>>942253859
Its an old idea that was the original intention. Segregation, even without the laws in place, is still very much active today. Desegregation didn't fix or do much of anything except allow brown people to move into white cities/towns/neighborhoods. Once the white people saw the changing face, which can include culture, they left in large doses. You can't fix something by just displacing its community! A border around a nation will in fact reduce the spread of disease. I wouldn't trust south asia to tend to its tuberculosis cases, so barring them entirely will reduce the cases being transmitted to the host nation. There are technically protocols in place, which could help reduce the spread of transmission. Contrarily, it only takes a few mutations, due to a shittly run nation, to create a new super virus and you're back to square one. India is currently creating super bacteria's thanks to its heavily contaminated "holy waters".

>nor will reducing the amount of immigrants
Are we thinking of the same thing? Physical borders, like autonomous towns, and national policies is what I mean for borders. Set quotas for how many can come as well as what nation is permitted. Boom, the numbers have dropped tremendously.

>Whites also won't be displaced by immigrants
...except they have been? California used to be almost entirely white with a bit of hispanic. Now the state is brazil. Texas, same thing. Maryland, New York, the list goes on. Its easy to be displaced by people whom can't close there legs.

>an immigrant comes to this nation who can do a better job
The dollar is stronger than most other countries currency. The people coming through will not necessarily do a better job. In a number of cases its either the same qualities as the natives or worse. Also, when you increase the labor pool you inadvertently stifle wages, workers rights, and employment opportunities. Its a race to the bottom.