« Fall 2008 American Economic History Podcasts | Main | Senate Banking Committee Hearing March 31, 2009: Lessons from the New Deal »

March 25, 2009



Rich S. wrote:The second is to be cruel, and seflsihNice balanced argument you have there. I think that cruel would be more accurately characterized as harsh.Selfish doesn't really describe it, however. How is it seflsih to deny a person something that he or she acquired illegally?If your father acquired a house by fraud and then bequeathed it to you, would it be seflsih of the judge to demand that you turn it over to the rightful owner? It would certainly be harsh. You would lose your family home. But it would not benefit the judge.Your argument assumes that the Republicans believe that they profit with less illegal immigrants. This is not correct. Society profits when the US has more hard working citizens. I know many immigrants who are extremely hard working and are great additions to the US. We all lose if these people must go. The question is if it is fair to the people waiting patiently for visas who are turned away because we let these people come in. Isn't it cruel to them.The seflsih acts are reserved for those who ask for the government to act to absolve them of their enormous guilt. Do you care more for the immigrants or for your conscience?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Reference Section

Search Brad DeLong's Website