Grew up in Texas, and back in the 80s it was very normal for kids to just hop into a car and drive south of the border for Spring Break. This was the most normal thing in the world for hundreds of thousands of teenagers and young adults.

And then national media realized they could make a lot of cheap news coverage by scandalizing the practice. So we got a slew of news stories, which became inflated with an even more over-dramatized series of books, tv shows, and movies, showing kids going across the border for drug use and rape and animal abuse and to dispose of dead bodies for the cartels and to get eaten alive by the Chupacabra. We got bombarded by a slew of media with a flashlight under the chin whispering "Oh, you think these kids are having fun? Well, what if the news threw a red filter over the images and used graphical effects to imply everyone was murdered?!"

Both the US and the Mexican police got more and more involved. The borders became militarized. You ended up with these obnoxious traffic situations, which really killed the appeal of any kind of vacationing. Also didn't help that a lot of the popular destinations got enclosed and privatized, for the benefit of a few insider luxury developers. The cost of a vacation exploded, as cruise lines and chain hotels and resorts took over the best spots. And now it's been fully Disney-fied, with a heavily demarcated entry and exit for tourists who are heavily discouraged from mingling with locals.

Shit fucking sucks, man.

I've also travelled and that's why I want borders, at least for now.

We should definitely be working to raise people in the poorer parts of the world out of poverty. I've been to some developing countries, and life there is extremely hard. That's why so many of them want to move to a rich country where they can live a better life.

Yeah, as a rich westerner, borders are an annoyance. It's great going around Europe and going from the Netherlands to France without needing a passport or anything.

Having said that, in the Netherlands and France, and most other western countries, there is a great social safety net paid for by taxes that makes sure that everybody living in those countries can live a decent life. But, even Europe was put under stress by the fact that some countries in the EU have a GDP per capita that's half what it is in other places.

A fair number of people migrated to richer countries within the EU for a better life. Most found a job and worked. They contributed more to the countries than they received in benefits. Even then, that was hard on those richer countries because it displaced some of the lower-wage workers, or depressed their wages. Despite this, the EU has mostly held together, other than Brexit, and the majority of the UK now regrets Brexit.

The important thing to remember is that the EU vets members before allowing them in, and was slow to allow the poorer Eastern European countries to join.

If the world eliminated borders tomorrow, the richer western countries would be swamped by poorer people from developing countries seeking a better life. There's no way that the systems in those countries could cope.

The rich might love it. Suddenly there would be hundreds or thousands of people competing for the lowest paying jobs, allowing the bosses to offer the lowest possible wages, the worst possible working conditions, etc. The ultra-rich business owners could get rid of unions and get local workers for next to nothing.

For the slightly less rich, the professional class, it wouldn't be too bad. Their jobs are protected. You need to pass the bar to be a lawyer. You need to do a residency to become a doctor. Their professional associations would continue to do the work necessary so that say a doctor in Nigeria didn't have their credentials recognized in the west.

The less wealthy you are, the less protected you would be. For someone whose job doesn't require any kind of diploma, certificate or degree, there would be no protection. They'd be competing with every unskilled person who came into the country seeking opportunities.

Even if you personally think that chaos is a small price to pay for a more fair world, a lot of people don't. The rise of far-right and fascist movements in the west is a direct result of increasing immigration. If borders were eliminated, not only would there be a lot more far-right voters, there would probably be violent clashes, even mass slaughters.

A lot of people hate globalization, but it has resulted in raising a lot of people in developing countries out of extreme poverty. It has done that mainly by taking wealth and power away from the poorest people in richer countries by shipping their jobs overseas. That part sucks. But, at least a lot of people in developing countries are no longer in danger of dying if they have a bad few weeks.

Programs like USAID were a better way of doing some of the same things. These were often subsidies for US farmers whose produce was then just donated or sold extremely cheaply to developing countries. There were of course problems with this system too. Often the "farmers" receiving the subsidies were rich corporations. But, it did raise the floor for some of the worst-off people in the world.

If we can continue to find ways to help people in developing countries, we should do that. Hopefully we can find a better way to do it than we've done in the past. But, even a less-than-ideal solution does help. Eventually, we may be able to reach a point at which we can remove borders without resulting in a mass migration that overwhelms the systems of the richer countries.

Closed borders don't make things better for a selected few if they make the world those selected few live in shitty.

I've also travelled a lot, and while visa stuff can be a nightmare, this also sounds like it's coming from a super selfish reasoning. As if a democratically elected government representing people in a certain place should have no right to its own sovereignty so that YOU don't have to deal with paperwork?

What's funny is the exact scenario you all want already exists in Sub-Saharan Africa. Borders effectively don't exist at all for anyone willing to get off the bus, walk 50 meters into the bush, then 200 meters forward and back to the road. I've accidentally crossed several borders dozens of times.

But then when it comes to countries that struggle to find work for their own people, they also get flooded by people from places where no government functions at all. Specifically Nigerians in South Africa and Ghana. Legally present, and subject to xenophobic attacks because there no hope for them in Nigeria because it's a hot mess.

So... That's the ideal situation? And people can't leave that open border situation fast enough because the places that are stable are flooded by people fleeing instability.

Honestly, I'm asking, how is it supposed to work without literally magic being involved?