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.
Now THERE'S the answer that will have the quickest and best results for America! The other problems can be tackled as we learn more from studies.
And there you go! Only 9 pages to turn a thoughtful discussion about resource allocation and human overpopulation on the planet into an anti -immigrant bash fest. Actually longer than anticipated. Funny how we can "have babies" while 3rd world countries and immigrants (oh, and farm animals) "breed." Nice way to actually bring what was a pretty interesting thread to follow back down into the gutter.
Which two racial groups are on most on government assistance? Whites and Blacks. I unlike some others do not feel Government Assistance in and of itself a bad thing, on the contrary. However - if you are looking around to point the finger at irresponsible women with lots of kids that cannot support them financially, that would be a good place to start.
It's mostly the third world countries that have the population problems.
As may have been noted earlier, total resource use is the product of population on the one hand and per capita resource use on the other. Considering that a child born in the US will be projected to consume 10-15 times the level of resources that a child born in a third-world country would, it should be apparent that both population growth and per capita resource use in the US are important issues to be dealt with in seeking to assure the future of the species on the planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by citigirl
Now if we can deport the illegal immigrants and slow down immigration we will have no problems in this country.
No, we would still be faced with the problem of what to do about people who believe that all problems result from illegal immigration.
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,468,601 times
Reputation: 382
Let's see, muslims may have many wives (we already have some wayward mormans for that) and one man can produce a lot of children with many wives. It won't take much to see just who is producing the most children.
The whole thread is about over-population and if you think slowing down immigration and getting rid of 12-20 million people that should not even be here would not help our population you have not read the title of this thread.
And there you go! Only 9 pages to turn a thoughtful discussion about resource allocation and human overpopulation on the planet into an anti -immigrant bash fest. Actually longer than anticipated. Funny how we can "have babies" while 3rd world countries and immigrants (oh, and farm animals) "breed." Nice way to actually bring what was a pretty interesting thread to follow back down into the gutter.
Which two racial groups are on most on government assistance? Whites and Blacks. I unlike some others do not feel Government Assistance in and of itself a bad thing, on the contrary. However - if you are looking around to point the finger at irresponsible women with lots of kids that cannot support them financially, that would be a good place to start.
Bily4,
As can be seen from many of my posts, I’m very much concerned with overpopulation, the environment, and conservation. And, as can be seen by my posts in this thread, I believe we have plenty enough humans in America and more than enough in various parts of the world. My position is unpopular with the “we need lots more people so we can circulate more money” crowd.
Immigration is a very big part of all of the above. So, my apologies if you’re offended, but the immigration problem cannot be separated from our other problems. The subject of the thread states the problem and immigrants and their desire to out-populate other groups is going to greatly add to our upcoming miseries.
As can be seen from many of my posts, I’m very much concerned with overpopulation, the environment, and conservation. And, as can be seen by my posts in this thread, I believe we have plenty enough humans in America and more than enough in various parts of the world. My position is unpopular with the “we need lots more people so we can circulate more money” crowd.
Immigration is a very big part of all of the above. So, my apologies if you’re offended, but the immigration problem cannot be separated from our other problems. The subject of the thread states the problem and immigrants and their desire to out-populate other groups is going to greatly add to our upcoming miseries.
Actually, your position is unpopular with the "how do you know what constitutes too many people?" crowd too. To marginalize the opposition to your point of view as to be only money centered is not supported at all. This is in addition to the immigration issue being marginal, if applicable at all, to the overall topic.
My problem with your overall position is that you have started from the assumption that we already have too many people in the USA and the world. Your referenced support site "The World Population Awareness" (below) is not an objective site, and your attempts to equate it to publications that do not enter this discussion from an advocacy position lessen the credibility of your argument.
Actually, your position is unpopular with the "how do you know what constitutes too many people?" crowd too. To marginalize the opposition to your point of view as to be only money centered is not supported at all. This is in addition to the immigration issue being marginal, if applicable at all, to the overall topic.
My problem with your overall position is that you have started from the assumption that we already have too many people in the USA and the world. Your referenced support site "The World Population Awareness" is not an objective site, and your attempts to equate it to publications that do not enter this discussion from an advocacy position lessen the credibility of your argument.
So what? It doesn't make any difference what periodicals, websites, or publications I submit, they'll all be false or be advocates for something with which you disagree. I don't care if you think my argument/s lack credibility.
Maybe you're not typical, maybe I'm wrong about you, but I've encountered so many in forums who have no intention other than drowning out other opinions to the point that only one is possible, that I'm well able to recognize a waste of time and effort upcoming.
If the various posts I make and the overall discussion gets people thinking about the problems we're going to be facing in the near term, then maybe people reading them will look much more deeply into the subject/s. It's a small thing, but I think it's a worthwhile endeavor.
If you're the type I think you are, then you will promote the idea that no action of any kind will be necessary and whatever happens happens. I'm not that type of person; I won't sit back and watch, and I certainly will avoid wasting time and effort in situations that are lost causes from the beginning.
It is worse--strictly in terms of resource consumption--for the planet's biosphere for a middle-class US Citizen (or other 1st worlder) to have a child than it is for a lower-class citizen of a third world country to have a child.
Last edited by sponger42; 08-16-2007 at 10:18 AM..
Reason: clarification
It is worse--strictly in terms of resource consumption--for the planet's biosphere for a middle-class US Citizen (or other 1st worlder) to have a child than it is for a lower-class citizen of a third world country to have a child.
I see that logic and I agree, but then "third worlders" are supposed to be helped to become "first worlders" by globalization. The problem of resource consumption is going to become far worse.
So what? It doesn't make any difference what periodicals, websites, or publications I submit, they'll all be false or be advocates for something with which you disagree. I don't care if you think my argument/s lack credibility.
Maybe you're not typical, maybe I'm wrong about you, but I've encountered so many in forums who have no intention other than drowning out other opinions to the point that only one is possible, that I'm well able to recognize a waste of time and effort upcoming.
If the various posts I make and the overall discussion gets people thinking about the problems we're going to be facing in the near term, then maybe people reading them will look much more deeply into the subject/s. It's a small thing, but I think it's a worthwhile endeavor.
If you're the type I think you are, then you will promote the idea that no action of any kind will be necessary and whatever happens happens. I'm not that type of person; I won't sit back and watch, and I certainly will avoid wasting time and effort in situations that are lost causes from the beginning.
I am the type who wants to see serious discussions evolving from a factual basis.
My objections to advocacy sites is that they are not in support of these discussions, unless they contain analytical data supporting the hypothesis. Frankly, I am open to either side here, but haven't seen anything yet stating that planet overpopulation, versus the distribution or goods/services (sometimes for political purposes) is a problem. The article I initially referenced, from an international publication with no preset agenda concerning worldwide population, questioned that assumption. Be dismissive of this all you want, I still haven't seen anything analytical disclosing that we are currently overpopulated, or what the maximum number of folks are who can survive reasonably on this planet.
I am the type who wants to see serious discussions evolving from a factual basis.
My objections to advocacy sites is that they are not in support of these discussions, unless they contain analytical data supporting the hypothesis. Frankly, I am open to either side here, but haven't seen anything yet stating that planet overpopulation, versus the distribution or goods/services (sometimes for political purposes) is a problem. The article I initially referenced, from an international publication with no preset agenda concerning worldwide population, questioned that assumption. Be dismissive of this all you want, I still haven't seen anything analytical disclosing that we are currently overpopulated, or what the maximum number of folks are who can survive reasonably on this planet.
IF you were GENUINELY interested, you'd have already found out that the so-called advocacy site you continue to mention is only one of many places to obtain substantial pieces of information. As to The Economist I’ve already stated my view that it is an advocate for a particular line of economic thought with which I disagree, not on various principles of pure thought, but on their mutations. Not that the magazine doesn’t also have valuable insight and data on many issues, otherwise subscriptions would suffer mightily, but I don’t view the publication as an important tool in decision-making for me.
For me, at this point, it's really as simple as setting up a spreadsheet and calculating the exponential growth that is projected now, and then adding in a few variables NOT considered by the Census Bureau such as the newfound desires by a few ideological groups, not small in numbers, to out-populate other groups, to come up with some very frightening scenarios.
You downplay the immigration issue, but there is proof in various media that the out-population of certain geographic areas is uppermost in planning for future domination by some immigrant groups. None of this bodes well for conservation and environmental efforts.
Additionally, and this is too big a topic to discuss in this thread, America is going through the throes of change and is finding out that some things should not have been subjected to the rush to globalize. We are destroying, in some areas more quickly than others, our agrarian roots and the ability to support ourselves in smaller groups and geographic areas. We need to look at smaller groups for support of various social services and self-sovereignty because this bigness is going to swallow us. Downplay overpopulation at your peril as far as I’m concerned, because the increased numbers only add to the bigness of it all.
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.
