Discussion in 'Human Science' started by NO1, Aug 12, 2010.
I'm pretty sick of all these attacks on brown babies.
Hispanics (legal or illegal) have a much higher birth rate than whites.
Curiously, when whites had a high fertility rate, no one seemed to be uncomfortable about attacking them for it. Concerns over birth rates only fell into disrepute when white birth rates settled down and it became clear that it was the birth rates of brown people that were overwhelmingly driving the growth of the world's population.
A taboo about discussing this issue out of political correctness is absurd. In the last half century, the world's population has trebbled, this is hardly a trivial issue and poses some very serious problems, yet it is never discussed as an issue, becuase while it was acceptable to suggests whites should have fewer kids it is clearly unacceptable to ask the same of none whites.
When, for example, do people discuss the trebbling of the world's poplation within the last half century, when discussing an issue such as climate change? It is very obvious that attempts to lower overall CO2 emissions are going to be unsuccessful of the world's population continues to grow at this rate. It would require cutting our per capita CO2 emissions by more than two thirds ever half century, which simply isnt realistic. And yet inspite of the obvious relevance of fertility rates to global warming, it is never mentioned with reference to global warning because oh no, that would be racist. Well yes it is true that some groups reproduce more rapidly than others, but pointing out that fact should hardly be taboo.
With regard to the separate issue of the demographic change in America brought about by immigration and immigrant birth rates, I hardly see why discussing this is a taboo either. I make no appologies for being concerned about the growing number of muslims in Britian and indeed the rest of the western world. There clearly are serious tensions, conflicts and incompatibilities between the culture of a typical westerner and a typical muslim, and many of these seem hard to reconcile. And similar concerns may legitimately be held with respect to other immigrant groups also.
Why is it seen as some great evil to acknowledge these differences, and express the opinion that you prefer the kind of culture and society created by the long established population, rather than the societies and culture created by immigrant populations, and that as such, you wish to reduce levels of immigration? Moreover, not only may immigrant populations differ in ways that you find undesirable, but the very fact that there are differences is in itself clearly a source of tension and conflict. Whether it be along racial or cultural lines, you dont have to look very hard to find people of their own volition tending towards division, self segregation and the formation of parrallel societies, in any diverse country.
Brown babies are beautiful.
Whites will be a minority in America in a few decades – deal with it……..
The birth rate among established Americans has fallen below replacement level. The same has happened in virtually all Western countries. The only thing that is propping up our "social security" Ponzi Schemes is immigration. We should all thank our lucky stars that other people want to live here, otherwise we would get no pensions.
This is an exceptionally big problem for Japan. If you think we Americans are xenophobic assholes, the Japanese make us look like cosmopolitan swingers: they really don't like having foreigners around. Their life expectancy is much longer than ours and the place is full of really old people who have been retired for decades. Their birth rate has fallen even lower than ours for a few reasons that are unique to their culture, such as the fact that young women don't want to lead the traditional subservient life that marriage over there so often leads to.
Nay, spider. Already each child costs a lot in tax dollars through public education and the like. 8% of American babies being born to illegals is an 8% decrease in the tax dollars that go to those causes. Indirectly, that hurts citizen-children because it deprives them of what they should be getting. These kids' parents pay nothing yet are leeching from everything.
Excuse me, but unless you know some deep dark secret that I don't, no kids in America pay for anything! Everything they get is paid for by their parents, other family members, or us: the taxpayers. The goal is for them to grow up to be productive citizens and pay it back with interest. And by golly, the children of immigrants have compiled an exemplary record of growing up to be productive citizens and contributing to our economy.
Most of their families come from countries with a stronger work ethic than our people, who have been coddled by the American welfare state for several generations. When people in Mexico, Ghana, Algeria or the Ukraine can't find work, they migrate to Germany, Singapore, France or the USA, where they can get jobs. When people in America can't find work, they open a beer, turn on the TV, and collect welfare.
You xenophobes have been bashing immigrants since the Irish started coming over in the 19th century. And you have always been proven wrong. Put a sock in it!
Five percent of the U.S. workforce is undocumented. That includes almost 20% of construction, groundskeeping and maintenance workers, more than 10% of food preparation and service, and a sizable percentage of agriculture, food preparation and service. These are jobs that your own children won't do, because you have raised them to be too lazy, selfish and "entitled" to get their hands dirty, yet too undisciplined and uncaring to bother getting a decent education so they can be rocket scientists and corporate executives.
As Republican political advisor Lionel Sosa said, "We must care about the people that we lured here to do the jobs we don’t train our children to do."
Beat me to it........ my sentiments exactly
Everybody will be white, eventually (courtesy Examiner):
"The color of a man's skin is of no more importance than the color of his eyes." -- Ras Tafari Makonnen, a.k.a. Haile Selassie
I left out the word "parents." It was to be "these kids' parents pay for nothing..." That's why there's an apostrophe. Somehow I didn't type out the word. So to everything you just said: nay. And yes, I honestly do see these kids of illegal parents as less worthy, less deserving than kids whose parents are legal. Not through any fault of their own, but through the fault of their parents. Imagine if no one paid: we'd have NO public schools. These kids are leeching while coming from families who do not contribute adequately.
You are making general statements, accompanied by a lack of evidence.
Interesting article, but I think it is more likely that everyone will end up shades of brown.
I personally agree. But many still have issues.
I see plenty of evidence for my assertion that the average immigrant has a stronger work ethic than the average American. I see immigrants who didn't have jobs at home coming here and working two jobs, sometimes three... and sending money home to their parents. Meanwhile I see Americans who get laid off ("redundant" in British English) moving back in with their parents and taking up permanent residence on the sofa.
That's nice. Can you quantify this evidence in any way?
I think it is a matter of demand. Illegal immigrants would not enter the country if there where no job vacancies. They cant enter to live of the state via welfare, also do not pay tax.
I have run a few business and know the pain of labor shortages. To employ someone with skill I had to spend more and more money. I sent that cost onto the client, but some markets with strong competition can not adjust like this.
Why many governments limit immigration when there is a demand for workers not available locally is abhorrent. We all live on one planet and each human should have equal rights.
Nationalism is the greatest obstacle to sociological enlightenment
Well those immigrants themselves are going to grow old, so immigration as a means of propping up pensions is not a long term answer; its a band aid solution at best. The claim that immigrants are the only thing propping up the social security systems in the west is simply untrue. Many immigrant groups are a net drain on the welfare state due to significantly higher rates of unemployment, crime, fertility and first cousin marriage (which leads to higher birth defect rates, take pakistanis living in britain for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7237663.stm ), all of which represents a significant burden to the welfare state. And the overall benefit to wealth per head, the measure that actually matters, is frequently negligable for western countries:
and that is even with highly productive groups cancelling out less productive groups.
Another thing to consider is that the effects of immigration are hardly limmited to the economic. There is a significant social impact of immigration, and if the behaviour of the incumbent population is anything to go by, it is negative. In particular, when immigrants move in, the whites tend to move out. If the social impact of immigration was positive, this wouldnt happen. But the reality is that people generally prefer the company of people like themselves, hence why we see racial tensions, the formation of ghettos, and people of all kinds taking dividing themselves up along racial and cultural lines.
And even if the mass importation of people of different racial and cultural backgrounds wasnt divisive like it is, it is often the case that the differences themselves are highly undesireable. Even if muslims didnt tend to form ghettos as opposed to becoming well integrated for example, their cultural differences are themselves a real cause for concern. For example, a recent survey of muslims living in britain found that 33% would welcome the introduction of shariah law, and 25% said the 7/7 bombings were justified:
and these were their responses to mainstream interviewers were they knew their views would be controversial. A more candid set of responses might yeild somewhat higher percentages for both. And the survey by no means stands alone:
These kind of difficulties need to also be considered before endorsing mass immigration for supposed economic benefits that are marginal at best. The question that you ought to really ask yourself is "would I like mass immigration in the area where I live?" If the answer to that question no, as for most people it would be, then it is hardly reasonable to expect others to have it in their communities so that you can reap the economic benefits of cheap labour whilst being largely detatched from the negetive social and economic impacts, which is true of most of the liberal elite who endorse mass immigration.
Well that's what Ponzi Schemes are all about! The shit-for-brains government was supposed to be investing our money. Instead they spent it on wars, pork-barrel projects, and the cost-ineffective nationalization of entire industries like charity, education and transportation. It was they who assumed that the population would continue growing so there would always be a larger next generation of suckers--whoops I mean loyal citizens--to pay for the retirement of the last generation.
I don't know what country you live in, but in the USA that is one big fucking Redneck myth. Ask anyone in law enforcement and they will assure you that first-generation immigrants have a starkly lower crime rate than natives, and that among illegal immigrants the crime rate is almost negligible. A) They're too busy working to have any spare time and B) the last thing they want is to take a chance on having to deal with the cops.
As for unemployment, your assertion is patently absurd. The reason they're here in the first place is that they do work that Americans refuse to do so employers are desperate to hire them. If they do lose their jobs, they don't qualify for unemployment benefits so they might as well go home where the cost of living is lower and they can get by for considerably longer on what they've earned here. My wife was a social worker for most of her career and she knows more about this stuff from first-hand experience than you people are getting from the muddled media reports.
Somebody has to keep our population growth from going negative, until the people who run this place figure out how to build a prosperous economy that does not rely on infinite growth.
Well every country has its unique problems and that seems to be Britain's. It's not ours. We have almost no immigrants from Pakistan and incest is still a tabu over here.
You're talking to a libertarian, so you don't have to explain the pitfalls of the welfare state to me. FDR should be rotting in hell. This endless Rooseveltian Era in American politics and culture will reach its first century before long.
Not in mine. I've seen the statistical analyses. Immigration, including illegal immigration, has been a positive force in the U.S. economy since we've been a country.
Despite being a libertarian now I'm still an old hippie at heart, love and peace and all that stuff. Nonetheless even I am a little alarmed by the Muslims. Every other immigrant group comes here wanting to become Americans. They come here wanting to make this place just like the shit-holes they escaped from.
Talk about second-order effects: There have recently been two robberies in this country committed by men disguised as women wearing burqas. I predicted this a year ago, right here on SciForums.
I have spent most of my life in large cosmopolitan regions with huge immigrant communities from many countries. I speak Spanish and can babble in Chinese. I had a Chinese girlfriend for a couple of years and by statistical coincidence many of my best friends over the years have been Iranians. The places where I feel the most uncomfortable are the little cesspools where everybody is the same. I'm going to print a bumper sticker that says, "Keep the Mexicans, deport the Rednecks. Better food, cooler music, hotter chicks." (They also work harder and their English isn't much worse, but that won't all fit on a sticker.)
Separate names with a comma.