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.
Well, the left wants to control population growth and the right wants to control immigrants.
With the declining number of children in America per woman, immigration has been the mainstay to sustain and increase population numbers in America.
Now that immigration will cease or the flow will greatly be stemmed, can we expect that the population projections can be re-estimated and that maybe America will start to follow an Italy like population flow with declining populations?
I guess I'm basically saying this is something that both the left and right can be happy about. The right gets the immigration reform and the left gets population control.
The only thing is that much of the Sunbelt growth is predicated on population growth. Will they be able to sustain constant or declining populations.
I haven't seen anyone approach this immigration topic from this angle.
Apparently, the whole reason Merkel allowed immigration into Germany was because there were projections that Germany was going to lose so many people due to their women not having enough kids that all of their social systems would collapse. This is the REAL reason that she did it, most people are totally unaware, but not me. It would basically cause the collapse that Greece has been facing: an aging population and child bearing women not having enough children.
Thoughts? (I don't want any political discussions, I just want it focusing on population growth)
America will join the rest of the industrialized world with a shrinking population, and in a few generations it will become noticeable.
Other articles to google up can be found under "China's Demographic Time Bomb" and "Shrinking World Population".
People have been told for many, many years that the world population is "increasing exponentially", and that used to be true. Now, it's only true in India and Pakistan and maybe a couple of other places. Once the population starts a natural decline, no government has ever been able to reverse that trend. Japan has tried, but with no results.
So the world - and America - will have fewer people in the future. That's a fact, but I have no idea how it will look and what it will feel like.....
America will join the rest of the industrialized world with a shrinking population, and in a few generations it will become noticeable.
Other articles to google up can be found under "China's Demographic Time Bomb" and "Shrinking World Population".
People have been told for many, many years that the world population is "increasing exponentially", and that used to be true. Now, it's only true in India and Pakistan and maybe a couple of other places. Once the population starts a natural decline, no government has ever been able to reverse that trend. Japan has tried, but with no results.
So the world - and America - will have fewer people in the future. That's a fact, but I have no idea how it will look and what it will feel like.....
Good subject, though.
I understand this, but you missed the point.
America would already be like Japan had it not been for immigration. We have birth rates that are very similar to many countries in Europe but immigrants stemmed the tide.
Now with no immigration won't we become just like the declining European nations of Greece?
Better to maintain your culture and have population decline than to lose your culture simply to have population growth.
Yes, economies need to restructure themselves in the face of population decline but the process is so slow that the changes are hardly noticeable. Cumulatively over time you do see the changes, but not in any given year.
My town's population has been falling about 1% per year since 1990. The county it is in is also losing population though at a somewhat slower pace. My State's population has been flat due to one county seeing increases that offset the losses everywhere else. What does this mean? There is very little new construction here. The trades mostly work on maintenance and/or renovation of existing structures and infrastructure. The schools are half empty and many should close altogether and send their kids to a neighboring town, but no town wants to do that as the school is the centerpiece of communities that have little else to serve in that role. Instead, schools that had 2 classes per grade go down to one. Schools that had one class per grade go to multi-grades in a single class. At the Middle/High School level where one school serves multiple towns, it becomes difficult to field some sports teams for lack of enough kids. Family farms and similar properties that had 3 houses on them from the days when extended families worked the farm may try to rent out the extra homes, and failing that they sit empty. The inevitable leaks go unrepaired and one day they realize the house is now a tear down. Dismal as this all may sound to some, the quality of life and community spirit remains rather good. Our traditions continue. The natural beauty of the landscape goes untarnished when there is no development pressure. Towns do not have expensive infrastructure projects to fund when there is population decline rather than growth.
Merkel could have encouraged migration from anyone other than the most violent culture on earth- Islam.
Tell me which country could have given her 500,000 people for several years in a row?
This was her way of ensuring the future of Germany at a slight cost to safety and culture, the goal being that the immigrants will eventually assimilate, if not in this generation, then the next, and they won't have to do this again. If she waited and did this later, the population of Germany would even be lower, meaning that the immigrants would make a higher percentage of the population.
She was effectively preventing a Greece like economic collapse. Greece has about 99% Greeks there.
Those favoring cutting immigration are basically favoring a Greece-like society.
Tell me which country could have given her 500,000 people for several years in a row?
This was her way of ensuring the future of Germany at a slight cost to safety and culture, the goal being that the immigrants will eventually assimilate, if not in this generation, then the next, and they won't have to do this again. If she waited and did this later, the population of Germany would even be lower, meaning that the immigrants would make a higher percentage of the population.
She was effectively preventing a Greece like economic collapse. Greece has about 99% Greeks there.
Those favoring cutting immigration are basically favoring a Greece-like society.
A slight cost? Seems to be an enormous cost to safety and culture. The Turks that were imported a couple generations ago have never fully assimilated. That is the way of Muslims. Their culture is incompatible with Western culture. A few assimilate of course, but that is not the norm.
If Germany needed more people they could have found as many as they wanted in Central and South America or in Asia. Those people would have assimilated.
If the choice is a Muslim onslaught or Greece, I'd go with Greece any day. You can recover from economic collapse. You can't recover from cultural subjugation.
I think we have seen a decline in births because it is expensive to raise a child and responsible parents that don't have the safety net of public assistance are careful to make sure that they can provide for the kids they have.
I think we already have too many people when you consider the congestion in most cities and poverty so why should we import more families that will keep having kids?
It won't be global warming that does us in but it will be the vanishing resources. We can only sustain so many at the high level of living we enjoy so we shouldn't encourage more people or we will all end up taking a step down.
I think we have seen a decline in births because it is expensive to raise a child and responsible parents that don't have the safety net of public assistance are careful to make sure that they can provide for the kids they have.
I think we already have too many people when you consider the congestion in most cities and poverty so why should we import more families that will keep having kids?
It won't be global warming that does us in but it will be the vanishing resources. We can only sustain so many at the high level of living we enjoy so we shouldn't encourage more people or we will all end up taking a step down.
Talked to the neighbor, a young couple with a 6 year old son. They wanted to have at least one more child, but with the cost of their medical deductibles and daycare, they decided they could not afford it.
The only younger kids I see, usually 5 or 6 of which I suspect to be anchor babies, shop the first weekend of the month when public assistance pays out and use WIC coupons also. Only those on public assistance can afford to have kids anymore.
The quality of life has really slipped in the US for the working class. Perhaps jobs that pay a decent wage would allow people to afford more children. Many women are now staying at home with the kids because they can't earn enough to pay childcare from their wages. It is a sad situation.
We birth anchor babies, many states provide pre-natal care for the illegal alien pregnancy. I would guess if just that was a "free" service for American citizens, we would see an increase in our birth rates and if the state paid to raise the kids providing free medical, food stamps, subsidized housing............... When they talk about illegal aliens working for less, my husband and myself could have worked for those low wages if someone else paid to raise our two kids also!
When we get the $11 billion of tax dollars off our backs in supporting illegal aliens, we will all have a little extra pocket money! Ship 'em out!
OP, if you just want to focus on population growth, this is not the forum area to do it in. This is "illegal immigration" and those people are having kids that we support and that is not good for our country, not having children ourselves because the majority are responsible enough not to have kids they can't afford and yet be forced to support anchor babies delivered by people that aren't supposed to be in the USA, people that brought our laws to be here trying to anchor themselves by having babies we support!!!!!!!
Talked to the neighbor, a young couple with a 6 year old son. They wanted to have at least one more child, but with the cost of their medical deductibles and daycare, they decided they could not afford it.
The only younger kids I see, usually 5 or 6 of which I suspect to be anchor babies, shop the first weekend of the month when public assistance pays out and use WIC coupons also. Only those on public assistance can afford to have kids anymore.
The quality of life has really slipped in the US for the working class. Perhaps jobs that pay a decent wage would allow people to afford more children. Many women are now staying at home with the kids because they can't earn enough to pay childcare from their wages. It is a sad situation.
We birth anchor babies, many states provide pre-natal care for the illegal alien pregnancy. I would guess if just that was a "free" service for American citizens, we would see an increase in our birth rates and if the state paid to raise the kids providing free medical, food stamps, subsidized housing............... When they talk about illegal aliens working for less, my husband and myself could have worked for those low wages if someone else paid to raise our two kids also!
When we get the $11 billion of tax dollars off our backs in supporting illegal aliens, we will all have a little extra pocket money! Ship 'em out!
OP, if you just want to focus on population growth, this is not the forum area to do it in. This is "illegal immigration" and those people are having kids that we support and that is not good for our country, not having children ourselves because the majority are responsible enough not to have kids they can't afford and yet be forced to support anchor babies delivered by people that aren't supposed to be in the USA, people that brought our laws to be here trying to anchor themselves by having babies we support!!!!!!!
That is the thing. The middle class has to plan for expenditures like kids, housing, food, cars etc..
The poor who are already on some type of assistance don't care so they have more kids since they don't have to worry about putting food in their mouths.
America is reaching a tipping point where technology is reducing jobs yet we have more people that need to work and make a living for themselves. The Gov. cannot continue to take money from the dwindling population that does work and give it to those who don't. It is a recipe for disaster and will lead to the downfall of America.
America used to lift everyone up with hope but now it is pulling us all down. We dodged a bullet with Hillary who would have opened the borders and increased the refugee programs. Why do we need all these new people when we are already having trouble taking care of those who are already here?
Oh yeah it was all about votes.
I'd like to see illegal immigration stopped and our population growth to stabilize.
If we had less people to take care of we would need less money to do so.
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.
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.
