U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-09-2017, 08:03 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
13,816 posts, read 8,666,647 times
Reputation: 20118

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom77falcons View Post
No they don't. The US lets in 1M permanent residents (green cards leading to citizenship) every year. Only Canada, NZ, and Australia have similar type immigration. The rest of Europe, etc allows in immigrants on a temporary basis and does not offer automatic citizenship after 5 years like we do. Some countries keep immigrants temporary for 8 years.

You have to compare apples to apples and not include things like H1B, etc. Purely on green card issuance, the US lets in more than the world combined. And a million per year is way too much.
You are talking about chain migration, where someone comes in and his relatives all follow.
And that is coming to an end fairly quickly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2017, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,786 posts, read 3,879,227 times
Reputation: 3605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Facts Kill Rhetoric View Post
In other developed countries, they have already reached that point where Natural Increase is either zero or negative and all their growth comes solely from immigration. There are also countries that have not expanded immigration, therefore their entire national population is in decline because immigration cannot offset the negative Natural Increase. These countries understand that and realize there isn't a way to reverse it, as that would take decades to put into motion, so have come to expect a shrinking population. Therefore their national level planning goes towards containment of structures and housing units, as well as increasing economic production, to try to mitigate the affects of a population drop. America doesn't have to worry about that presently and wont have to worry about it for another 50-60 years, since its one of the more younger developed nations of the world but internally, some of the American states do have to worry about this and for some, they have to worry in the present because the process is starting already for them.
Another way to mitigate decline in population is to increase retirement age (to reduce the ratio of working people to retirees). If immigration is capped at ~1million per year and fertility rates remain the same as they have been for the past decade (Imo they will decline further), we would probably have to raise retirement age from 65 to 70 for the people who are currently 35 and younger. There will be a big, sustained spike in deaths in around 10-15 years once the first boomers will start passing away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2017, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,494 posts, read 12,006,720 times
Reputation: 10581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
Another way to mitigate decline in population is to increase retirement age (to reduce the ratio of working people to retirees). If immigration is capped at ~1million per year and fertility rates remain the same as they have been for the past decade (Imo they will decline further), we would probably have to raise retirement age from 65 to 70 for the people who are currently 35 and younger. There will be a big, sustained spike in deaths in around 10-15 years once the first boomers will start passing away.
Raising the retirement age is a really dumb idea. All of the increase in life expectancy in recent decades has been due to the wealthy - the poor do not live any longer. In addition, a lot of blue-collar jobs are physically impossible to work on in your late 60s, while white collar jobs (provided you don't get age-related cognitive decline) can pretty much be done indefinitely (which is why a lot of wealthier people choose to forestall "real retirement" if they enjoy working.

If you raised the retirement age the result would be a huge decline in the standard of living of poorer Americans, who would have to work in physically stressful jobs for a longer period, and have a much shorter period of retirement than their parents or even grandparents did. In contrast, wealthier people would have a larger productive period in the workforce, but many would choose to retire early even if they didn't qualify for Social Security yet, provided they had the resources.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2017, 03:08 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
6,094 posts, read 3,429,893 times
Reputation: 7765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justabystander View Post
Are you native American? How did your ancestors get in? Good luck in getting jobs done that only immigrants will do.
I don't disagree with your other statements, and I'm a first generation American to boot, but I find that "jobs only immigrants will do" line, very tired, cliche and inaccurate. There's tons of poor, broke and under or unemployed native born Americans who would love to have any job, no matter how crappy. Also when people make statements like that, they totally ignore the exploitation of immigrant workers (legal or otherwise) done by certain industries. They ignore such exploitation because "well at least they offer jobs!"

A desperate enough American will take any job they can get, but they will not put up with the BS that some companies do, because they have the language skills and basic legal knowledge to not be taken advantage of, the way many poor immigrants are. So it's not necessarily that Americans don't want to work these jobs, but these companies don't wanna hire Americans because Americans aren't as easy to abuse in their eyes.

Other than that I agree with your statements. We all came from somewhere else down the line besides the Amerindians. Hell, I am an immigrant who is descended from immigrants. My thing is everyone should come legally, learn the language at least enough to get by and if they work with the public, don't expect government handouts and be decent people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2017, 01:35 AM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
706 posts, read 517,488 times
Reputation: 407
It will decrease drastically if NK has its way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2017, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,786 posts, read 3,879,227 times
Reputation: 3605
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Raising the retirement age is a really dumb idea.
Its either that, or increasing taxes to 60%+ once the ratio of working (contributing) adults to pensioners plummets due to the fact that less working age people are entering the workforce and elderly living longer, or eliminating social security completely (never going to happen). Pick your poison. Imo after 40-45% taxes, people will be considering raising retirement age as part of the solution. This whole system only works when you have 2.5-3 working people supporting each retiree, and we already dropped to 2.8:1 ratio, lowest in history of the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2017, 08:06 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,494 posts, read 12,006,720 times
Reputation: 10581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
Its either that, or increasing taxes to 60%+ once the ratio of working (contributing) adults to pensioners plummets due to the fact that less working age people are entering the workforce and elderly living longer, or eliminating social security completely (never going to happen). Pick your poison. Imo after 40-45% taxes, people will be considering raising retirement age as part of the solution. This whole system only works when you have 2.5-3 working people supporting each retiree, and we already dropped to 2.8:1 ratio, lowest in history of the country.
As long as we continue to replenish our working-age population with immigrants, we should be fine. And Social Security in particular could easily be stabilized by lifting the cap on earnings taxed. In addition, I'm of the belief that automation is going to dramatically decrease the amount of employment over the next few generations, in which case we'll have less people working no matter what the retirement age is set at.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2017, 08:32 AM
 
Location: 78745
3,015 posts, read 2,173,409 times
Reputation: 5143
People are healthier and living longer. By 2050, people will be living longer than they do today. It probably won't be all that unusual for people to live to be 120 years old.

I don't see how the US population can decline, unless there is a mass exodus from the country; or we have a national disaster, such as a gigantic meteor that slams into the United States with such force that it destroys much of the country from coast to coast; or we are struck by a massive earthquake that's so devastating that it shakes much of the country to dust and ruins with death and destruction everywhere.

Otherwise, I don't see the US population declining.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2017, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Nantahala National Forest, NC
27,092 posts, read 6,013,517 times
Reputation: 30347
Not while people insist on having 4-6 kids...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2017, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,494 posts, read 12,006,720 times
Reputation: 10581
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatblueheron View Post
Not while people insist on having 4-6 kids...
People don't insist on that. Only fringe groups like the Amish and ultra-orthodox Jews have families that large nowadays. Even Mormons only have an average of 3.4 kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top