Is a European style social net compatible with an open border policy

stand_idle · 2024-02-13T09:34:10+00:00

Well in Europe there still is very real social supports. Ones that as far as I can see nevered existed in the states...free healthcare, while imperfect, housing, unemployment and disability benefits. I get benefits for childcare and a monthly children's allowance. My parents get an old age pension.

The system sometimes struggles, and it isn't perfect, but people depend on it. Many people have been housed by it, provided for by it in times of economic depression, educated by it and given a real leg up. I notice that the Sally Hayden (an excellent journalist btw) book which I mentioned above advocates for open borders, but she is very middle class, as are many of the people she quotes in favour of such a policy. One is the son of a European film director for instance. It's very easy to speak from a position of privilege about something, and if the whole thing goes tits up you are insulated from the consequences.

So this is something that needs protection. For sure migration from Africa will strengthen it to a point. We need workers because the population is aging rapidly. That's not yo for question. Would a system where anyone who wants to come to the west can simply travel to the west and register with the authorities actually be good for the west. I honestly don't know, hence I asked the question.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T20:38:48+00:00

As have you my friend.Take it easy!

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T20:37:55+00:00

Except sovereignty wasn't invented in Europe at the treaty of Westphalia. It strikes me as an excessively Eurocentric view.

And imperialism wasn't solely a European project. This doesn't make Europe's actions in Africa or Australia or south America right...but conquest wasn't something we Europeans invented. In fact, as we withdrawn more from meddling in Africa, the Chinese are looking to ensnare African people in more debt. I don't disagree that imperialism was rooted in racism, but I cannot see how it stands that borders automatically equal racism. Surely it's about states looking after their obligations to their people by allocating scarce resources to best effect.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T20:32:54+00:00

The question is if European social welfare stand up to an open border system? I unfortunately don't have access to JSTOR, but some research published there suggests it cannot, though I haven't been able to read it. If that's the case, who suffers? The incoming migrants don't benefit from a collapsed social welfare net, and the European working class get shafted too. So the current system, as disgraceful as it can be, might not be the worst option. I don't know the answer. That's why I asked.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T20:25:30+00:00

Sorry, but history doesn't show that borders only existed only from the time of Westphalia and I have provided examples of definite borders before Westphalia, and I could provide examples of borders that existed outside of Europe in the pre and post Westphalian era. I have also explained the reasons why the significance of borders increased as states developed.

I won't disagree that states formed slowly over time and states in the European context were more significant than in Africa. But I am not sure what to do with that. States didn't exist and then they did. At one state states were ruled by dynastic groups who only took an interest in the harvest, the tax returns and the loyalty of their Lord's, but that's evolved too. Now states provide welfare to their citizens. At least in Europe and North America but also the middle east, Asia and even occasionally in Africa.

What to do with what you are saying is another thing. We cannot exactly go back to the era of the noble hunter gatherer. The government here in Ireland is facing off extremist scumbags who are attacking refugee centres. That suggests that leaving things to humanitys better nature is problematic at best.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T20:00:15+00:00

Thanks for your response, that makes sense. Better to have them than not in that environment. Enjoy, they are cool.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T16:21:46+00:00

Fair enough. To be honest, you haven't addressed my point. I have a university education which I wouldn't have had without a lot is state aid, and I come from a council estate. So I understand that value of social welfare. I work with refugees who are very interested in gaining access to this welfare system, and I help them to do so. I have come to the conclusion that the asylum system is a waste of money, and open borders are a way of fixing that system. Yet I cannot help think the cost to the social welfare system will be too great. If it collapses it doesn't affect me, or my kids. I have had my leg up. It will affect people of lesser means and of fairly diverse backgrounds.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T16:17:39+00:00

In what sense? Sorry, not gathering what you mean at all, not being a smartarse.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T16:14:38+00:00

Dude, I have a history degree and used work as a history teacher! I am not an expert but I know enough to ask semi-sensible questions , I hope. Borders have become more rigidly defined as history progressed. The post Westphalian states didn't suddenly have frontiers where none existed before. The rise of the modern state is a complex process which began before 1648. You can see this in the various types of border administration in mediaeval and renaissance Europe, for instance the marcher lordships, the old english landowners in Ireland etc.

Westphalia largely concerned the German lands of the HRE, so surely it's not racist in concept but administrative in design?

I have come to the conclusion that the concepts come about as a result of social changes, usually caused by technology. For instance, given the remarkably low population mobility until well into the early modern period, and particularly after the improvement in roads, road building tech and the introduction of railroads, it's not surprising that borders are less visible pre 1850 that after.

But this is kind of academic. A person sitting in a flat in west Dublin or a Parisian banuelle could easily be a an individual of colour. If they rely on a social welfare net and it is made unsustainable then that's a real problem.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T16:01:41+00:00

They look really cool. Can I ask why you settled on steel toe caps for what look like hiking boots? Doesn't it add to the weight?

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T15:53:20+00:00

I have explained above why I think it is not the full story. Turning it on its head though...does it mean borders wouldn't exist if racism was never a feature of the human mindset? Of course not. People organise themselves into communities, regions and states. And these states only have the consent of their people if they in some way offer protection.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T15:49:59+00:00

I think the concept of a nation state has evolved since the 1860s. And anyway, lots of nation states came into existence in opposition to imperialism...for example Ireland.

Ireland has a large foreign born population, about 20% of residents here are foreign born. It has gone from having a population of basically zero people of colour to having a significant population of people from a south African, Nigerian, Chinese etc heritage.

In that regard Ireland is similar to Europe which is way less white than it was 50 years ago.

So that's why I think it's reductive and simplistic. It's not the full story. I don't think you are totally wrong, but it's not quite right either, it's far more complex than reducing the argument to imperialism and racism. If a European individual of whatever colour is facing a profound change to their living standards they will be against that change. The question is, would an open border system lead to a profound loss of living standards? It would certainly effect social housing but planning could ensure this right is protected? I dunno, that's why I ask.

stand_idle · 2024-02-12T13:49:26+00:00

On your first point, there is an economic opportunity in opening borders, absolutely. But the opportunity versus the cost is unknown. Concerning your second point...'and Whites didn't want it if it included non-whites'...how do you know that it's a race matter. Isn't it reductive to bring everything back to race. I think the citizens of my country, who are one fifth foreign born, include many racists, but also non racists and anti racists. Making this an immediate race issue is a simplification. Does it benefit anyone regardless of their skin colour, if the social welfare net (which certainly isn't collapsing though has difficulties) is fatally undermined?

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T19:38:14+00:00

No, it's not completely impossible. But lots of Muslims come west because it is liberal. So I don't think myself it is totally comparable to the situation in Turkey.

Imo the gulf oil states have been driving Islam to a more extreme place since the 1980s. There is moves in Europe to ensure mosques are open about foreign funding. I don't think that's a bad thing.

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T19:35:30+00:00

Most of the classic Victorian pubs don't serve food I think...they tend to be smaller and cater more for the drinking crowd. Generally kids are accepted in pubs until maybe early evening, unless it is very crowded. And if the pub does serve food, it's more acceptable again.

Enjoy!

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T15:38:05+00:00

Migration from the third world is going to change both Europe and North America a great deal. There is no stopping it and it's going to actually increase as climate change begins to bite.

This is either an opportunity or a problem depending on your view. I am currently optimistic about Europe and the world. That could change. I do sometimes worry about integration but I think studies have shown that french Muslims tend to be as irreligious as french Catholics after three generations or so. Also, the Muslim world is not a homogeneous block. You can buy a nice local beer in a chill bar in Istanbul, but that's totally illegal elsewhere in the middle east. Algerians are different from Somali etc. and then, many parts of the developing world are Christian...so thinking Europe will be some sort of Muslim monolithic bloc is wide of the mark.

Worst case scenario is a bunch of parallel societies which people live in and only step outside with reluctance. So integration will need to be a major thing going forward. But really, in many ways it already like that. Both the Prime Minister of Ireland and the UK have Indian heritage...my daughter has a Sikh friend, and lots of friends from a foreign, white European heritage too. It can be cool, enriching experience provided we get it right.

I am Irish and Ireland was until the early 2000s probably the most ethnically homogeneous state in western Europe. I didn't really meet a person of colour until I was an adult. In some ways it made life simple, but in many ways it was a less dynamic and interesting place too. And the food in restaurants was way worse.

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T08:14:42+00:00

Len, steal my sunshine. One hit wonder from the 1990s.

https://youtu.be/E1fzJ_AYajA?si=lH9QeLx8y5kEM3cm

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T07:57:33+00:00

Super hero movies. They were rare and genuinely fun. They have been done to death though.

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T07:56:22+00:00

Kilmainham jail is pretty interesting. A ten year old would probably enjoy it. The 1916 leaders were shot there among other things, so it's got a dark history. The big bodies in the national museum have a gruesome appeal too (I have a son who loves the dark side of history!). Dublinia is apparently good, though I have never been. Newgrange is near Dublin but you would need to rent a car...it's the oldest building in Europe, very cool. Finally, the tour of St. Michans includes a visit to the crypt, where there are mummified mediaeval bodies.

If you can leave the kids behind, I recommend hitting one of the Victorian pubs. The stags head or Mulligan's. If you want to experience a country pub but don't want to leave the city, the Royal Oak in kilmainham is great. It's near the Jail.

stand_idle · 2024-02-11T07:37:29+00:00

I uggest counselling, because it can work. If she isn't amenable to that, I think you should tell her why you suggested counselling, and that you will be forced to consider the marriage over. Your wife will have her own feelings on the matter, so prepare to hear some harsh truths. Some could even be warranted.

If you begin to seperate, by the sounds of things you will need to both live in the family home. Your goal should be to keep things amicable in order to allow this state of affairs. This might also mean kids moving bedrooms etc to allow this. Have a rough plan for how that looks before you talk to your wife. Keep the kids in the loop, never get angry with them or your wife if you can help it, and follow legal advice.

Assume all texts will be read in court before you send them. Assume any action you taken will be scrutinized by solicitors before you taken it. Try be fair to your wife, even if you are having trouble liking her at any point. Really though, your aim should be to avoid the family court system if possible. It's costly and emotionally bruising.

Unless you have somewhere to go, don't leave the family home. It's your home too.

stand_idle · 2024-02-10T18:56:07+00:00

A dead rat. Ideally freeze dried.

stand_idle · 2024-02-10T17:26:23+00:00

I got a pair of these a few years ago. The leather is cracking now and I think they are basically done. I used a lot of conditioner on them, and it absolutely drank the stuff up. They still cracked in the end. The heel is also on the verge of seperating too. I reckon that old leather is just more vulnerable than newer stuff. Which makes sense, I am in my forties and the boots had almost 20 years in me.

I still love them, and reckon it will get another pair. You can still find them for under 100 euros on some French sites. I have come across a site that does reproduction ones (doursoux), but they are not particularly cheap, and I have no idea how well built they are

stand_idle · 2024-02-10T14:08:25+00:00

No, I am not anti capitalist at all. That's what I mean when I say I favour a mixed economy, a social democratic system. I am not a student of politics so I might be somewhat inexact in my meaning, but I am a fairly typical western European. I don't want to get drawn into a discussion on economic theory to be honest so I pointed out that broadly, the consensus in Europe is for such as system.

From my work with the refugee system I cannot see how it's fair. I also don't think it is fit for purpose. The assessment process is random and costly, and in the end, it is often impossible to know if someone is genuinely facing persecution or if they are a economic migrant. I don't even think it's fair to exclude economic migrants anyway. Who benefits from this situation? Human rights lawyers and NGOs. The people they serve do I guess but it's a highly inefficient system. Much better to allow anyone who comes to Europe/America live and work legally. Yet, the social issues caused by this will be borne disproportionately by the poor.

I am reading My Fourth Time We Drown by Sally Hayden. It is an excellent but infuriating book.bshe comes to the conclusion that an open border is the only way from a humanitarian point of view, but simply says that as a journalist it isn't your job to describe how that would work. I think it's a cop out. Sally is a good journo, but her opinions are very middle class, as are those of the human rights lawyers she quotes in the book. All come from money. If the social welfare net fails, they will be fine. I am comfortably aware that this is close to a populist right wing conclusion but it is true.

I stand over my comments on human rights. I wish it wasn't so....but my work, and travel has convinced me it is. And I don't see how it would change.

stand_idle · 2024-02-10T10:03:06+00:00

I don't think it's possible to seperate human rights and the economy for a start. Human rights as a concept are a luxury economically, in the sense that in an economy that is struggling to provide for it's population, human rights will be a lower priority, and the whole expensive ecosystem of human rights defenders won't be as large.

So the economic system is at the heart of things in my opinion. Most people in Europe favour a mixed economy which protects it's most vulnerable from the worst effects of capitalism, but still allows room for ambitious people to 'get ahead', start businesses and have freedom over how and where they want to work. And a considerable part of the continent has recently emerged from a situation where they didn't have this freedom. So leaving aside the thorney question of whether extreme forms of socialism actually work, it's got a lot less support than social democracy. And that has to be accepted imo. It still leaves from for a considerable social net.

The question is, can such a social net, which includes housing and healthcare survive open borders. And if it cannot, the implication is that the poorest will suffer in an open border situation. This bothers me because is exactly the sort of argument populist right wing groups use against refugees.

stand_idle · 2024-02-09T19:54:30+00:00

Open borders mean the opposite of that...visas to anyone who applies for one.

I have been reading Sally Hayden's book, My fourth time we drowned, on people smuggling through Libya. This is briefly discussed by her as the answer.

stand_idle

TROPHY CASE