The GOP has taken a very anti-immigrant stance. According to what they say they want, the borders should be shut to any newcomers. But as can be seen from this graph that shows how the US population would change under various assumptions about the level of immigration, that would not be a good thing.
Immigration is essential to the long-term health of the country, because otherwise people 65 years or older will outnumber children under 18 by 2029, putting stress on medical care and other services.
What the xenophobes are likely most scared about is the growth of the Hispanic population, expected by 2060 to make up 26.9% of the country (currently it is 19.1%) while the non-Hispanic white population, currently making up around 58.9%, will begin to decline in 2045 and may drop to 44.9% by 2060.
One suspects that if the influx of immigrants were from (say) Scandinavian countries, they would be welcomed.
“One suspects that if the influx of immigrants were from (say) Scandinavian countries, they would be welcomed.”
No need to suspect, Trump has outright stated that.
Maybe for a while -- But the conservatives in the USA have always needed someone to hate so Im sure they will find new groups to target
Immigration is a short term solution for such problems. If current trends continue, world population is predicted to reach a peak of about 10.4 billion in the 2080s, and eventually decline from there during the coming century. And that is if we don’t have sudden population collapses in any continent or large geographical area due to environmental issues. Ultimately the Japanese have the right idea, we will need to have robotic caregivers because at some point there won’t be enough young humans.
anat, demographic destinies and demographic trends, yes. Quite interesting.
Of course, immigrants need a couple of generations to really fit in.
cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issei
Young humans can look after themselves. And reproduce, even.
(Also, you remind me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run
As usual, book was far better than the movie, which was non-canonical)
—
Just means things will change and the living will need to adapt.
(Same as it ever was)
A shrinking population is not inherently bad.
@ 4 John Morales
Of course, immigrants need a couple of generations to really fit in.
What country do you live in?
In Canada, assuming you arrive before or just at school age, you fit in pretty well in the first generation. Oh there are some issues but most early arrivals adopt a favourite hockey team and know how to find the Local Timmies in no time.
Note this really is dependent on getting into the local education system probably before you are 11 years of age.
One suspects that if the influx of immigrants were from (say) Scandinavian countries, they would be welcomed.
Very cynically I would point out there are lots of blonde, blue-eyed Ukrainians who are likely to be happy to immigrate.
John Morales @4:
But can they look after a large number of old people? That was the point Mano brought up.
anat:
Maybe yes, maybe no.
But they can look after themselves, and that’s a necessary precursor to looking after the oldsters. That bit is a bit more discretionary.
That was the point I brought up.
(Was Logan’s Run really that obscure a reference?)
Australia.
Perhaps I was too allusive. From my cited article:
“The issei, nisei, and sansei generations reflect distinctly different attitudes to authority, gender, involvement with non-Japanese, religious belief and practice, and other matters.”
Formative acculturation matters. Home environment matters.
Perhaps a specific illustration of my point; here’s how very well some immigrants fit into Canada:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/24/quebecs-ban-religious-clothing-chilling-be-us-you-must-dress-us
The need for immigrants:
https://youtu.be/LBudghsdByQ?si=3m2kgHpQzILRj4Vf
This is a debate which here in Europe has been going on for years. There are those who are pro (pretty much as in Mano’s view), who highlight the need for migrants for business, etc. perhaps to help maintain the long.term health system or because they do jobs that US citizens do not want to do.
And there are those who are contro who highlight how much immigration has led to the infiltration of people who come for reasons for expediency and not necessity, perhaps becoming eventually radicalized terrorists, or criminals or drug-dealers or all of those. They also point out how ghettoes often form with people not learning the language, not integrating, and indeed in many large cities (London, Milan, Paris, Rome, to mention a few) there are no-go areas -- even for the police. Such groups often follow such things as Sharia law (and not the laws of the country where they are) with such things as mistreating women, blocking women’s rights, female genital mutilation, and also ‘dishonour murders’ if women break the rulers.
Which is right? Each will have to decide based on his/her own thinking and, perhaps, also where they live and what their experiences are.
@ 10 John Morales
From your link:
Hilarious you think this link demonstrates how poorly immigrants fit into Canada. Lol.
I’m not really afraid of immigrants. Even though I grew up in a small town in the midwest I’ve still met more than enough immigrants from all over to just see them as people. I frankly couldn’t find anything they all had in common even if I wanted to other than meeting me and being born on different sides of lines on a map than I was.
You know what demographic I’m afraid of that feels like it’s growing? Uneducated people and gullible fools. The kind of people that power weaponized ignorance. There will always be people like that but I think the weaponization has become more sophisticated and targeted. I would really, really love to see low or no cost higher education become a real priority. It won’t fix the problem directly because cult and conspiracy followers get taught to avoid the tools that could deprogram them but it would begin to make it harder for them to recruit.
SmellyBog, gotta love how you’ve latched on the aside regarding conformance with a country’s customs and ignore the demographic issues at hand:
Ah, the braying of the ass. Only to be expected.
When laws are passed specifically enforcing conformance with local custom by immigrants, that’s a sign of a perfect fit by those immigrants. Because the law only reflects the reality, right?
Fitting in is a two-way thing — you know, square holes, round pegs, all that.
“As a Muslim woman in Canada, I could always dress however I pleased.
The Quebec government took away some of that Canadian freedom with Sunday’s passage of a controversial bill that bans many public employees in the province from wearing religious symbols at work.
Teachers, judges and police officers, among other civil servants, can no longer wear Muslim headscarves (hijabs), Jewish skullcaps, Sikh turbans and other symbols of their faith in the workplace.Even more alarming, the law also prohibits anyone wearing face coverings — Muslim women wearing niqabs (face veils) are the primary target — from receiving government services that include healthcare and using public transit.”
One can fit in, so long as one utterly abandons their (and I quote from the link I adduced) “distinctly different attitudes to authority, gender, involvement with non-Japanese, religious belief and practice, and other matters.
I’m sure the children of such immigrants face no dilemma between their parents’ customs and the customs of their new country.
—
Anyway, my main point was about this purported need for the young to look after the oldies. That is how societies are set up, for now. But that can obviously change.
@jrkrideau #7
The Scandinavian countries have traditionally voted for social democrats, which is the same as commies for the GOP. The Ukrainians, as Putin has informed us, are neonazis, so they are OK. At least young blonde slavic women. Just ask Trump.
/s
@12, rupert:
you wrote: “…and indeed in many large cities (London, Milan, Paris, Rome, to mention a few) there are no-go areas — even for the police. Such groups often follow such things as Sharia law…”
please refrain from posting that kind of bull without thinking.
I am from Milan, and no-go areas due to rabid immigrants are conspicuously absent. Indeed there are places I would not advise to visit at night (the central rail station is an oft-mentioned example -- for some reason delinquents love rail infrastructure), but those have been there since forever. And I use the Stazione Centrale regularly every bloody time I get back from Germany.
Chinese immigration is traditionally centered along Via Sarpi, while Viale Padova has quite the interesting mix since decades. Again, not the best venues at night, but no-go areas they ain’t.
Exercise of sharia law is also nowhere to be seen, seldom mentioned even in the hallucinations of the most rabid fascist press.
Further, I am skeptical about the claims regarding Rome, as one can find precious little about such on the local press -- the eternal city does delight in collecting colourful messes, but not of this kind.
So let’s pay attention, eh?
Outis
I also spend time in Italy and I beg to differ.
Further, if you had really read my post (instead of one phrase), you would have realised that I was not posting MY personal opinion, but merely summing up the pros and cons of this debate according to some people.
I was also under the impression that this was a free site and one could post without bring censored which would be typical of Fascist behaviour. Perhaps Mano will clarify.
Oh, yes, the “Sharia law” thing. Actually, in the US, at least, the courts do use Sharia law — to interpret contracts which are made using Sharia expectations. That’s no different from contracts that specify that any contract disputes will be governed by the law of a particular state (usually Delaware), or, say, Orthodox Jewish law in contracts and disputes among Orthodox Jews. But the host countries do not allow Sharia law to actually override the laws of the country where they are.
AFAIK, none of these are part of Sharia law. They are tribal customs, which people from the tribes may or may not claim are based on their interpretation of the Qoran. “Mistreating women” is not exclusive to these groups either, it’s very much a part of mainstream USA culture. Non-immigrant men routinely abuse and kill women who violate their idea of what women are allowed to do, they just don’t call it “honor killing”; instead, it’s called “domestic violence,” and the police and courts mostly don’t take it very seriously. And let’s not forget the routine and de facto condoned violence by white people against African-Americans. The violence of the “tribal practices” of mainstream culture is seen as normal and civilized, it’s the practices of “tribes” who don’t look or act like us that are seen as barbaric and threatening.
This is Mano’s site, and “free” only to the extent that he allows it. If you get censored (which I have not seen yet; note that criticism is not censorship), it’s not “Fascist,” any more than if someone tells you to get out of their home because they don’t like what you’re doing or saying.
Rup @#18 and Allison @#20,
I think of this site as a sort of magazine where I am the publisher, editor, and (almost) the sole writer. This means that I feel free to exercise editorial control and block posts or people whom I feel have crossed the line, though I have done so very, very, rarely.
What is that line? It is a judgment call that is hard to specify in advance. Doing so leads to endless quibbles and hairsplitting with people who disagree about where the line should be drawn. But I know it when I see it.
And that is not necessarily bad.
Some projections have the earth’s population peaking sooner at even lower levels.
1. We have no idea what the sustainable carrying capacity of the earth is.
Some scientists believe we are already over that point, and are mining the earth to leave less for our descendants.
The only way to know this is to find out the hard way.
2. What is so great about living in crowded countries where huge numbers struggle every day just to survive?
3. A smaller human footprint leaves more room for the rest of the biosphere. Already the majority of the large animal biomass on our planet is humans plus our food supply, mostly cattle, and commensals (pets) (PNAS 2023), . It’s 94% of the mammalian biomass.
Do we really want to live in a simplified and wrecked ecology?
Which is also part of our life support system.
The pro natalists, which are like cockroaches in that sometimes you see them and sometimes you don’t, but they are always around, claim that we need a steadily growing population to fund social security and keep everything going.
It’s a nonsense argument.
Populations can’t keep steadily growing forever. Something always becomes limiting.
At some point, we have to transition to a steady state level.
That in fact, has been human demographics for most of our history.
The era of rapid population growth has only happened in the last few centuries because science and technology lowered our mortality rates and increased our food supply.
US Social Security is on trend to run out of surplus money in 2033. In political terms, where our planning horizon is now a few weeks, that is near infinity.
With minor changes, that can be fixed.
And if we do nothing, it still works, just with lower payouts, steady state, 74% of today’s rate.
Being disagreed with by a single poster; seems early days to worry about censorship and fascism. The only time I can remember someone being banned from here was in about 2015.
And that was as a result of arguments about the previous Israel-Gaza gore-fest… aren’t we overdue for a visit from a Hasbara liar (or unwitting stooge)?
___
#22 raven
Given how many biospheres have already been bulldozed to sustain us, I am not too worried about the plateau being sooner rather than later.
raven, I am all for a contracting human population. It is inevitable, and the sooner we internalize the concept the better we can plan do do the reduction in a way that reduces harm to individuals. Part of that is giving up on economic growth as a goal. Which unfortunately is still considered heretical, and thus impossible to push for politically.
@ 24 Holms
It should be elementary, my dear Holms, for you to think of examples of comment moderation more recent than 2015. 😉
Words mean things, other words mean different things. The one I used was ‘banned’.
Holms,
Hi,
Yes, I may have jumped the gun a bit on censorship, but the comments “please refrain from posting that kind of bull without thinking.” and “So let’s pay attention, eh?” seemed to be attempts to shut me up
@12, rupert:
Can’t speak for Italy or France, but as far as London is concerned that’s a thing moronic ignorant foreigners quite often say about London (and Birmingham and Manchester sometimes). And it’s absolute 100% grade A bullshit. The very idea that the Met police, one of the most violent, racist police forces in the UK, might be put off going somewhere because some immigrants or descendants of immigrants didn’t want them to is absolutely laughable. Have you ever even BEEN to London? Based purely on that comment I’d be suprised if you could find it on a map.
Oh, but hang on, here you are popping up under another nym (why?) saying that you’re:
Ah, so it’s “some people” who believe that 100% grade A bullshit, not you? Well, why didn’t you quote the people who think that immigrants are hobgoblins and that the earth is flat? YOU chose the opinions to offer, YOU chose the bullshit to amplify. Own it, don’t try to run from it. If you’re disowning it now, say so. If you think it’s true, back it up.
Hahahahaahahahaahahaaaaa. What the fuck gave you that impression? FtB is full of brittle, sensitive bloggers who’ll ban you from posting at the drop of a hat. E.g. the last straw that got me banned from posting under PZ Myers’ blog, ages ago, was laughing repeatedly at the massive hypocrisy of posting something railing against the evils of Amazon while ON THE SAME PAGE shilling for Amazon for his own profit promoting his own book with a link to the Amazon page to buy it. He really didn’t like that at all, and that was my last post on Pharyngula (cue someone popping up to list all the other things I said on there that got me lambasted but notably DIDN’T get me banned). As he has pointed out, Mano is considerably more tolerant and laissez-faire, within reasonable limits. But a “free site”? “Post without bring (sic) censored”? You really must be thinking of somewhere else.
Finally:
Wow, victim complex much?
Consider: you appear to be saying that the ONLY thing you can say here is bullshit you posted without thinking. Because that’s all you were asked (by ONE person not in charge of the blog) to stop doing. Not to shut up completely -- just, y’know, stop posting bullshit.
If that’s too hard for you, and if ONE person with no actual administrative power telling you to give it a rest is too much, well yeah, claim “censorship” and flounce… and don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out. Or, possibly, find and post some evidence other than bald assertion about the stuff you’re claiming… good fucking luck with that.
Don’t have time nor inclination to respond to your comments, but here are a couple of links talking about an honour killing. No doubt, imaginaruy, you will say.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57425961
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/samans-body-returned-funeral-can-take-place/ar-AA1jHI13
Um, honour killings are a thing in poorly-regulated honour cultures.
I grew up in a well-regulated one, so ostracism replaced the killing, but still.
Why my mum went halfway across the world.
Topic, however, is immigrants in general.
This aside as to how they fit in is a secondary thing; point is, they help the economy churn along.
For example, that’s why post-Brexit Britain now has more immigrant workers than it did before that event, except now they’re mostly not from the EU.
(Amusing given the xenophobic predilections of Brexiteers)
—
Anyway, plenty of good popular resources there about demographic outlooks.
(Russia is fucked)
@rupert, 30:
You: “there are no go areas for the police in London!”
Me: “Bullshit. Citation needed.”
You: “Honour killings ARE a thing, and here’s the proof.”
Eh?
I’ve not disputed the existence of honour killings. How could I? Why would I? They make the news every time they happen, and because the UK welcomes immigrants from backward, barbarian cultures, they happen. But here’s the thing: they’re NOT tolerated. They’re investigated, and prosecuted, in exactly the same way any other murder is. If we simply shrugged our shoulders and went “well, immigrants gonna immigrant” and let them get away with it, you might, possibly, have had a scintilla of a point.
As it is, since my challenge was to your bullshit assertion about “no go areas”, not honour killings, you just look doubly stupid.
Go on, have another go. It’s funny.
sonofrojblake
Just fyi, I do NOT I think of myself as a victim merely because I asked Mano Singham to restate his rules seeing as the site is called ‘FreeThoughtBlogs’, and which he kindly did’. Some people just can’t resist resorting to psychological claptrap labelling to explain away perfectly innocent remarks. As Szasz said, psychology/psychiatry is not a science and in many cases misguided and pretensious, Psychiatric diagnosis is often used as an interpersonal and political weapon. In short, “psychiatry does not exist. There is only biography and autobiography.” Thomas Szasz (psychiatrist)
However, in answer to your ‘challenge’, I am not going to waste my Sunday doing your work for you. I have listed the main arguments that I have heard pro and contro this issue and now it is up to you to do your own homework as to the veracity of each point. I don’t live in London, and I certainly don’t want to -- far too cold, for one thing, and probably too polluted, too.
Oh, and it might add weight to your argument if, when you quote someone, you quote accurately. I did not write: ““Honour killings ARE a thing, and here’s the proof”, as you claim, but: “…here are a couple of links talking about an honour killing.” There is no mention of proof whatsoever.
Oh you are hilarious, thank you for a chuckle today.
First, well done for responding late to the obviously deliberately hyperbolic “victim complex much” comment. You missed the hyperbole and its attendant ridicule of you, clearly, but hey, nobody accused you of being bright, right? I’m a chemical engineer, not a psychiatrist or psychologist, and to be clear what I was doing was not “psychiatric diagnosis used as an interpersonal and political weapon”, what I was doing was calling you dumb. That you missed that was just brilliant, thank you.
As for wasting your Sunday doing my work for me -- I didn’t make any bald assertions about what it’s like in London. I didn’t parrot bullshit about “no go areas”. I have NOTHING to back up or support (apart from my contention that you’re stupid, and the evidence is stacking up already so I’ve NO work to do there).
I didn’t claim you wrote that. Let me introduce you to something we doctors call “paraphrasing for comedy effect”. Because hey, I didn’t write “Bullshit. Citation needed” in case you didn’t notice. What I was doing was boiling down your disingenous subject change to its essentials, specifically:
1. you make a claim about no-go areas
2. I call bullshit -- specifically, I said, AND I QUOTE THIS TIME: “If you think it’s true, back it up”
3. You respond with some links to a story about honour killing, as though that’s in any way relevant at all.
Did I say “doubly stupid”?* I fear I may have underestimated.
*Yes, I did.
3.
Well, your writing style shows that you are not an academic, but you ARE boring as well as boorish 🥱
No evidence re: no-go, just ad hominem. Ok.
rupert @35
However much you may dislike sonofrojblake’s writing style they are as free to post here as you, what happened to your plea for free speech? Or does it just apply to your speech?
sonofrojblake is correct that there are no “no-go areas for the police” in London or any other British city. He’s also correct that your bringing up of honour killings is a non sequitur. I doubt you are arguing with any integrity as you have now resorted to insults rather than bring any actual evidence, but just in case you are, you should take more care to separate your actual views from those of groups you are describing.
Jazzlet,
I don’t think that calling someone boring or boorish is an attempt to prevent his right to free speech.
Futher, so far as resortiong to insults is concerned, I don’t think that calling anyone ‘boring’ is a serious insult; it is pretty minor as far as slight as far as insults are concerned. It really says nothing about his character.
On the other hand, if you read through his posts, Sonofrojblake, claimed that “I could not find Lndon on a map”, that I had a ‘victim complex’; then he call ed me ‘doubly stupid’ (twice), ‘dumb’, and ‘stupid’ – all of which ARE insults.
sonofrojblake
You wrote: “No evidence re: no-go, just ad hominem. Ok”
There is plent of ad hominem in your previus posts: you claimed that “I could not find Lndon on a map”, that I had a ‘victim complex’; then you called me ‘doubly stupid’ (twice), ‘dumb’, and ‘stupid’.
@rupert, the gift that keeps on giving:
Indeed, I agree with you. I don’t think that saying “please refrain from posting that kind of bull without thinking” is an attempt at censorship or Fascist behaviour, but hey, nobody accused you of consistency either.
Absolute bullshit. You do realise people can just look up the thread and see what I actually wrote, right? Maybe not.
First of all, why did you put that bit in quotes, like you were quoting me? Because you’re not. Apart from anything else, as well as being able to find it on a map, I am able to correctly spell “London”. You failed on two attempts. It’s not looking good, is it?
Also, I did NOT say you could not find London on a map. I said that BASED ON YOUR DEMONSTRATED IGNORANCE I would be surprised if you could find it on a map, since you appear from what you write to be the sort of moronic foreigner who bloviates about cities you have never visited and know nothing about. I mean, brag about being able to find it on a map, by all means, go ahead.
And yes, I insulted you -- but look again (it’s easy) at what I wrote in #36 (you quoted it correctly, so it shouldn’t be hard).
” “No evidence re: no-go, just ad hominem. Ok””
Now, consider the word “just” in that sentence. Why do you think I wrote that?
Perhaps because your response to my challenge to come up with any evidence for your claims about no-go areas for police in London lacked ANYTHING except ad hominem. The “just” is absolutely crucial. For sure, I’m liberally seasoning my interactions with you with insults, but you can’t pretend there isn’t a point here -- the point being you baldly stated something that’s absolute bullshit and are doing everything to avoid having to admit it.
“He’s insulting me”, you whine. Yes, I am. You know what’ll make me stop? Either of two things:
(a) any evidence that the heavily armed, quite violent and renownedly racist Met police would be put off going ANYWHERE THEY FUCKING LIKE in London by the opinions or behaviour of immigrants or the descendants of immigrants OR
(b) an admission that you just parroted that talking point without thinking and now realise it’s just bullshit and take it back.
Pick one. I won’t hold my breath.
Yeah, Sure, I can’t spell ‘London’.
Blah,blah. As I said, boring.
Goodnight, and good luck.
Third time’s a charm on the spelling, at least. Still just blah blah instead of any defence of what you actually said, though. As *I* said -- stupid.
Stupid and obtruse is he who cannot under a simple post. I have already stated that it is not my own argument; I was merely passing it on. Ergo, no need to defend anything.
I undered your post perfectly well. (You really don’t English good does you?)
“Not my views, I’m just quoting other people”, a common coward’s tactic and not acknowledging that it was your choice to pass those quotes on. You’re fooling nobody, possibly not even yourself.
Bit of a grammar Nazi, aren’t we?
You are still playing at being a psychiatrist again whilst pretending to be a chemical engineer.
I’m a LOT of a grammar Nazi, thank you. You provide an embarrassment of riches for me to ridicule, after all (although not this time -- actually taking care for once?).
I’d rather be a grammar Nazi than the kind you are, though. Why do you hide behind “some people say” that ” in many large cities (London, Milan, Paris, Rome, to mention a few) there are no-go areas — even for the police”. Why not just say “I don’t like darkies” and be done with it? Anyone reading what you write can tell that’s what you mean. You’d actually look less silly if you just owned it.
In the first place, you don’t know the colour of my skin. You are just making assumptions. And as a corollary to that: criticising someone because they don’t know your language well smacks of elitism, as well as linguistic racism and discrimination. Keep on incriminating yourself.
Nor do I care. It’s not relevant.
No assumptions about your skin colour here. Perhaps you took the “I don’t like darkies” quote literally, rather than recognising it as a Monty Python reference ridiculing a racist. Hey ho, missing a reference to a fifty year old comedy sketch is forgiveable.
Oh it smacks of it, does it? Good. And it looks like I discriminate against people who choose to communicate in English, but don’t choose to bother to do it correctly, even while they’re by definition sitting in front of a machine that could correct their English for them in less than a second? Good. It should look I discriminate against those people, because those people are fucking stupid.
Still no defence of your choice to amplify the canard of no-go areas, I see. Sticking by its validity, eh? Not even acknowledging that it’s bullshit? Keep on incriminating yourself.
Such a lunatic policy take by Mr Singham.
.
Proposing mass immigration is an explicit acknowledgment of a nation’s cultural decline, not so much a nation’s population decline.
.
Agriculture. As in Agri-Culture: environment and related processes to produce food from seed to tree, from seed to food on plate.
.
Culture. Think of Culture as Humano-Culture: environment and related processes to produce humans from conception to adulthood.
.
Bad soil produces sickly plants. Bad culture produces sickly humans, illnesses both physical and mental. Some cultures have and produce more pathologies than others.
.
Mass Migration is not a cure for a nation’s diseased cultural state. Russia, China, Japan, South Korea have population decline; said nations are not contemplating mass immigration.
.
Sri Lanka’s current population (2023 AD) is 23M and projected to decline starting in 2050; will Sri Lanka contemplate mass immigration in 2050? I doubt it.
.
India’s current population (2023 AD) is 1430M and projected to decline starting in 2070; will India contemplate mass immigration in 2070? I doubt it.
.
In July 3, 1984, the Wall Street Journal advocated a five-word constitutional amendment: “There shall be open borders.” Big Business loves slave, err… correction, CHEAP labor. Screw the American citizen.
.
The advocacy of mass immigration to the USA is similar to the advocacy of slavery of yesteryear: “Import the Africans! We need the labor!!!” This advocacy for mass immigration betrays a base and vile “racist” attitude that some nations (usually failed, s***h**e states) are to be “breeder” nations. At some point (and not too distant future) the global population will decline, with all national populations declining. The advocacy of mass immigration for any nation betrays ideological myopia. The advocacy of mass immigration is so much sweeping under the rug the need for societal repair, for cultural repair, for political repair, for economic repair.
.
In 1900 and 2020 the global population was 1.60B and 7.84B respectively; a 5-fold increase. The global median age (yrs) in 1950, 1970, 2023 is respectively 22.2, 20.3, 30.5. Experts predict that in 2100 the global median age will be 42.3. As of 2020 AD the median age in Japan is 48.0 yrs. Japan now is what the world could or would be in 100 years. Japan has a very restrictive immigration policy (foreigners of japanese ancestry are given preference), its economics is pretty solid, its national debt is not beholden to foreign creditors, its societal harmony is pretty solid. Yes, Japan has its problems and it aims to self-solve the problems; no need for mass immigration. Japan follows the “FUBU” principle: For Us By Us. Japan is driven by pragmatism, not ideology. Learn from Japan.
.
Is mass immigration to the USA actually needed for labor needs? Answer: No. The economist Thomas Sowell stated for many years that labor shortages in the USA are phoney, that employers need to pay market rates and the labor shortages will disappear. The H-1B, H-2B programs: are South Asian IT professionals actually needed in the USA? Answer: No. The impetus for the H visas is that, back in the day (1980’s), it was very hard to fire american citizens. Now, in the 2020’s, many employment protections for US citizens are gone so the main reason for the H visas is that foreigners are paid less and not so much they are still easier to fire than US citizens. The Big Tech firms have branches in Asia and Europe so why not keep asian workers in Asia? Why the compulsion to bring asian workers to the USA? Why the compulsion to tear asian workers away from their beloved homelands?
.
The advocacy of mass immigration betrays a government with broken discipline. A State government cannot balance the budget and thus relies on Federal funds since States cannot print money. A Federal/National government cannot balance its budget and thus prints money, thus increasing inflation, devaluing the currency, increasing the national debt. A State cannot get its economics, its demographics, its politics in order and thus promotes mass immigration.
.
It is ironic that a State/Nation promoting mass immigration for manpower needs also promotes the ultimate killer of manpower: abortion.
Ooh, I think I’ve just identified another person to add to my Stylus filter. In the meantime…
>Such a lunatic policy take by Mr Singham.
Who is this “Mr Singham” of whom you write? Nobody called that posts here at FtB. You seem to be in the wrong place. Confused? You seem to be.
>Proposing mass immigration is an explicit acknowledgment of a nation’s cultural decline, not so much a nation’s population decline.
It has nothing to do with culture OR population decline. Population is still going UP, even in the countries who need immigrants. What the need for immigrants is, is an explicit acknowledgement of a nation’s demographic timebomb as median age increases. Which, bizarrely, you acknowledge you understand, later in this same post, but it seems you have a “culture” axe to grind, so on…
[omitting tedious analogy between agriculture and human culture]
>Bad soil produces sickly plants. Bad culture produces sickly humans, illnesses both physical and mental. Some cultures have and produce more pathologies than others.
You know what reliably produces sickly humans? Advanced medicine, that reliably keeps healthy humans alive well into their eighties, nineties and beyond. Some cultures have produced more of those than others, but I’d call it mostly a triumph.
>Mass Migration is not a cure for a nation’s diseased cultural state.
Presupposes a condition not in evidence, viz “diseased cultural state”. I can’t be bothered interrogating the definition, as I suspect it boils down to “whatever you say it is”, rather than something objective.
>Russia, China, Japan, South Korea have population decline
China -- just false. Russia, Japan, South Korea -- yes, reducing… by less than 1% year on year. So?
>said nations are not contemplating mass immigration.
And you’d choose to go live there if you could, because life there is/is going to be so great? Yes? No?
>In July 3, 1984, the Wall Street Journal advocated a five-word constitutional amendment: “There shall be open borders.” Big Business loves slave, err… correction, CHEAP labor. Screw the American citizen.
I’m curious -- at any point in the last 39 years since that, has that amendment come to pass? If not -- why bring it up? Seems irrelevant.
>At some point (and not too distant future) the global population will decline, with all national populations declining.
I won’t hold my breath.
>In 1900 and 2020 the global population was 1.60B and 7.84B respectively; a 5-fold increase. The global median age (yrs) in 1950, 1970, 2023 is respectively 22.2, 20.3, 30.5.
See, you do understand, or are at the very least aware of the relevant data.
>It is ironic that a State/Nation promoting mass immigration for manpower needs also promotes the ultimate killer of manpower: abortion.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there it is. “The ultimate killer of manpower -- letting women decide what they want to do with their own bodies.” Fuck off, eh?
Proposing mass immigration is an explicit acknowledgment of a nation’s cultural decline, not so much a nation’s population decline.
Yeah, the days of mass-immigration to the US from Europe were well known to the whole world as days of serious US cultural decline. (Do you actually think all those immigrants thought they were coming to a country in decline? Do you think all that immigration CONTRIBUTED to US “cultural decline?” Offhand, I’d say those immigrants ADDED to our culture — wouldn’t you?)
Russia, China, Japan, South Korea have population decline; said nations are not contemplating mass immigration.
I’m guessing (again, offhand) that the Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans understand they’re still rather densely populated and don’t really need more people. As for Russia, who the fuck would want to move there anyway?
The advocacy of mass immigration to the USA is similar to the advocacy of slavery of yesteryear…
First you compare humans to plants, then you compare voluntary immigration to slavery. Your analogies are like Hitler at an ice-rink. Your fish isn’t just fried, it’s half-baked and embarrassingly putrid. Go to bed already.
[meta]
Draft horses get blinders, but that is not a matter of consent.
sonofrojblake gets blinders, but that is a matter of neediness.
(Heh. Proud of it, even!)
‘Stylus filter? What the shit are you talking about?
Another another outstanding bit of ‘worldly wisdom’ from ‘sonofsomethingorother’ writing from the comfort of his bedroom in his mother’s house and hiding behind a pseudonym; a self-confessed “lot of a grammar Nazi” fanatic who judges people by the typos they inadvertently make and jumps to conclusions about the words and expressions they use and follows this up by twisting their meanings. As was in my case, when he thinks that I have a monopoly on the expression ’no-go areas’. The internet, TV, radio and newspapers often mention ‘no-go areas’ in major cities and this is not necessarily motivated by racism, but simply because they are genuinely concerned about their own (and their children’s) safety if such things should turn out to be true. Perhaps there are kids at university who have to live in houses or flats near such places or perhaps they have to use the railway station late at night. And for these reasons, they hope that these places are NOT as described.
And who gives you right to tell someone to fuck off just because you don’t like what they post? I am not defending nor deprecating any posts on here, but I do believe that your (and those people you approve of) are NOT the only voices who can have a say, but it is pretty obvious that you do.
Pretty typical tosser behaviour when you come down to it. Sic vita est
@ 52 Morales
The only people who think filtering out crap is like putting blinders on a horse, are people who identity as the crap being filtered.
@ 53 rupert
Hahaha. No, we can see how chill and non-judgmental you are.
Before we get to that, who gives you the right to tell someone not to tell someone to fuck off just because they don’t like what’s posted?
@rupert, 53:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/singham/2023/11/11/a-clear-eyed-look-at-the-situation-in-israel-gaza-and-the-west-bank/#comment-5266760
Oh dear, come now, you can do better. Alas, I’m a homeowner. Detached, cul-de-sac, leafy village, lovely view, a safe but not too inconvenient 30 minute drive from the homes of the grandparents to my children -- haven’t lived with a parent for decades. But do go on picturing me hunched over a neckbeard and a huge belly in a basement somewhere if it makes you feel better. Never mind. And “rupert” (one word, no capital letter) is your real name, is it?
Hmm. You don’t English good does you? As I already explained -- I don’t judge people by the typos they inadvertently make. I judge people by the typos they don’t bother to correct, even though the means to do so is LITERALLY at their fingertips. If you can’t process the difference, well… I’m not surprised.
No, not at all. I’ve seen it said by racists in many media outlets. You’ve definitely not got a monopoly on it.
I DO think that you did say such places exist in London -- or rather hid behind the circumlocution “some people say”. Invited to defend that assertion, you’ve repeatedly demurred. Do you believe it, or not? It’s a yes/no question. And if you don’t -- why would you bring it up? “Hey, some racists say this thing that isn’t true” isn’t a valuable addition to the discourse.
(checks the top of the page) -- Mano Singham, theoretical physicist and retired Director of UCITE at Case Western Reserve University. Next question.
Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion… and mine. You seem not to like that. Sic vita est.
And who gives you right to tell someone to fuck off just because you don’t like what they post?
Um…the blog owner? Who (AFAIK) at least hasn’t told sonof to shut up yet?
I am not defending nor deprecating any posts on here…
Yeah, you are, and totally ignoring everything that led up to the one comment you’re screaming about.
Pretty typical tosser behaviour when you come down to it. Sic vita est
Yeah, Latinizing a bland generic English-language saying fits that description quite well.
I was also under the impression that this was a free site and one could post without bring censored which would be typical of Fascist behaviour. Perhaps Mano will clarify.
Have any of your comments been censored, Rup(ert)? Or are you just another right-winger who immediately starts crying about “censorship” and “cancel culture” and “help, I’m being repressed!” as soon as your arguments get debunked? That’s kinda typical of fascist behaviour these days.
Raging Bee,
Absolute rubbish.
I am not screaming about anything. Merely qualifying an intentional attempt to misinterpret my previous comment.
You don’t believe it? Fine. I don’t believe the stuff you post either. And if you want to be taken seriously, you might want to come out of the woodwork and post under your REAL name.
sonofrojblake says:
“Alas, I’m a homeowner. Detached, cul-de-sac, leafy village, lovely view, a safe but not too inconvenient 30 minute drive from the homes of the grandparents to my children — haven’t lived with a parent for decades.”
Probably just an invention to hide behind. As you said to me: prove it.
You certainly like to copy my comments. not very original.
“prove it” -- how?
rupert
I notice that you have continued your generally insulting tone without saying whether or not you support the idea that there are no-go areas for the Met in London. Perhaps you could take a moment from thinking up more derogatory comments to answer “yes” or “no” to that? If you decline to do so the only inference will be that you do believe in the no-go areas, but don’t have the courage of your convictions.
Ah, the SlugintheButt pipes up.
Heh heh heh. You totally miss the point, of course, that being the contrast I highlight. Only to be expected.
The horses don’t do it to themselves, but psychologically fragile and needy people do do it to themselves. Good grief, here I am pointing out the difference, and you can only see the similarity.
You clearly don’t need one; for you, it would mean missing out in indulging your obsession with me. Last thing you would ever want to do!
(“Gotta Catch ‘Em All”)
*Yawn* Another dimwit resorting to fake-macho bluster when his incoherent bullshit gets debunked.
Yo, rup(ert), if you think real names are important, why didn’t you ask all of us for ours BEFORE you started commenting here?
Jazzlet,
I do not find my tone insulting at all. And certainly not if you compare the words used to those used by sonofrojblake or raging bee. Perhaps you missed those insults.
However, to answer your points.
First, beliefs Beliefs refer to attitudes about the states of affairs which can be either true OR false. We often have beliefs about something but then find evidence which negates them and have to revise our beliefs. So rather than talking about beliefs, I prefer to use the expression ‘to think in a particular way about something at this moment in time’.
I can only repeat the points made in my initial post which simply listed the PROS and CONS of immigration as I have heard them talked about on TV, newspapers, the radio, etc. No implication of beliefs or even opinion was involved in this post (certainly not racist or anything else); it was merely informational.
However, if you want me to express an opinion on each of them (including Mano Singham’s) I will do so.
1. Are migrants needed for business, etc. perhaps to help maintain the long. term health system or because they do jobs that US citizens do not want to do.
Yes, although this cannot be taken as an absolute general truth. For example, it may not be true in countries like China, India, The Philippines, etc.
2. Has immigration led to the infiltration of people who come for reasons for expediency and not necessity, perhaps becoming eventually radicalised terrorists, or criminals or drug-dealers or all of those.
No doubt this is true in some cases.
3. Do ghettoes often form with people not learning the language, not integrating, and indeed in many large cities (London, Milan, Paris, Rome, to mention a few) leading to ‘no-go areas’ -- even for the police?
My personal instinct is to think that there are few places on the planet where the police and the forces of law and order (with modern sophisticated technology and weaponry) could not go if they desired to do so. So, in answer to your question. No, I do not believe that they exist.
4. Such groups often follow such things as Sharia law (and not the laws of the country where they are) with such things as mistreating women, blocking women’s rights, female genital mutilation, and also ‘dishonour murders’ if women break the rulers.
I heard read of cases of the above, but have no personal experience or proof.
All of this reflects my thinking at this moment in time, but as I said above, in the future, things may change and happen which may force me to revise and updating my thinking.
Hilarious. I don’t find my tone insulting either, as it goes. So everything’s just peachy. Let’s continue, with your answer to the question “do you believe no-go areas for police exist in London?”.
Excellent, finally. You deliberately chose, in post 12, to repeat and thus amplify the patently false stories of police no-go areas, even though you yourself don’t believe any such areas exist.
Now I invite you to speculate what that makes you look like to someone reading this thread.
I doubt you’ll even think about it… but I can tell you that other people ARE thinking about it, and have made their minds up about you, based on evidence.
I do not find my tone insulting at all.
That’s your belief, and it’s flatly contradicted by the evidence of your own comments here.
…because they do jobs that US citizens do not want to do.
This anti-worker, anti-union trope needs to be kicked to the curb, as in last century. It should be obvious to anyone who has a job, needs a job, or knows any actual workers, that the problem is NOT that American workers “don’t want to work;” it’s that too many employers don’t want to pay them a decent wage and never wanted to invest in training or education to give them the skills they need.
Has immigration led to the infiltration of people who come for reasons for expediency and not necessity…
Where do you draw the line between “expediency” and “necessity?” They’re not exactly different things.
…perhaps becoming eventually radicalised terrorists, or criminals or drug-dealers or all of those.
The worst terrorists in the West aren’t immigrants, they’re natural-born bigots who’ve been radicalized by other natural-born bigots and groomed to attack and destroy their own society. And the worst drug dealers of late have been US corporations LEGALLY overselling opioids. They’re the ones conning people like you into freaking out about immigrants as a distraction from their own far grosser malfeasance.
My personal instinct is to think that there are few places on the planet where the police and the forces of law and order (with modern sophisticated technology and weaponry) could not go if they desired to do so.
Exactly — if there’s any “no-go” areas in any city anywhere, it’s not because the locals are keeping the cops out; it’s because local cops and leaders themselves either don’t care enough, or aren’t given sufficient resources, to properly serve those communities. That’s how ghettoes always form anywhere. Bloody ginormous case in point: Gaza.