And you support individual rights!
I’d bet the “alt right” includes a non-trivial number of tech professionals who’ve been replaced by lower priced immigrants from India, China, etc. If we ever see “Medicare for All”, I’ can see a lot of doctors and other health care professionals joining them as the US joins Canada and Great Britain in poaching doctors from developing nations in a bid to reduce salaries.
Unemployment in the tech industry is essentially nil; foreign workers are not replacing American workers. If a qualified worker cannot find a job in the tech industry they have other serious issues, but may like to scapegoat foreigners.
Unemployment in the US is essentially nil, but it wasn’t always that way.
I don’t recall where supporting a free market requires supporting unlimited immigration as well.
They’re out supporting immigrants at the expense of their members, which may be why their members are supporting Trump now.
teamster.org
Check out the Libertarian Party platform. It does support open borders but with a caveat.
You said “tech professionals who’ve been replaced.” You don’t need immigration to have your job outsourced to someone in India who works from there via the Internet. So opposing outsourcing is opposing free markets.ProVobis:
I don’t recall where supporting a free market requires supporting unlimited immigration as well.
Why? Is the Libertarian Party the sole arbiter of what constitutes support of a “free market”?
No, opposing outsourcing is opposing outsourcing, which I never claimed I did, nor, did I in fact claim that I opposed replacing tech workers with cheaper foreigners. I just mentioned that I thought people in that group likely candidates for membership in the “alt-right”. Anything else is an inference.
Is this true of the American Medical Association which notoriously kept enrollment in medical schools low?
Okay, what is your idea of a free market?
Are medical schools having problems getting students due to AMA policies? It’s not something I’m familiar with but it wouldn’t shock me if true.
Something other than what the Libertarian Party supports, I suspect, but I’m not familiar enough with their specific positions to say for sure.
Opposing legal migration is simply a policy position. I don’t think ‘caught out’ is the appropriate term. If she said this then she simply prefers for there to be no, or a much reduced legal migration. There is nothing wrong with that position. The Philippines and most other countries have limited migration. It is the normal position.
And opposing it because it leads to “demographic changes” is an explicitly racist policy position.
The religion you speak of is the Catholic religion. See CCC 1935.