Ilya Somin
Teoksen Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government Is Smarter tekijä
Tietoja tekijästä
Ilya Somin is a professor of law at George Mason University. He is the author of The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. City of New London and the Limits of Eminent Domain (2015) and writes regularly for the Volokh Conspiracy blog at the Washington Post.
Tekijän teokset
The Grasping Hand: "Kelo v. City of New London" and the Limits of Eminent Domain (2015) 22 kappaletta
Merkitty avainsanalla
Yleistieto
There is no Common Knowledge data for this author yet. You can help.
Jäseniä
Kirja-arvosteluja
Tilastot
- Teokset
- 5
- Jäseniä
- 89
- Suosituimmuussija
- #207,492
- Arvio (tähdet)
- 4.5
- Kirja-arvosteluja
- 1
- ISBN:t
- 22
There's also a lot of argument presented that in addition to individual benefits for those moving, it also provides political and economic benefits to both the losing and gaining nations. A lot of these seem very solid.
The one area where I disagree with the book is in the costs of migration (primarily to the "gaining" nation). Somin seems to present "immigrants might vote 60:40 in a way different than natives" as a straw man argument that he thinks dramatically overstates the case; in reality it's even more than that for some immigrant groups and some areas, and even a 1% change has compounded (due to second-generation, etc.) to cause major political changes in the US (and especially in specific states and cities). His example of Estonia vs. Russian immigrants might still be the most extreme, but while there's no valid economic argument against the overall economic increase of educated immigrants, there is a political and cultural one at a certain scale. He says "restricting political franchise would be less of an imposition than restricting all access", but we have no way to do that, and a lot of the economic costs of low-end immigrants are not direct welfare benefits but other costs. As well, he repeatedly makes the standard argument of "if there are costs, they can be covered by redistributing some of the gains" -- of course that's theoretically correct, but never happens.
I like the argument, and mostly agree with it, except for the underestimated costs. It's a great way to present the argument, and the example of "entirely foot voting, with no democratic voting" is interesting -- imagine a bunch of cities/states run by non-democratic institutions (companies, individuals, perhaps automata) into and out of which people could freely choose to migrate -- basicall the Internet in physical form.… (lisätietoja)