Yet even if one agrees that a country has a right to restrict immigration, it does not follow that it ought to do so. Mr Legrain argues that it is not just in the global interest to have free migration, but also in that of recipient countries. A standard “gains from trade” analysis would suggest that this should be true. But if one is to argue for free movement of labour on economic grounds one needs a sense of the likely consequences. Analyses of free migration in the presence of huge real wage differentials suggest that we would end up with vast informal sectors and shanty towns. That is what happens within poor countries. Why should it not happen across the globe? I cannot see how one would persuade a host population that this outcome would be in their interests.
Notary search - 4 views
Sudan and the International Criminal Court: a guide to the controversy | open Democracy... - 0 views
1More
Kindle: Web Browsing Experience Is Horrible - 0 views
The value of information | openDemocracy - 0 views
2More
Blogs help drive Jena protest -- chicagotribune.com - 0 views
2More
The FASTForward Blog » So Blind I could not see - A Possible "New Newspaper M... - 0 views
‹ Previous
21 - 40 of 47
Next ›
Showing 20▼ items per page