[onlooker]

I think the irony of unfettered Capitalism and being incompatible with Nationalism as defined in this thread goes even deeper. The basic tools of Capitalism such as money, lending, private property and the ideological position of Capitalism being individual gain, greed, competition all are incompatible with Nationalism. Why? Because they all stress the individual and self gain at the expense of collective unity and wellbeing . Capitalism was bound to seek to expand markets worldwide. In that sense Globalization was inevitable. This era has seen the ascendency of Corporations in tandem with the ascendency of Capitalism.

And so now Governments are totally corrupted and serve Big Money. So, my assertion is in fact that Capitalism is incompatible with Nationalism. It corrupts any attempt to reign it in via the power structure ie. Govt. In fact Big Money is the true Power Structure of this planet. The Corporations, the Banks , the wealthy have no national allegiance. They have allegiance to Money and profit. Surely, you all see how the US govt. invariably sides with Big Business on practically all issues. President Eisenhower said beware the Military/Industrial complex

[onlooker]

By the way given that this thread is specifically about Immigration we have here also an example of Govt. policy to favor corporations. These illegals are working here receiving hardly any benefits even while required to pay taxes. And Cog, technically they are not allowed to receive hardly any help from govt.

So the coporations are happy to have these people at so cheap a cost doing work, that Americans either do not wish to do or would do but only with better pay and/or benefits that their illegal counterparts.

[Cog]

Government should do what it does best. To regulate commerce between the USA and other countries in a way beneficial way to the USA as a whole. But there is no implication that government needs to be overbearing in its regulation of corporations that serve our own citizenry. The adoption of socialism doesn't get us anywhere good. Government regulation costs everyone in America money. Lost productivity to comply with it all costs an enormous amount of money.

Yes, government at the federal level can shrink and still maintain its main functions which are to guarantee individual and corporate rights before the law. Immigration and international commerce are also those things delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. Health care and the type of method we pay for it, is not an enumerated federal function. Although we have went part way there with Medicare and Medicaid. There is no right to health care. It maybe a desirable thing to have but no right exists for it.

[KaiserJeep]

That's not the way it is here in Silly Valley, onlooker. YES, the (possibly) undocumented Latinos landscaping my yard and buiding a deck are getting paid in cash, but they are also moonlighting weekends only from what I presume are real jobs, since all of them have pickup trucks. In my defense, I tried to get real licensed/bonded contractors, but my yard is too small to interest them.

But the H1B visa holders working here are getting all the benefits paid to other corporate employees, and salaries commensurate with their relatively young ages and lack of experience. There is NOBODY going to make it here in this valley without something, with houses right around $1M in a good neighborhood close to mass transit, and rents at $3500-$5000/month. Either you live at your parent's home, or you find at least 5 roomates to share a house, regardless of citizenship status.

[Ibon]

Either you live at your parent's home, or you find at least 5 roomates to share a house, regardless of citizenship status.

My daughter lives in Oakland and shares her apartment with 3 others. Many of her millennial friends have left due to unaffordable housing.

[KaiserJeep]

I'm sorry, Ibon. Oakland is on the news every night with violence and has that revolving door effect with the Chief of Police. Not to mention, even with mass transit, it's 90 minutes or more from a Silicon Valley job. There ARE safe places there, so I hope your kid knows how to stay safe. But even my toney neighborhood is getting too dangerous for Seniors, which is why I am moving. It is with mixed emotions, I was in my 30's when I came here and have lived here half my life. The legalization of weed was the last straw, you can see people smoking things everywhere, and I doubt very much that those glass pipes and butane lighters are about weed.

[onlooker]

"But the H1B visa holders" --
Yes, those would get treated a little better logically than totally illegal aliens.
As for the crime and violence, the migrants bring, I fully agree that this is happening. But again why? In a country with such immense resources where a sizable part of the population wants firmer immigration control, the decision makers have abdicated their duty to protect the nation and the national interest.
That is of course what Nationalism proponents argue. Because, again and again in the US, we see profits take precedence over people. That is why we have the for profit failing Health System, a perpetual Drug War, an increasingly for profit prison system, trade treaties betraying working class, rabid union busting and downsizing of the workforce since Reagan etc. So, we are seeing the full bloom of the anti people, anti environment pro profit creed of Capitalism. Better take some tea, this subject gets me too worked up haha

[Newfie]

So even here we can’t discuss how many folks we want in the USA.

[Tanada]

So even here we can’t discuss how many folks we want in the USA.

Okay I will say it. I think the continent of North America can probably support 1.3 Billion if we eat every gram of food we grow and export nothing, and expect us to get there about 2150 unless peak oil/climate change prevent it. I would prefer that the USA have about 200 million, Canada about 50 million and Mexico/northern Latin America about another 50 million for a grand total for the continent of 300 million spread out rather than packed into the current mass sprawl cities.

My reasoning;
200 million for USA puts us around the 1960 population and nearly halves our population. 50 million for Canada puts them not far from where they are right now. 50 million for Panama up to Mexico including the Caribbean islands cuts their population about in half, like the USA population cut. The reason I didn't cut Canada is they had a very sparsely populated country up until about 1960 and they are a long way from crowded even now.

[yellowcanoe]

The reason I didn't cut Canada is they had a very sparsely populated country up until about 1960 and they are a long way from crowded even now.

Yes, Canada isn't crowded if you calculate the average number of inhabitants per square kilometer. However, I believe that Canada actually has a higher percentage of its population living in urban areas than the US does. The trend is for rural areas to become further depopulated and the urban share of the population to grow. That's one of the reasons why I oppose large scale immigration. The argument that Canada is relatively unpopulated is bogus because a significant majority of immigrants settle in the larger communities that are already densely populated. Once a city grows beyond what its infrastructure was designed to support the quality of life starts to drop.

[Cog]

A large portion of Canada is uninhabitable due to temperature. So acreage doesn't matter if you can't support the people who want to live on it.

[onlooker]

A large portion of Canada is uninhabitable due to temperature. So acreage doesn't matter if you can't support the people who want to live on it.

Ah, but that is where longer term planning comes into play. Sopposedly, CC will shift temperate regions further up North allowing for different and more crops and a longer growing season to plant and sow

[Cog]

This might amaze you but if the continental USA turns sub-tropical, we can still grow food here. Maybe I'll be growing bananas and oranges in Illinois. The people in South and Central America sort of know how to do this. Monsanto knows how to design seeds that will grow in many conditions.

[Ibon]

............................Optimal-...............Actual
US.........................250 million........326 million
Canada................... 50 million........ 36 million
Mexico ....................50 million........130 million
Central America.........30 million........ 41 million

The optimal is subject to change.

[Newfie]

Interesting Ibon and Tanada have such close numbers.

I can stipulate to something like that. 200-250 million for USA (I like 200 million better.).

Spending time in the. Arribean Basin I haven found a place yet that Isnt widely beyond its carrying capacity. I haven’t been to the Western Carib but since that’s where the caravan is coming from I guess that answeres that.

So, it looks to me like the only region here who should even be having an immigration debate is Canada.

Does ANYONE here significantly disagree? Does anyone want to argue for a higher number?

[ROCKMAN]

Newie - "So even here we can’t discuss how many folks we want in the USA.". And once again, bro, I have to ask: What do you mean "we" white man? IOW who exactly are you representing in your statement? As all the previous posts here obviously represent no single unified position.

Just as the discussion of the term "nationalism". It is actually a meaningless term since its meaning is dependent upon the opinion of the individual using it.

[Ibon]

So, it looks to me like the only region here who should even be having an immigration debate is Canada.

Does ANYONE here significantly disagree? Does anyone want to argue for a higher number?

If you look at the Peak OIl News page they linked the article about the remarkable decline in fertility rates.

https://peakoil.com/enviroment/remarkab ... lity-rates

Immigration will always remain an issue especially if domestic fertility rates continue to fall below replacement levels.

[Newfie]

Dodging the issue. If the right answer is 200-250 million then it seems absurd have immigration when we are at 330 million.

It’s pretty simple.

Forget all the drama and bigotry and accusations. The population needs to shrink.

Immigration is like a 330 pound guy whining about being fat while knocking back a Super Sized soda.

[Ibon]

Dodging the issue. If the right answer is 200-250 million then it seems absurd have immigration when we are at 330 million.

It’s pretty simple.

Forget all the drama and bigotry and accusations. The population needs to shrink.

Immigration is like a 330 pound guy whining about being fat while knocking back a Super Sized soda.

You sound like you suggesting we should just put a cork on immigration completely until we reach a desired level of population.

I would never advocate that. Why should that policy be promoted ahead of say Dohboi's suggestion of eating less meat.

Or why not outlaw exporting corn and wheat to China that is grown in arid areas that deplete our non renewable aquifers.

The 330 pound gorilla is multifaceted when it comes to human overshoot and you seem to be trying to create a 330 pound scapegoat gorilla here!

[Ibon]

I would think we would want those 200 or 250 million to be made up of the leanest and best adapted humans to carry forward our species. In my view that would be best achieved allowing say 30 million new immigrants in and replacing all those obese slovenly opiate addicted Americans in their place. Why should nationality define who gets through the bottleneck. I would much rather have a central american with an agrarian hard work background be in my neighborhood over some junk food eating suburbanite who doesn't even know an orange grows on a tree......

Ja Ja... That is why all my neighbors are central americans!