Migration and Citizenship

Immigration has received a great deal of interest over the course of years, and the debate of whether countries should or should not open their borders for migrants has been as continuous. For open borders, restriction based on one’s native country is no less abhorrent than prejudice based on sexuality, ethnicity, or faith. We are correct to respect the equality of chance; nevertheless, as it is cherished locally, it must likewise be cherished worldwide, where inequality is far more pronounced (De Haas, 2007). Many people regard local inequality as socially urgent in ways that they do not consider inter-national disparity. I believe that borders must be broadly open, especially from third-world countries to developed countries, for better livelihood economic development and improve global prosperity. 

            People migrate because they believe it would better their life or their family’s livelihood. Economic migration is motivated by the understanding, or assumption, that greater economic possibilities lie in another location. As a result, individuals are more inclined to move if there is significant local economic disparity and when it is convenient for them to do that. Famine, lack of business opportunities, housing shortages, and poor living conditions at their origin represent pushing causes (Wilcox, 2009). In contrast, wealth, potential, available jobs, and better lifestyle conditions in the intended region are key motivators. The method of evaluating future expenses and advantages is involved in the person’s choice to relocate.

Migrants must evaluate basic variables like travel costs, the likelihood of obtaining a job, and the salary levels in the travel region compared to those in the native location. Personal reasons, including relationships with family and friends in the targeted places, or the possible impact of their departure on the family left, will also influence their decision (Joppke, 1998). Because information about other countries’ situations is vital in migration choices, contemporary networks play a major part. Prospective migrants may become aware of chances through the press, media pictures, or returnees and move for various reasons, including economic, social, political, and environmental considerations.

The subject of enforced movement and migration is inextricably linked to its system and boundaries. There is a significant dependent link linking the formation of the sovereign nation and the production of large-scale migrant flows throughout history. Today, immigrants are generated due to the interplay between migration and borders, and they are inexplicable without it (Carens, 1987). The mobility of people appears to be the most obvious manifestation of this interconnectedness to the public at large of sophisticated capitalist economies (Wilcox, 2009). And no aspect of that migration is becoming more challenging to govern efficiently or harder for the public to accept than unauthorized migration. Most foreign movements, irrespective of official standing, either permanent, temporary, or cyclical, or for a job or to reunite families, captivates less established nations, but in various ways.

These migrations have made mobility important for both nations’ populations and their economy. While affluent nations are anxious about their own set of issues, such as challenges to safety, a projected loss of control, and repercussions on labor supply, less advanced countries are worried about their own set of issues (Carens, 1987). They are also concerned regarding uncontrolled migration. These comprise the evident disrespect for the humanitarian law, employment laws, and other basic freedoms of their citizens who engage in the unlawful immigration flow, as well as the smuggling business that has sprung up in response to such activities(Joppke, 1998). The premise that movement can be ‘managed’ in whatever meaningful way appears unduly naive. Migration flows have proven increasingly tough for countries to regulate due to the intrinsically democratic nature of Western cultures and economies and the emergence of international migration alliances (De Haas, 2007). The restricting immigration initiatives adopted by nations and philosophers struggle since they ignore addressing the reasons for migration. Instead of reducing immigration, strict immigration regulations have the unexpected consequence of encouraging illegal movement, inhibiting migrants’ cyclical mobility, and forcing them to remain permanently. Furthermore, restricting laws plus the anti-immigrant social ideologies that frequently precede them may lead to the humiliation of refugees and incite racism and prejudice, thereby harming societal cohesiveness.

Open borders raise global prosperity tremendously. It is an uncommon illustration of a governmental action that benefits almost everyone. Once a person immigrates to a particular nation that is highly wealthy, with a significant variety of enterprises supplied with science, the labor force rises, and the sector generates more products and services. A highly efficient individual will ultimately earn a larger pay, thus benefiting the receiving nation’s collective revenue and prosperity on a global level (Carens, 1987). Indeed, this happens where there is unrestricted labor movement within countries. The effect on the acquiring nation is extremely positive and maybe precisely evaluated using net present value (NPV) (De Haas, 2007). This has been demonstrated on multiple instances that the NPV of younger immigrants is favorable in continuous values, less whatever the government spends on their well-being. The case NPV of younger immigrants is true even though the immigrant is undereducated. As a result, the immigrant is not only in an improved condition, but the adopting nation’s state resources are also reinforced.

To sum up, to allow people from third-world countries into developed nations to improve their livelihoods, economic power, and nations, and achieve global prosperity, the country’s boundaries should be broadly open. Most people from third-world countries migrate into developed countries to enjoy the benefits of an improved economy. Such advantages include the likelihood of obtaining a job and the salary levels. In addition, both the country accepting immigrants and losing immigrants are concerned about immigration policies that can hurt or improve the economy. Nevertheless, open borders lead to the flow of both talents and money enabling tremendous global prosperity.

Bibliography

Carens, J. H. (1987). Aliens and citizens: The case for opens borders. The Review of Politics, 49(2), 251–273.

De Haas, H. (2007). Turning the tide? Why development will not stop migration. Development and Change, 38(5), 819–841.

Joppke, C. (1998). Why liberal states accept unwanted immigration. World Politics, 50(2), 266–293.

Wilcox, S. (2009). The open borders debate on immigration. Philosophy Compass, 4(5), 813–821.