While many argue investment-based criteria for immigration are wrong or at least problematic, skill-based criteria remain relatively uncontroversial. This is normatively inconsistent. This article assesses three prominent normative objections to investment-based selection criteria for immigrants: (i) that they wrongfully discriminate between prospective immigrants (ii) that they are unfair, and (iii) that they undermine political equality among citizens. It argues that either skill-based criteria are equally susceptible to these objections, or that investment-based criteria are equally shielded from them. Indeed, in some ways investment-based criteria are less normatively problematic than skill-based criteria. Given this analysis, the resistance to investment-based migration criteria, but not to skill-based criteria, is inconsistent.
|Journal||Moral Philosophy and Politics|
|State||Accepted/In press - 2019|
Bibliographical notePublisher Copyright:
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston 2019.
- equality of opportunity
- ethics of immigration
- investment migration
- political equality
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science
- History and Philosophy of Science