Suit yourself. I'd prefer a small-government, pro-liberty, pro-market approach that matches what the majority of economists support. Government intervention for the sake of government intervention is senseless.
If you watch more of the video you see some mouthy ANTIFA Amazon Warrior get in the good guy’s face but she had sense enough not to swing at him too
GI with actual reasons behind it. Not GI for GI sake. Globalism does and you can't have free or freeish markets without permissive borders.
What does that mean? Can you expand on that idea? What sort of reasons would the government need to protect the borders.
Since no country on earth has free markets or free trade, I'm not sure why turning the wage rates of a first world country down to that of a third world country would be economically beneficial. If a country wants to experiment with open borders, I'm open to let them try it, but I just don't want it to be my country.
Let's open the borders after we install gun turrets with motion sensors 100 feet apart along the border.
Well, a little five minute video that was clearly constructed and edited to peddle the anti Mexican agenda has the Mexihate crowd frothing at the mouth, as it was designed to do. Not one of you bothered to wonder who the source of this material was, where the money came from, or what the agenda is.
When the US feels free to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations and US corporations are allowed to exploit people in other nations then the victims have every right to move about freely as well.
US population is 328 million and growing by over 2 million a year. Why is that not enough? How would it serve the national interest to bring in more people than we already do?