## Equally valuable on both sides of the border?

May 27, 2011

We should avoid committing ourselves to mathematical propositions that are not true and whose consequences we actually disagree with or that are false.

At A3P they quoted a statement that people are equally valuable on both sides of the border. (They have clarified this is not their position) Is this really true? Is a person equally as valuable with themselves if they work better? Or they become more valuable? All persons are equally valuable independent of their actions, genes, behavior, etc. is a proposition that is false and dangerous. Throwing around such false slogans in an immigration context is damaging.

http://american3p.org/american-voice/18-facts-that-prove-illegal-immigration-is-a-nightmare-for-the-u-s-economy/

(Following was quoted by A3P but was subsequently removed as not representing their view.)

At different times this country will need different levels of immigration, but we will always need new immigrants. People on one side of a border are not more “valuable” than people on another side of a border.

This proposition is false and dangerous. Moreover, it is the opposite to what is desired in an immigration restriction party.

One of the dangerous consequences of this idea is that different people fit equally well in either country. They are equally valuable to something. To what? To each country in its society and economy and polity? This is clearly false.

This is the people are equally exchangeable fallacy. It is false. It leads to switching people who should not be switched. Switching people has consequences and switching them on sides of the border if it increases diversity is harmful and destructive of social bonds and of the equilibrium of the societies. It produces two misfits. Done in a one way destruction it makes the original people of the target country misfits in their own country on a systematic basis.

Asserting mathematical or logical equalities that are false has consequences. Math has implications. To invent a mathematical concept of equally valuable and assert it is true of all people has consequences. These are harmful.

The person who wrote it at A3P indicated they were a lawyer who had prepared immigration papers and they complained it was too much work. This is a view consistent with the people are equally valuable on each side of the border view. But it is clearly false. Immigration restriction is all about people not being equally valuable and that a mass influx of foreign people is harmful.

The immigration papers are about selection which is the concept that people are not equally valuable outside the US to those inside. To say they are is to be for more open borders than even the US government is now. That is the opposite of A3P. This comes from throwing around immigration lawyer boilerplate as if it was true.