Let's assume that it can be done very simply sample of blood and a couple minutes later the person is screened. That is not the point of this hypo. I want to know how many should we take in. Do we send some of them back to their deaths or do we take them all?

 

[Lord Coke]

Ah. Well in that case, screening 100 million people is impossible. It would take forever. Same with the logistics of shipping 100 million people here. And that's before the basic impossibility that none of those people were sick either. Those would be plague boats.

This is a hypo were we assume we can to answer the question how many do we take in.

 

[7437]

This is a hypo were we assume we can to answer the question how many do we take in.

All of them? As long as we are assuming unlimited resources

 

[7437]

If there is a mechanims to screen the person then why not? Let's assume that it can be done very simply sample of blood and a couple minutes later the person is screened. That is not the point of this hypo. I want to know how many should we take in. Do we send some of them back to their deaths or do we take them all?

If you had 100 people working around the clock doing a 2 minute test, it would take almost 4 years to test 100 million people. And that's round the clock, with no time between tests

 

[ocean size]

If there is a mechanims to screen the person then why not? Let's assume that it can be done very simply sample of blood and a couple minutes later the person is screened. That is not the point of this hypo. I want to know how many should we take in. Do we send some of them back to their deaths or do we take them all?

I understand this is more of a thought experiment than anything but people aren't guaranteed to die because there's a bad flu going around.

 

[Lord Coke]

I understand this is more of a thought experiment than anything but people aren't guaranteed to die because there's a bad flu going around.

I did not say they are going to die. I just said there is a ongoing plague in there home country so there is a high likelihood that they will die if they go home. At least high enough that they are undisputedly refugees.

 

[Lord Coke]

If you had 100 people working around the clock doing a 2 minute test, it would take almost 4 years to test 100 million people. And that's round the clock, with no time between tests

The military could have 10000 in a matter of days anywhere in the world testing people. The US military got 130000 troops into Iraq in 03.

 

[7437]

The military could have 10000 in a matter of days anywhere in the world testing people. The US military got 130000 troops into Iraq in 03.

..... you ever been in the military? Medical isn't fast. Ever.

And then some of our people would get infected.

 

[Lord Coke]

..... you ever been in the military? Medical isn't fast. Ever.

And then some of our people would get infected.

Yes Marines.
Sure and for purposes of this exercise we are assuming that is some quick test that can be done to tell whether they are infected but that is really beside the point. Assuming all of these people are cleared we are addressing whether we let these people in. Dealing with every nuance of this hypothetical process really muddies the conversation and will force us off into tangents unnecessary to answer the question presented.

 

[TheGreatA]

Open borders and globalism will seem like a hell of an idea if there's a major, deadly virus outbreak.

 

[7437]

Yes Marines.
Sure and for purposes of this exercise we are assuming that is some quick test that can be done to tell whether they are infected but that is really beside the point. Assuming all of these people are cleared we are addressing whether we let these people in. Dealing with every nuance of this hypothetical process really muddies the conversation and will force us off into tangents unnecessary to answer the question presented.

Given how unrealistic the scenario is.... you wont get a useful hypothetical out of it. Add in that they all can get jobs and speak English while we are in fantasyland.