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

Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 393 posts

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#21

Post by slackdog »

Residents need jobs. Alaska is one of the most beautiful states in the country, but there are relatively few opportunities for work. If there were more jobs, more people would consider moving to Alaska.

We got a taste of this effect when remote working became common. A lot of people moved to other states and cities they wouldn't or couldn't live in before when they were expected to live near the office. But of course remote working isn't possible for many industries, particularly for blue collar labor, so if you want those people to move into your area, you need to have job opportunities to offer them.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#22

Post by boh »

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

It's really bizarre that state sovereignty is just considered a business practice. No it's not a "modern invention" to "enact" borders. Nor does labor organizing have anything to do with its enforcement. Corporate-centric culture doesn't do well in explaining the world. I'd suggest a less narrow viewpoint.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#23

Post by candiddevmike »

vorpalhex wrote: post #13
fnordpiglet wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a migratory species it is literally inhuman to erect a border. Borders should be jurisdictional boundaries but should be permeable like the states in the US. The rest of the tribalism BS is just that.

Humans stopped being migratory about 12,000 years ago. You probably don't want criminals to freely move into your country. You probably want a country that gets funded by taxes (both short term and long term). No country in the world maintains open borders. Everytime there has been mass unorganized migration it has been a humanitarian disaster. Platitudes only work on paper.

All of that already happens without open borders, it just costs us more money to maintain.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#24

Post by Eumenes »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #7
cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

For a migratory species it is literally inhuman to erect a border. Borders should be jurisdictional boundaries but should be permeable like the states in the US. The rest of the tribalism BS is just that.

TIL humans are birds

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#25

Post by 908B64B197 »

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

> The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which makes workers in Detroit compete with workers in Mexico (suppressing wages in both location)

And Canada, who's planning to give amnesty and permanent residency to half a million illegal migrants in the coming year. [0]

[0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/immigration-ministry...

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#26

Post by nhchris »

nerdponx wrote: post #19
nhchris wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. This is backwards, and I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite. Suppose a factory unionizes - without borders, the owner will find it easier to import non-union workers. While moving a factory is challenging regardless of…

> easier to find common interests and unite I think the idea is that there are common interests to be found, but borders artificially keep people apart, by segmenting up legal jurisdictions. For example, why Starbucks employees in Jersey City aren't all that different from Starbucks employees in New York City right across the river. > Whole Foods' heat map says lower rates of racial diversity increase unionization ri…

> borders artificially keep people apart

GPS data shows how wolf packs carve out territory - https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#27

Post by Forestessential »

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

You are wrong. Mexico-United States Border keeps Mexican labor and business from being more ferocious than American businesses in America. Borders have been protecting cultural states for a very long time in fact. 3200BC and before countries existed. It has and still does have alot to do with cultural tastes, and unlike how you expressed it, 'protecting the economy' from being formed against the wishes of the countries leaders. Borders come about for different reasons surely, but to reduce a border to an economic zone is just commie-aide.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#28

Post by mdgrech23 »

snowwrestler wrote: post #18
dougmwne wrote: post #2

This is pretty silly because governments do compete for residents. Having jobs is a major part of attracting new residents unless you are a (sub)tropical paradise. A business that doesn’t employ anyone or consume any inputs from other state businesses is not going to be a particularly interesting business to incentivize.

> Having jobs is a major part of attracting new residents unless you are a (sub)tropical paradise. The theory is that for a whole range of lucrative jobs, “everywhere with Internet” can offer residents those jobs through remote work. So a neighborhood doesn’t need to compete to attract a big office building. Personally I think that remains to be seen… we’re clearly still in the hangover from the pandemic. Society mig…

Also local individuals aren't providing campaign donations but sure can bet corporations are.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#29

Post by nerdponx »

nhchris wrote: post #26
nerdponx wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> easier to find common interests and unite I think the idea is that there are common interests to be found, but borders artificially keep people apart, by segmenting up legal jurisdictions. For example, why Starbucks employees in Jersey City aren't all that different from Starbucks employees in New York City right across the river. > Whole Foods' heat map says lower rates of racial diversity increase unionization ri…

> borders artificially keep people apart GPS data shows how wolf packs carve out territory - https://bigthink.com/hard-science/wolf-gps/

This is not what I believe, but my attempt at summarizing the point under discussion.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#30

Post by gameman144 »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #7
cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

For a migratory species it is literally inhuman to erect a border. Borders should be jurisdictional boundaries but should be permeable like the states in the US. The rest of the tribalism BS is just that.

I'm interested here, as I'm inclined to disagree pretty strongly.

How would you prevent the erosion of rights or culture by a group with a bigger population?

For instance, have a few hundred thousand Americans move to Cuba and vote to have Cuba secede to the US? Or a few hundred thousand mainland Chinese citizens move to Taiwan and do the same?

While it's definitely nice to keep migration smooth and easy, it seems like there are lots of issues wherein free and unlimited migration could cause relatively predictable problems.

Post reply on HN