[Newfie]

Interesting I just stumble across this Sierra Club subgroup on immigration and population control

http://www.susps.org/index.html


"SUSPS' mission is to change Sierra Club population policy so that it once again comprehensively addresses U.S. population growth. We encourage you to vote for Sierra Club Board candidates who support the Club addressing the root cause of U.S. population growth."

[Newfie]

Here is their Immigration page.

http://www.susps.org/overview/immigration.html

U.S. immigration and population growth

Unless we act to change our country's immigration policies, U.S. population will double this century - practically within the lifetimes of children born today.5 By the year 2020, if current population trends continue, the U.S. will add enough population to create another New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, San Francisco, Indianapolis, San Jose, Memphis, Washington D.C., Jacksonville, Milwaukee, Boston, Columbus, New Orleans, Cleveland, Denver, Seattle, and El Paso - plus the next 75 largest cities in the U.S.3 - if we don't act now to stabilize U.S. population.

Population growth is influenced by three factors: mortality (the death rate, which has been steadily decreasing in the U.S.2), birth rates or fertility (children per woman) and net immigration (immigration minus emigration).29 Unlike in developing countries, fertility (children per woman) is no longer the significant contributor to U.S. population growth. In fact, overall U.S. fertility is slightly less than replacement level and has not exceeded replacement level since 1972.11

Components of U.S. population growth
Immigration is the largest factor contributing to population growth in the U.S. Immigration contributes over 2.25 million people to the U.S. population annually (1.5 million legal immigrants and illegal immigrants as of 2001-2002, now estimated at 1.7 million in 2003) plus 750,000 births to immigrant woman annually).31, 38 The total foreign-born population in the U.S. is now 31.1 million, a record 57% increase since 1990. 9-11 million of those are here illegally - a 4.5 million increase since 1990.

Population has been a concern of environmentalists since the first Earth Day in 1970. Had we stabilized immigration at replacement numbers in 1970, U.S. population would have stabilized at 255 million in 2020 and then gradually decreased to an environmentally sustainable level. Yet Congressional immigration policy changes starting with the 1965 Amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act has increased immigration six-fold. The first manifestations of this increase were realized by the first Earth Day in 1970. Current immigration levels are driving U.S. population to double this century.

Historically, post l970 immigrants and their descendants have added between 35 and 45 million people to America's population in less than 30 years. Unfortunately, this flow of people into the U.S. has not relieved population pressures in the countries of origin. During the this period of time the populations of most developing countries (including Central America, Mexico, China and Central America) have continued to grow.30

Clearly, we are not able to solve the world's population problems by attempting to absorb their excess population. Because our high resource consumption is exacerbated by our intake of immigrants, our population growth is compromising the environmental futures of not just our own country, but of the rest of the world - from many other countries from which we extract resources.

Paul Ehrlich, author of "The Population Explosion"35, said:

"Overpopulation in rich countries is, from the point of view of the Earth's habitability, more serious than rapid population growth in poor countries."

An NPG demographic analysis of age distribution, fertility, and mortality data shows that if there had been no immigration to the U.S. since 1990, the population in 2000 would have been 262 million - 19 million less than the 281 million counted. Thus, post-1990 immigrants and their children accounted for 61% of U.S. population growth during the last decade.32

Looking toward the future, at least 70% of our projected population growth this century will be caused by mass immigration - that is, by recent immigrants and their descendents.33

In 1972, two population commissions - the President's Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, headed by John D. Rockefeller III, and the Select Commission on Population, headed by Father Theodore Hesburgh, president of Notre Dame - concurred that U.S. population must be stabilized and that immigration policy would have to respect this demographic reality.6

The facts are clear. To preserve and protect our environment, the Sierra Club must, in addition to focusing on fertility and consumption, acknowledge the large part that current immigration numbers play in U.S. population growth and acknowledge the need for lower levels of immigration into the U.S.

[Cog]

The Sierra Club and Donald Trump on the same side of restricting immigration. Pinch me I must be dreaming.

[claman]

Both The US and Europe are facing huge immigration from the south.
These countries south of the borders have no idea of how to feed their own population, and most of all , they don't know how to not get more babies.
It is not whites against brownies, it is ignorance against better knowledge

[claman]

pstarr, Why doesn't the mexican people use their democratic right to chose a well working government? Pstarr tell me why don't they ??

[Newfie]

Not ignorance clam, but colonization. The southern countries are still European resource-extraction pools. We stole everything, strip-mined the timber minerals arable land and beautiful ancient cities. Cut and ran. Never built the same infrastructure we have come to consider our birthrights. They are stuck and want out. Wouldn't you?

Sure I would want out.

I'm not saying it is fair, at some point fair is a luxury. There is no fair when it comes to ultimate survival.

[Newfie]

The Sierra Club and Donald Trump on the same side of restricting immigration. Pinch me I must be dreaming.

Yup, strange alliances.

Its what happens when the pinch starts. I'll bet we see more odd stuff in the future.

[claman]

Newfie, do you really mean that there should be a lot more illegal immmigrants in te US ?

[Newfie]

No, not at all.

First we need to set some population limit. Say 300 million, so we have something to talk about that isn't kicking the can down the road.

Next we need a strategy for getting to 300 million.

Once at 300 million we need to decide if that's the right number or if we want to go lower.

If it's the right number and we are still below replacement THEN we can discuss who we want to invite in.

These are general thoughts. There need to be exceptions and allowances. But we need to accept the concept of limiting our population.

Let's say we get to 300 million AND signficantly reduce our consumption, then we may find we can afford 330 million population.

But as it is now we are inviting in far too many folks who we then invite to the consumerisim feast table.

This isn't an easy conversation for me as my Mom, Wife and Daughter in Law are all immigrants.

[claman]

Newfie, I get that. But still I would ask the question : Why don't you go and change the Mexican system. Afterall that is where you belong.

[efarmer]

My opinion is that the Sierra Club understands resource limits, and the associated limit to continuing exponential growth whereas Mr. Trump is selling culpability of immigrants to people who feel disenfranchised as a scapegoat while promising them exponential growth again, as all our politicians must to get elected. Instant growth gratification is our sugar snack, austerity followed by big growth is our almost acceptable sweet and sour, and very little growth is our throw the bums out dog biscuit to chew on while our bellies growl.

Until recently Mexico had one political party in power for 6+ decades. Put either of
our main parties in power continuously for that long and watch the
corruption seep to the depths of every sort of economic, politcal, and law enforcement system
with all of them requiring many decades to temper once it starts to attempt to.

Resource limits without alternative in scale demand shrinkage and pain a very few people like them.

[claman]

Nevf, you said:These are general thoughts. There need to be exceptions and allowances. But we need to accept the concept of limiting our population.
Yes and OK, but where do you set the limit??

[claman]

newfie, You did earlier set the limit at 300.000. I guess thats okay if they can find a job?? Couldn't these extra mexicans by any means stop having too many children ??

[Newfie]

Claman,

I don't know how many children they have once they are here. Maybe they adopt our norms and the rate drops.

If you mean in Mexico and Africa and India. Sure they could stop. But that's a bigger issue. I was just talking about the situation in the USA. If we can't take care of ourselves how are we to ing to care for others? Responsibility starts at home.

[claman]

Newfie, i guess you're right. I'm living in sweden and my kids are living in denmark. Responsibility starts at home.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

Posts: 7509
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:00 am
Location: US East Coast

[Newfie]

I'm a dual citizen of the USA and Canada.

My avatar is the unofficial, but popular, preconfrderation flag of Newfoundland.

Do you have a point? Don't be obtuse, spit it out.

[MD]

Why can't some liberals accept climate change science?

Why am I bothering to reply to this thread?

Inquiring minds want answers!

[efarmer]

Understand MD. It is like studying physics and trying to decide if it is a liberal or conservative topic and then saying that centrigual force is liberal and threatens to throw all our mass away while centrepidal force is conservative and hold us together whilst gravity is a gift from God and is apolitical, but being a Theological topic should not be taught in public schools. This saddles one with crappy slants so awful, they lack enough merit to be even simply wrong.

[kiwichick]

one of the underlying causes of rapid population growth in Latin American countries is the significant influence of the Roman Catholic religion......it is also a factor in Africa , along with the traditional cultural factors ......boys being more highly valued than girls

whereas is western democracies that lopsided valuation on male children has declined to a significant degree....and religion is no longer so prevalent and overwhelming
......even if women living in Ireland still have to travel to England/Wales/Scotland for a abortion