Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

thenation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 270 posts

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#171

Post by jacquesm »

brokenkebab wrote: post #49
mindthegap wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me: I grew up in Europe in times where the wall came down in Germany, a shared currency was established (Euro) and all European borders within Europe where suddenly passable without passport, visa checks, money exchange, someone judging you, etc.. Of course this caused other problems to solve, but the general feeling of freedom and being able to go some other country and even being able to live and work there was…

I think you're mixing up travel without a hassle which everybody likes to exist, with open borders which is a way more complex idea. EU is not an open-border place, I, for example, has to obtain visa to enter it.

It is you who are mixing up inner and outer. The EU is an open border place (or at least, the Schengen area is) for those who reside there. For some other countries' nationals to enter a visum is required. The EU was never about 'open borders' at the boundaries, in fact there are a lot of requirements on the boundary states and they get compensation for that.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#172

Post by asdfman123 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #151
snowwrestler wrote: post #35

I think the degree to which open borders are a reality within the U.S. is under-appreciated. As a reminder, U.S. states are sovereign entities with their own criminal laws, tax regimes, educational systems, property and contract rights, civil rights, economic growth, industries, natural resources, etc. In some cases their laws are pre-empted by U.S. federal law, but there remains quite a bit of diversity. Despite thi…

Oregon and Washington are an interesting case. Washington has the most regressive tax system in the US. Oregon is one of the least regressive (yeah, all states are regressive). You would think that wealthy folks would really want to move across the river to escape Oregon's income tax. The problem, though, is that there are just two bridges across the river and they are frequently very busy, and 99% of everything is o…

I think it comes down to the fact that people don't care as much about taxes as is commonly thought. They care about how much they like a city, or the general culture, or how close they are to mountains or the ocean.

Tax is belabored because it's so ideological, like when the Kansas governor claimed cutting taxes would bring a rush of new industries into Kansas (it didn't).

I know though when I chose to move from Texas to Hawaii to Washington State I never thought too much about taxes at any point.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#173

Post by asdfman123 »

coldtea wrote: post #149
HillaryBriss wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or compare Los Angeles to Beverly Hills. These two cities share a border. Median incomes are way, way higher in Beverly Hills. And LA's poor millions are free to crowd right into to Beverly Hills and just start grabbing up some of that wealth. But it barely happens at all. The two populations are not merging nearly as much as the shared border would predict.

> And LA's poor millions are free to crowd right into to Beverly Hills and just start grabbing up some of that wealth. Yeah, not really free. They can't pay rent in Beverly Hills, they can't afford to shop at Beverly Hills shops, they can't even be walking around looking poor without harassment (especially if also black/latino), they don't have access to closed communities, and so on...

Wow, it's almost like the people who live in fancy, rich neighborhoods enforce both laws and social norms to keep their neighborhoods fancy and rich.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#174

Post by jmastrangelo »

mason55 wrote: post #65
toinetoine wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so the economy grows through immigration instead of debt. Without debt how would the state pay the monthly income for the increasing number of people coming to collect it?

MMT would suggest that the government prints money and then adjusts taxes to control inflation. So you have a bunch of new people move, they start collecting UBI, the government prints money to fund the new liabilities, the newly-immigrated spend their UBI, incomes/revenues go up for businesses, the overall size of the pie grows, and if inflation starts to get out of control you raise taxes such that everyone is stil…

But what happens when you can't raise taxes any further? Or the high taxes shrink the motivation of the people running businesses to expand their businesses.

The money has to come from somewhere or you _will_ have runaway inflation.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#175

Post by diminoten »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #163
diminoten wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Against the wishes of their citizens? Since when? Also, how is any of that relevant to a country that has so much more space and resources for people? The US is geographically and economically gigantic compared to Singapore, proportionally we can take on orders of magnitude more people than Singapore, so why would we try to apply the same policy? At 35 people per km^2 vs 8,100 per km^2, how on Earth could you possibl…

> so why would we try to apply the same policy? To make the country as nice a place to live as possible. Here is a concrete example. Look at the outmigration of California -- if there had been way less immigration, more people (that aren't descended from recent immigrants) would get to enjoy living in California, but instead it's too expensive and polluted, houses are really packed in together. Imagine how much nicer…

California is not too expensive and polluted due to immigration, it's too expensive and polluted due to Americans. It's also neither polluted nor expensive, when you consider the entire state. Some of the most barren places in the US are in California, as are some very poor areas. It's a big state, which is my whole point, the US is huge.

But I get it, you want nice things and you don't want others to have them. Too bad.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#176

Post by monksy »

According to the state department:

" Svalbard: The Svalbard archipelago consists of nine main islands located midway between mainland Norway and the North Pole. You need a passport to enter Svalbard.

    Unlike Norway’s mainland, Svalbard is not party to the Schengen Agreement and air travelers to Svalbard from Norway will depart the Schengen Zone prior to boarding.
    Travelers to Svalbard face unique hazards given the extreme weather conditions and limited transport infrastructure.
"

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-tra...

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#177

Post by panzagl »

davvolun wrote: post #161
rayiner wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dramatically overestimate how much of an economic difference there is between MD and WV: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vwpy8_glsgc/Vi5llZ9ZILI/AAAAAAAAI... . Adjusting for purchasing power, the difference in median income is just 10%. It’s like the difference between Belgium and Australia. On the flip side, there is actually quite a difference between states like New York (second poorest in the US) and Virginia. And…

> And there is a very large internal migration from states like New York to states like Virginia I don't feel particularly qualified in this area, it's an interesting question though; but, this really needs a citation. I think you're making a very strong claim here, that there is a "very large" migration from New York to Virginia -- although I have a problem with the qualifier "states like" -- what does that mean? Bl…

The people in rural, red areas are usually concerned about urban, blue immigrants- they drive up prices, have an outsized effect in politics, then bitch about how things aren't as great as where they came from. I've seen this with New Yorkers in Virginia, Californians in Colorado, and Washingtonians in Montana.

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#178

Post by sm4rk0 »

drdrey wrote: post #158
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change was a significant factor in the Syrian civil war and ongoing migration in Central America. It will only become more significant.

Can you elaborate about the effect of climate change on the Syrian civil war? I am genuinely curious

https://theconversation.com/is-syria-really-a-climate-war-we...

Re: Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders

#179

Post by panzagl »

asdfman123 wrote: post #172
rootusrootus wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oregon and Washington are an interesting case. Washington has the most regressive tax system in the US. Oregon is one of the least regressive (yeah, all states are regressive). You would think that wealthy folks would really want to move across the river to escape Oregon's income tax. The problem, though, is that there are just two bridges across the river and they are frequently very busy, and 99% of everything is o…

I think it comes down to the fact that people don't care as much about taxes as is commonly thought. They care about how much they like a city, or the general culture, or how close they are to mountains or the ocean. Tax is belabored because it's so ideological, like when the Kansas governor claimed cutting taxes would bring a rush of new industries into Kansas (it didn't). I know though when I chose to move from Tex…

Retirees care.
Post reply on HN