# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar bhide's argument that immigration and trade impact the economy in different ways. immigration involves people moving across borders, which can lead to job competition and potential wage suppression for native workers. it can also strain public services like healthcare and education. - Delilah A

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhide's argument that immigration could be beneficial for the economy. I say this because according to the Harvard Business review , It is an unequal form of competition that explains much of the recent movement of industries and jobs out of the United States, undercutting our production. This means some americans can lose their jobs and have to file for unemployment. Some may say immigration and free trade is helpul to the economy because it allows goods and services to be produced more efficiently, but I don't agree because it will hurt the economy in the long run because many immigrants will come over and eventually take up all jobs for Americans and America will slowly lose its value.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Amar Bhide's argument because immigration and free trade can be a good and benefit the country. "Sheltering immigrants who would face torture or starvation in their homelands" People try very hard for a better life by moving to America. The passage states "Immigrants benefits from high wages and greater safety." I don't agree with not letting innocent people never have chance. I believe to make it safe for American citizens, we should take the extra precaution and give background checks as stated in the passage.-Teresa

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Amar Bhide's argument the best course of action to minimize fear is to manage risk because the utility of background checks and the public infrastructure is the foremost principal to reasonably support immigrants. "Take the recent example of "caravans" of thousands of Central American migrants who walked to the U.S.-Mexico border in order to apply for asylum. These migrants were driven from their home
countries by the violent activities of criminal gangs." Immigrants who enter a country illegally can still be connected or controlled by criminal organizations from their home countries, there's no telling who can be a criminal as its difficult to know. Some may argue that reducing the risks of immigration, countries should use a point system for immigrants receive points based on credentials but a person does not need advanced degree to make invaluable contributions, just like the British-born son of Libyan immigrants who carried out a bomb in a concert. -Carlos R

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhides argument that immigration could be beneficial for the economy because this could provide our country with multi risk. Diseases , overpopulation, low-employment, and citizen endangerment are just a few of many possible risks that could occur with immigration.Though the author mentions that bringing in immigrants could enrich food, culture, and traditions , There are many other things he U.S should focus on. #Safetyfirst.

# data[].attributes.body
l disagree Joe Biden open up the borders immense to let hundreds of thousands of them of coming

# data[].attributes.body
i agree with Amar bhide argument that is essential growth because it drives innovation and creates evidence for the free trade from economic studies shows that entrepreneurial ventures lead to technological and increase productivity. additionally successful entrepreneurs often serve as role models inspiring others to pursue innovative ideas some argue that entrepreneurial can risk and lead to failure the potential benefits out weight learning experiences

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with amar Bhide's argument that free trade and immigration is benefial an economy . I feel that free trade is the best thing but it is not for me to say anything but I disagree with it . it makes them fight for jod positons so many of the countries would not trade how they do things

# data[].attributes.body
i agree with Amar Bhide's argument that free trade and immigration are good for this social economy because, free trade is fair and provides consumers with increased access to less expensive and/or higher quality foreign goods. As for immigration they improve the economy by spurring economic growth by laboring, consuming goods and services and starting businesses

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Amar Bhides argument that potential gains because immigration appears to be extremely similar to free trade. In the article it states "immigrants themselves benefit higher wages, greater safety and more individual freedom". This explains why I agree with Amar Bhides argument.

In the article it also states "Supporting immigration also has a moral appeal". This is also a reason why I agree with Amar Bhides argument.

- Darry

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree because both trade and immigration involve the flow of resources—goods and services in the case of trade, and labor in the case of immigration. Bhidé, as a libertarian, argues that if you believe in the benefits of trade (like increased competition, specialization, and overall economic growth), then the same logic should apply to immigration. Essentially, he suggests that just as lowering trade barriers benefits consumers and producers by increasing efficiency, allowing people to move freely across borders can have similar positive effects on economies.

# data[].attributes.body
"I agree with amar bhide's argument that immigration appears to be extremely similar to free trade. Because the immigrant benefit from higher wages, greater safety.Sheltering immigrants who would face torture or
starvation is easy to sell in there home. In some ways immigrants can gain potential and maybe greater for free trade -Anthony

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree because the last few years he was there he never did the things he promised and currently Mexico is neither the president's backyard nor a colony of anyone and the coexistence of the two countries is necessary because the United States is nothing without the exports it provides. If the Mexican Country continues to disagree with other countries, food taxes will be very high because exports to the United States have to pass first. through El Puerto Mexicano and I have already answered that I will not let ships pass that go to the United States if there is a disaster.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhide's argument that free trade is good for the country because there are different things that could happen with free trade .She listed some cons throughout the paragraphs on what could harm the countries.Free trade causes a lot of fights with different countries due to one cheating out the other.Immigration is different on the other hand its less as a problem then free trade because free trade takes a lot of risk.

-Ricardo

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhides argument that immigration and free trade are helpful to the economy because Limiting imports from countries with low wages and poor working conditions may seem justified, but it merely deprives these countries' low-wage workers of their already-minimal earnings. I do not agree with the other side because they are competing for jobs which are leading people to lose their jobs. The unemployment of jobs are making no benefit for our countries. It makes them fight for job positions so many of the countries wouldn't trade how they are supposed to and it would make conflict within the countries.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree that in 1871, The NewYork Times published Tammany Hall's accounting books; Tweed was tried in 1873 and sentenced to twelve years in prison. The Times earned national recognition for its coverage of Tweed In 1891, Jones died, creating a management imbroglio in which his children had insufficient business acumen to inherit the company and his will prevented an acquisition of the.

-Devin

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar about free trade. I say this because free trade brings a lot of problems like conflicts with other countries and problems with other countries presidents . Immigration is less of a problem then free trade . Most immigrants move to America for a better life for them and there kids future and not to cause problems

.

# data[].attributes.body
Jessica Garcia

I disagree with Amar Bhide's argument of free trade because of risk people experience , immigration is fundamentally different from trade because it involves human beings with unique experience and contributions rather that just economic transactions. Immigration cuts out middlement benefits both sides.Amar Bhide experienced immigration and the risk. AS the article states 'Abedi carried out a suicide bombing Ariana grande concert'' showing us that free trade can be risky .

# data[].attributes.body
Joseph

I agree with Amar Bhide's argument that immigration isn't always bad because it can also bring benefits on our side also. He states that"Successive generations of immigrants turned the young country, with its agrarian economy, into the world's
leading technological and military power". Another benifit from immigration can be "Immigrants made New York City a cultural mecca and Los Angeles a center of the global film industry". Both of these sentences that Amar included show that it could benefit both sides but it is not always promised.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhide argument that free trade is good for the country because there are lots of risks with free trade. Amar Bhide lists the cons of free trade such as exploitation and possible fall outs with other countries. I feel that free trade cons outweigh the pros and could harm the country. Others may argue that free trade would benefit the country and is similar to immigration but I think the risk of free trade is to high also it's not the same as immigration because its less problems with immigration.

-Titus

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Amar Bhide's argument that free trade and immigration is beneficial for an economy. I say this because according to The Harvard Business review, workers from lower wage countries, will be entering higher wage countries. This means these new arrivals would compete for jobs, accept work for lower pay, and force the existing jobholders to accept either lower wages or unemployment. Many people would be put out of jobs because of new arrivals and they want better for themselves and family, so they would fight for positions which will lead to putting people out of jobs. While some may say free trade and immigration help an economy because you get better technology, foods and services, I do not agree because what if a lot of countries don't trade properly now there is conflict with those two countries.