>>If you gave every single person a choice (...) they'd all be living in Iran, the Congo or the US?
As if the only thing to factor in when choosing where to live is the "social contract". There are many people that are allowed to live in Canada and Australia, and yet they don't.
You'd be surprised by how averse to change most people are. Even in places where people have more opportunities to come and go, they still prefer to stay where they are over risking for better opportunities elsewhere. Not all Americans from flyover states want to move out, no matter how bad the environment might be. The same applies to Europeans in the EU, or South Americans in the Mercosul.
>> (...) There's not enough money in the world to pay for the UK's social security system for every person in the world(...)
I can see that we hold many different values about other things, and these might be contaminating the main topic of discussion. I don't want "government benefits". What I want is "free flow of people and services, so that they don't grow up to be dependent on these government benefits in the first place".
>> Why are you deserving more than any other being on the planet?
I am not more deserving to anything, neither I am any less deserving to anything.
>> And why should I even be allowed to stay in the UK?
Why shouldn't you? Are you dangerous? Are you denying someone to their freedoms? It doesn't seem to be the case.
In my value system, you should be allowed to stay anywhere where your presence (or your actions) do not cause direct harm to society. In yours, the country of origin takes precedence over the individual.
If you gave every single person a choice over which social contract they could choose do you think they'd all be living in Iran, the Congo or the US? Do you think the US could cope with 5 or 6 billion people living there? Or Switzerland or whoever's topping the quality of life list atm.
You're calling people xenophobic because you want the US or the UK to suddenly turn into a meritocracy, but not a real one where we kick out the failures out and let more deserving in. No just the one where you get let in but most other people don't.
But you're not xenophobic or racist? Because it's based on a criteria of merit that you qualify for but the starving child in Africa doesn't.
Is that hypocrisy?
The world today can't get away from those physical barriers. There's not enough money in the world to pay for the UK's social security system for every person in the world. A worldwide NHS? A dream many years from being realised. There's not enough schools spaces in the world for every child. There's not enough houses or roads or cars or yachts or lear jets or iPhones or big screen TVs to go around.
We're nowhere near that point, not even vaguely close. There's not enough. And you're complaining that you've almost managed to break through to the top 5% but they won't let you be a full member of the club. And by Jove you deserve it, and the guy who got me riled in the first place deserves it because you say so. There's enough for you, but only if they let that magical door open a teeny-tiny bit more.
I was lucky in my birth, you were almost as lucky as you've obviously landed on your feet. You got opportunities denied to most of the world. I got, and probably wasted, more. But are either of us xenophobes for benefiting from that luck or wanting to keep that situation for ourselves and our families?
Step back and reflect, really reflect if your desire for this 'sane' immigration isn't totally selfish. Why are you deserving more than any other being on the planet? Because you ticked some boxes? Passed some exams? Dream of starting a business? And why should I even be allowed to stay in the UK?