Svalbard is as close as you can get to a place with open borders • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 3:19 PM UTC

brokenkebab wrote: post #207

jacquesm wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The EU was never about 'open borders' at the boundaries That's exactly what I wrote. Open borders as an idea is about global free movement. Schengen on the other hand is just a bigger kind of fenced area, international agreement simplifying travel and trade for citizens of participating countries. When @cojxd asked "For whom is open borders a dream?" I'm pretty sure it was meant as an idea/ideology. Because, if someo…

> Because, if someone agrees to lift this border, but not that - there's simply nothing to discuss.

You're pretty wrong about that. Borders are a nuisance, and lifting all of them is a good long term goal to have. But in the intermediary we can only move so fast. Saying that you don't want to discuss lifting individual borders as long as we are not lifting all borders is like saying you don't want to make a first step as long as we're not agreeing to walk all the way to the destination. That's not how societal change is achieved, it is achieved one step at the time, usually without lofty long term goals and every border that falls is one more step along the way towards open borders and should be applauded.

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

#262

Post by HillaryBriss » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #209

olalonde wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you're both supporting the parent's point: fears about open international borders are overblown because things like cost of living, culture or private property naturally limit massive migration.

Cost of living prevents a poor guy from some lesser LA area to rent in Beverly Hills. While the same "but how I would afford the same lifestyle in US" might be a concern for middle class immigrants from poorer countries considering getting there, it's not really relevant to mass immigration from poverty stricken areas, as people from there can (and do) enter the US and live in dirt poor areas, working whatever minimu…

> ... mass immigration from poverty stricken areas, as people from there can (and do) enter the US and live in dirt poor areas

it's also true that many people from poverty stricken areas in other countries live in moderate to expensive areas in LA County, like LA's West Side, Downtown, and Koreatown, as well as neighboring cities including Santa Monica, Burbank, West Hollywood, Torrance, etc. again, to do this, multiple inviduals or families simply pool resources and rent an apartment or house and share that space.

given that about 9% of Beverly Hills's population falls below the poverty line, it's a safe bet that this high density renting strategy is also employed within that city.

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

#263

Post by HillaryBriss » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

olalonde wrote: post #200

coldtea wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

I feel like you're both supporting the parent's point: fears about open international borders are overblown because things like cost of living, culture or private property naturally limit massive migration.

i think you're right. and i don't even need to look at the open border situation in West Virginia. i mean, i can look much closer to where i live (LA).

just from examining the nearby BH/LA border, we see that there may be other "invisible borders" (e.g. "Our prices discriminate so we don't have to") that prevent two populations from really fully merging.

it seems likely that any "open border" is actually accompanied by a unique set of additional, invisible borders, and cultural, financial and linguistic "force fields," sometimes powerful, sometimes weak.

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

#264

Post by leereeves » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:56 AM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #248

leereeves wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries (including Switzerland) have some form of investor's visa which is basically an official way to pay for a visa.

Which is a very different thing and will set you back ~1m, not a few hundred.

Visas are still for sale, they're just more expensive (like so many things) in the US and Europe.

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

#265

Post by tathougies » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:00 AM UTC

deanCommie wrote: post #251

tathougies wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only to outsiders because individual states do not make treaties with foreign countries. However states do sometimes send their own commercial ambassadors and meet with world leaders. States also retain full sovereignty of their territory except for limited cases and maintain their own armies navies and air forces

> States ... maintain their own armies navies and air forces Say what?

The National Guard are the individual armies of each state. Typically, they aide the army and obey national orders. However their commander in chief is the governor of their state not the president.

As an example, California has pretty strict border controls on its state bordera. Bringing certain agricultural goods into california is illegal and they will fine or jail you depending on the severity.

It is entirely possible and legal, but unlikely, that the governor of California sends it national guard troops to the border if Oregonians for example were attempting to storm the border with ferrets or something.

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

#266

Post by tathougies » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 4:19 AM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #235

tathougies wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is washingtonians working in oregon would pay oregon tax. Tax applies if you work in the state not if you live there. Living in portland and working in Washington is the best bet if you can pull it off

Unless something has changed very recently, you pay Oregon income tax if you live here or work here. To avoid it altogether you would have to both live and work in Vancouver. (until 5 years ago I lived in Portland and worked in Vancouver)

Seems like im wrong. However this puts oregon in a minority of states i believe. Most states do not tax residents on income earned in another state though they certainly could

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

#267

Post by ArnoVW » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #150

ArnoVW wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schengen is about being able to check at your borders. Indeed the UK can still do that, despite being in Europe. However, the UK still has to allow free movement of people. Meaning that it can not stop Europeans from living in the UK. This does not cover working though, and I believe that some European nationalities still have to apply for a work permit. See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/147/free-…

You get it backwards, free movement of people is for workers, you don't have the right to stay if you aren't working (or alternatively studying, or living with someone who works) — though this isn't heavily enforced

You're right. I just looked it up to be sure. When I lived in the UK in 2007, Bulgaria and Romania entered the EU. There was some fuss about that, and initially those nationalities did not automatically obtain a work permit.

These were granted the same rights in 2014.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25237742

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

#268

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 10, 2019, 6:11 PM UTC

testaccount13 wrote: post #249

rayiner wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York has the second lowest purchasing-power adjusted median income. On the Census Bureau’s supplemental poverty measure (which accounts for cost of living), New York is the third poorest, with 17.9% of people living in poverty (versus 14.8% for West Virginia): https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio... .

CA does very poorly by that measure. Both of these states have large rural populations (which bring down the median income), as well as large urban centers (which bring up the cost of living).

[deleted]

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

#269

Post by finnjohnsen2 » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 12:29 AM UTC

cojxd wrote: post #33

finnjohnsen2 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a dream. There is something about our luck of being born in a good and wealthy place; then close it off, hence punishing people because they happen to be born in shitty place.

The fact that our countries are good and wealthy is not a matter of luck though.

On an individual level it is.

I did nothing but be born and follow the path expected off me -- handed reliable and cheap electricity, water, free schooling, internet connection; and lastly great jobs giving my primadonna arse more $$$ than I need. Idk dude, I wouldn't mind taking credit but I'm not being honest.

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

#270

Post by HillaryBriss » Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 5:44 AM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #216

HillaryBriss wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they can't even be walking around looking poor without harassment (especially if also black/latino) I don't quite know where you're getting that. I mean, it's not like the city has enacted some kind of Jim Crow regime. Beverly Hills residents were among Barack Obama's most generous donors. You think they would stand for that kind of evil in their own city? Beverly Hills is represented by Democrats at the state and…

> I don't quite know where you're getting that. I mean, it's not like the city has enacted some kind of Jim Crow regime. Such places have done exactly that, in several ways. E.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining This a good source of tens of other methods (and it's not even up to day) used in L.A in general to keep the "riffraff" out: https://www.amazon.com/City-Quartz-Excavating-Future-Angeles... > Beverly H…

> Such places have done exactly that, in several ways. E.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

You're not presenting evidence specific to Beverly Hills here. Saying that "such places have done exactly that" is not evidence of what's happening today specifically in Beverly Hills. And redlining is not a scheme for harassing people who are walking around on the street. Why is that your response in this context?

> They can virtue signal how non-racist they are (as long as it doesn't cost them anything real -- donations help buy favors) and still only live in 99% white areas

You're assuming the very point you should be proving. You haven't offered any evidence about why some BH residents supported Obama. Instead, you assigned them a motive without providing any objective evidence. How are you going to persuade anyone of your viewpoints that way? And Beverly Hills is not 99% white.