🚀 go-pugleaf

The article "SG,SEA:  NUS remains the champ of Asean debate" said:
   At the final held at Dewan Tunku Chancellor, Universiti Malaya, UP was not
   easily edged out as they proved to be feisty opponents as the proposers for
   the topic There Should Be No Borders Within Asean.

Aside from the skill of the Filipino and Singaporean debaters, what do people
think of this "no borders" idea?

I think it is a great idea, if implemented slowly enough not to cause sudden
major disruption. ASEAN could enjoy the kind of mobility that the United
States has: people from one state can easily move to another if their skills
are needed there, and everyone is better off in the long run.

For example, Malaysia is currently facing a worker shortage. But because
Indonesians and Filipinos have to go through so much hassle and ringamarole,
they can't easily fulfill our labor needs. And we have the nationalistic
thinking that "they" will benifit from "our" bounty.

If we think of ourselves as not so separate, we both end up benifitting.

The main argument I've heard for "no borders" is that it is destablizing.
"Why," the argument goes, "then all the Indonesians will move to Malaysia
and destablize everything."

That's why I said it needs to be implemented slowly. Right now the imbalance
exists that is artificially held by immigration control. In a stable state
open border situation, the natural balance due to the available resources
and people will, like the states in the United States, assert itself and
you have slow gradual migrations rather than sudden shocks to the system.