That's a good nutshell definition.
But this is why nutshells are best left for snacktime. Clear definitions of concepts are needed to analyze complex issues like immigration.
Libertarians advocate (in your phrase) "the freedom for a person to do as he/she pleases as long as it does not negatively affect the lives of others" but have a very precise definition of what it means to "negatively affect the lives of others." It doesn't mean any action which causes anything which anyone doesn't like (the color I paint my house annoys my neighbor, me selling my house depresses property values for my neighbors, etc). It means a property rights violation: seizing or causing damage to someone else's property (including their body).
(for more rigorous definitions of "property rights violation" and other key concepts, see
here)
A Mexican outcompeting an American in the labor market (e.g. because he's willing to accept lower pay) in no way violates the property rights of the American. The state forcibly preventing an employer from hiring who he pleases, or forcibly preventing a worker (of whatever nationality) from doing a job he was hired to do
is a violation of both of their property rights.
From a libertarian point of view, there is zero difference between immigration restrictions to "protect our jobs" and labor unions.
Both involve the state using force to violate the rights of some workers (and employers) to subsidize others.
Connect With Us