In his 1974 paper titled "Living on a Lifeboat", Garrett Hardin reduces growing populations and immigration to a metaphor of living in a lifeboat. The premise of the paper is that each country is like a lifeboat, only capable of handling a certain number of people. Once that capacity is reached, there runs a risk of upsetting the balance, and overturning the lifeboat, or society. If the lifeboat is already at capacity, then no more can be let on the boat, as well as no more can be born on the boat, until there occurs a death, creating a space for someone new. The United States is a lifeboat, and there are many people foundering in the ocean, wanting a chance to board our lifeboat, since it would yield a good, fruitful life. However, admitting many people would be detrimental to the health and success of the lifeboat. Of course, with this idea, there arises many ethical and moral issues, along with the practical. These can be looked at through many viewpoints, but the most favorable one is the viewpoint of oneself, and your own survival. Since Hardin proposes that the United States lifeboat only give wisdom, not food, to other foundering lifeboats, we could incorporate the idea of one Jonathan Swift, and pass this wisdom onto other lifeboats, thus increasing their chances at survival.
Hardin first observes that the people residing in the lifeboat could take a Christian or Marxist viewpoint of the whole matter. That is, try to help all of the people who are looking to join your lifeboat. If this were to occur, the occupancy of the lifeboat would soon far exceed the capacity of it, and it would sink, killing all aboard, including oneself. His second observation is that there is a limited number of empty spaces aboard the lifeboat. Thus a small number of people can be admitted to your lifeboat. But then arises the question, how do you decide who comes on. Is it a first come, first served basis, or should there be a selection process, where only the most fit to survive and continue on will be allowed on board? This brings up many ethical and moral issues, which would be hard to solve.