First we need to establish the reason why people immigrate. Migrations are such a part of history that the need to move must be ingrained in the human condition. People frequently believe that life must be better somewhere other than in their native land. Sometimes it is ambition, at times adventure, often simply desperation. But, as current events indicate, it is the injustice, poverty, and violence in their own lands that generally make people move to save themselves and to ensure a better future for their children. One need only look at the situations in Haiti, Cambodia, Croatia, or Cuba to understand this. For humanitarian reasons immigration should not be restricted. The United States was founded on Christian beliefs. Christianity demands hospitality to the alien or stranger.
Gordon Hanson believed that immigrants, legal or illegal, are the foundations to the United States. Immigrants are what made this country is today, the economy, the country, and the culture. Immigrants has major impacts on this country, because a lot of presidential candidate would not touch immigrations policies in their campaign. President Obama checked his immigration box by making a halfhearted call for immigration reform in May 2011 (Hanson). A policy of open immigration will advance the economic well-being of all Americans. Immigration is vital to American economic growth. The theory is simple: energetic workers increase the supply of goods and services with their labor, and increase the demand for other goods and services by spending their wages. I agree with Hanson simply because, the United States' forefathers are immigrants. This country was founded by immigrants from another country to look for a better life. Many descendants of immigrants don't understand the poverty of their homeland. One must also understands that not only the United States was built by immigrants, but immigrants are one of most important contribution to why they United States has the largest economy in the world. Every year the universities conducts a research for talented scientiests, engineer, and other technical personnel, and foreign students rose to the top (Jones). These students, who obtain graduate degrees in the United States develop the potential to publish academic research that they could not have accomplished at home. Many of these talendted students travel with their student visas, but 55% of all the international students in the United States marries a US citizen so they could stay (Hanson). The percentage that stays, are the highly-skilled workers, contributes a major portion to the U.S. economy.
Hanson made all his points really clear by stating facts from his research. He used the data from the government and none were seem made up. He made his points by telling a stories or relates to the data he had found. He had made none of the major fallacies simply by stating the facts and not being biased in his paper. The only fallacy that I see him committed the most I would say is appeal to pity. He tends to mention a lot of about poverty in other countries and he used that to defend his points about immigrations. He also had some of biased example. Out of all, I agree with his the points that he is trying to make, and they are very well presented.
Bryan Caplan's argument however, differs from that of Hanson's. His arguments is mostly inverse from Hanson, but they both agrees on one thing about immigration. They both believe that, if the U.S. tries to deport all of their illegal immigrants, it would be impossible to do it without costing the government large portion of their budget. The difference in their argument is the way that they resolve this major issue. Caplan proposes tests for the illegal immigrants about the U.S., and if they passed, they would get to stay. Also the government should try to legalize all of them, but should not entitle them to any benefits (Caplan). Currently the U.S. has a lot of illegal immigrants, according to Wayne Cornelius, the distinguished director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California at San Diego, out of the 1.5 million immigrants who enter the country each year, 500,000 of them are undocumented (Cornelius 7). I also agrees with Caplan because if one third of the people who crosses the border are illegal, we could never tell what their motives are. Some people also argues that borders should be open for anyone who wish to find a better life. However, these proponents of open borders neglect to recognize that as hundreds of illegal immigrants cross the borders, the issue of terrorism and overall safety becomes a major concern. Without undergoing the proper restrictions and precautions required to enter the United States, these illegal immigrants could potentially be a major threat to the country. As these individuals assimilate themselves into United States’ culture, the United States and its people are completely unaware of their presence. There is virtually no telling the types of people are entering the country- murderers, drug-dealers, or even radical terrorists. With possible dangerous persons living within the United States and its communities, the well being and overall safety of the people of the United States is threatened. Some of these individuals should not be entitled to the benefits that the U.S. government offers.
Caplan also made his points very clear by using facts and datas in his paper. The data is also from the government and none were from phoney websites. His arguments and positions in this is logically sound and very agreeable argument, but in my opinion he had also commit one of the major fallacies, on my list, is hasty generalizations. I can see why he commit this fallacy, because in this kind of arguments, you have to being using a lot of generalizations but also have to back them up also. He had done a great job in backing his generalizations up with examples in his research.
To conclude this, I would like to compare and contrast Hanson and Caplan's arguments. It is great that they both believe that deporting all of the illegal immigrants is a bad idea and it is the quickest way to drain the government's budget. Hanson proposed that we should no deport all the illegal immigrants because they are one of the great factor in our econcomic growth either highly skilled or low skilled. The government should shifts their views from taxpayers to employers. Caplan also proposed that we should not deport all the illegal immigrants but we should conduct a test to see who can stay. His resolution to his issue is to admit everyone into the U.S., but they away their voting rights and ineligible for all benefits so that we can protect the American workers, taxpayers, culture and liberty. After reading both their reading both arguments carefully, I would say I would favor more on Hanson's arguments. Hanson has a greater points because immigrants help this country to thrive to where it is now. Who are we to decide who gets to stay, or who gets the benefits over one another. Freedom of movement should be the new common sense. People are not goods or capital and they should be free to move. The attempt to limit this basic freedom leads to some of the worst abuses of human rights which exist in the world today. The abolition of immigration controls would mean a vast increase in freedom and prosperity for all of us.