parts of the world? Should we? I mean, that's an interesting philosophical question. I know

Chinese philosophers have thought about that question a lot. Do you have greater loyalty

to your clan, to your nation? Does the nation mean anything in the 21st century going forward?

I think it does. I think we have a responsibility toward those people, including workers that

have worked their whole lives and now find themselves unemployed as they're facing retirement

and not having enough money for retirement.

Think about the competition that we're going to generate. I mean, I understand why big

business wants unlimited immigration. Big business loves unlimited immigration that

drives wage levels down in this country, and so they can drive profits up and wage levels

down. Yeah, corporate profits are going to go up, if that's what we're all about. You're

going to get the corporate profits up, but you're also going to get wage levels down.

Why don't American students go into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics?

Do you ever wonder about that? I wonder about that all the time. Why do we have to have

a STEM jobs bill just to bring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics?

What's the matter with American students? Why do they all want to go to law school and

study with me? In part it's because there are all these smart foreign students coming

in, and you know if you're going into science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, you're

going to have to compete with these smart foreigners coming in. And you want to do that?

You want to stake your career on competing with these smart foreign students? So the

competition is real. And we need to decide what is our priority? Is it taking care of

our fellow Americans first, or is it worrying about the entire world? Can we not take care

of our fellow Americans until we take care of everyone in the whole world? I don't think

so.

BRANDON TURNER: Can I let Bryan respond?

BRYAN CAPLAN: Sure. I care about my children far more than I care about other Americans

or other human beings. I love my children, and yet there are many things I will not do

to help them. I will not steal from other people to help my children. I won't try to

get other kids kicked out of school so my kids can be the best kids in the class. I

won't, because it seems wrong. The fact that you love someone and care more about them

is a reason to make sure that you are treating other people fairly. And that is precisely

what immigration laws do not do.

Immigration laws are not about saying we're going to take care of Americans as long as

we're treating other people fairly. It's about saying we're going to take care of Americans

no matter what the cost we impose on other people. And that is really what immigration

restrictions come down to. It's saying that we are so concerned about a few people here

that we're willing to inflict enormous harm on other people who've done nothing wrong,

they just happened to be born on the wrong side of the border.

In terms of the economics of what Jan is saying, this is the kind of thing that economists

try to root out of people in first semester econ. Yes, you can always look and find ways

that you're losing from things. You also need to look at ways that you're gaining. And then

you need to add the two up and see what the net effect is.

If we were to actually run a world on the principle of try to get rid of anyone who

might compete with you by being better than you or anything, what kind of a world would

this be? What kind of economy would it be? We would be living in dire poverty. We should

be glad when there are more talented and skilled people in the country realizing their potential.

Most of the time we gain from them, because usually we're trading with them. Sometimes

we lose because we're competing with them. It's important to remember the bottom line:

total amount of stuff produced in the world. There is very good reason to think that immigration

would double the total amount of stuff produced in the world, most of which is going to go

not just to corporations but to human beings all over the planet.

TURNER: Let me push on this though. So if this the kind of immigration equivalent of

a free lunch, why aren't we taking it?

CAPLAN: I think the reason why we're not taking it is because most people are economically

illiterate, so they focus on whatever downsides they can find. And second of all, people suffer

what I call anti-foreign bias. Namely, any time there's a problem, they look around for

a way to blame foreigners. Whenever foreigners are about, they try to find anything negative

that they can to say about them. Very rarely do people take a deep breath and say let's

consider, first of all, all of the good and all the bad added it up. And second of all,

rarely do people consider, am I doing wrong to a foreigner? Should I feel bad that I mistreated

someone who wasn't born in this country? And this is yet a question that we all should

be asking ourselves.