April 29, 2013

NumbersUSA: Gang of 8 bill means 33 million more immigrants

Neil Munro writes in the Daily Caller:
The pending Senate immigration bill would bring a minimum of 33 million people into the country during its first decade of operation, according to an analysis by NumbersUSA, a group that wants to slow the current immigration rate. 
By 2024, the inflow would include an estimated 9.2 million illegal immigrants, plus 2.5 million illegals who arrived as children — dubbed ‘Dreamers’ — plus roughly 3.4 million company-sponsored employees with university degrees, said the unreleased analysis. 
The majority of the inflow, or roughly 17 million people, would consist of family members of illegals, recent immigrants and of company-sponsored workers, according to the NumbersUSA analysis provided to The Daily Caller.

Or America could converge to Third World status and the would-be newcomers would decide to stay home or go elsewhere.

62 comments:

Anonymous said...

Third world people, third world country. You can't have a first world country with third world people.

There is a reason why Somalia is Somalia, and that reason is Somalians. There is also a reason why Norway is Norway, and that reason is Norwegians.

The failure to understand, or perhaps, to admit this, is the root of all our immigration malaise.

anony-mouse said...

I'm trying to point out that no one is paying attention to an obscure organization called the 'House of Representatives'. The entire focus has been on the Senate where the Dems have a majority anyways.

How can I do it in a way that people here will notice?

I've got it!

There's a conspiracy lead by the MSM to get everyone focused on the Senate so that patriotic Americans will ignore the House. It seems to be working.

How's that?

Anonymous said...

Most the legistration benefits two groups, Hispanics and Asian. About 15 percent of Asians are illegal and they too want their family members, maybe both Hispanics and Asians knew that Obama would pushed the Republicans in getting them here by legalizing, family reunifcation or guestworker programs for the low skilled and high skilled. That's why both groups voted heavily for him.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that most the oppostion is on the right, the Tea party which opposes legalizing illegals and has gotten angry with Rubio treats him worst than cheap labor libertarian Rand Paul. I read that Grover Norquist got gun owners and religious right people in the late 1990's to oppose e-verify because it would lead to a national ID card.

rightsaidfred said...

After the village is burned, what should we do with the ashes?

Anonymous said...

The problem is that most the oppostion is on the right, the Tea party which opposes legalizing illegals and has gotten angry with Rubio treats him worst than cheap labor libertarian Rand Paul. I read that Grover Norquist got gun owners and religious right people in the late 1990's to oppose e-verify because it would lead to a national ID card.

Anonymous said...

Third world people, third world country. You can't have a first world country with third world people.


Blogger Vox Day has a great line similar to this. You cannot have a police state without the police, and you cannot have a third world nation without the third worlders.

Boston showed us we have got both.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that most the oppostion is on the right, the Tea party which opposes legalizing illegals and has gotten angry with Rubio treats him worst than cheap labor libertarian Rand Paul.

I don't follow. Rubio is part of the Gang of 8, Paul is not. Rubio is the face of the the reform movement being lead by Senator Schumer. Schumer could never have gotten this through without using a putz like Rubio to push it.

Paul has stepped back on so called reform post Boston.

Hence, Rubio deserves more scorn than Paul.

Nick Diaz said...

@Steve Sailer

"Or America could converge to Third World status and the would-be newcomers would decide to stay home or go elsewhere."

America will converge to Third World status WITHOUT immigrants. This is what I have explained to you many times, but your brain can's seem to grasp.

The remaining industry and tech industries are completely reliant on immigrants to keep afloat.

America is f-ked without immigrants.

Anonymous said...

Well, Rubio may deserved more scorn but Paul opposes e-eviery since businessmen should hire who they please. Its the typical right wing get tough on the borders because of terrorism but if people get thru business should be allow to hire them. Paul still wants a lot of illegals for big business he only opposes a little for security.

Daybreaker said...

rightsaidfred said... "After the village is burned, what should we do with the ashes?"
-
Defame them.

Anonymous said...

It's amazing to me that intelligent people still follow national politics play-by-play as if there are any patriots among them. If you want a good story, try pro wrestling.

Get it through your skulls, it's all about money.

Anonymous said...

The remaining industry and tech industries are completely reliant on immigrants to keep afloat.

America is f-ked without immigrants.


Americans can do those jobs.

Anonymous said...

"America is f-ked without immigrants."

Why don't we try it and see? If we truly can't live without them we can always invite in millions at any time down-the-road. But I'm sure the problem, from your point of view, is that we will do just fine without them, even worse, we'll do better.

Ex Submarine Officer said...

America is f-ked without immigrants.

I think you have it backwards, maybe should be "Immigrants are f-ked without America."

The U.S. takes in more immigrants than the rest of the world combined. W/out America, where would all these people go? Some of them might make it to Europe and Aus/NZ, but there is far from enough places for them there.

Anyplace else come to mind? It would be nice for the immigrants to show at least a hint of gratitude for the big-heartedness of the the U.S. and its people for allowing them to escape the messes they and their countrymen have created.

Hunsdon said...

Nicky baby, where would we be without you?

Anonymous said...

America is f-ked without immigrants.

Mexico is f-ked without emigrants, who provide her with her second largest source of income.

Mexico would feel more pain without emigrants to America than America would feel without Mexican immigrants.

America will converge to Third World status WITHOUT immigrants. This is what I have explained to you many times, but your brain can's seem to grasp.

You have never tried to explain anything other than that the 1924 Immigration Act discriminated against Southern Europeans.

Why don't you start a blog, make your points, and provide us with the links.

ben tillman said...

"America is f-ked without immigrants."

Why don't we try it and see?


We already did, and "America" became the wealthiest country in the history of the world. We had other advantages as well, but immigration restriction was a huge factor.

David said...

>Grover Norquist got gun owners and religious right people in the late 1990's to oppose e-verify because it would lead to a national ID card.<

Ah yes - the mark of the Beast!

Cue video of Auschwitz tats, Illuminati symbols, Jesus soaring through the heavens, Satan with glowing eyes, Stalin inspecting the Red Army, Hitler throwing down the Paris two-step, POWs staring at the camera from behind barbed wire, all set to a theremin score and interlarded with a conflation of Nostradamus and Biblical exegesis so deplorable it would have made Mother Teresa fall on her crucifix. Alex Jone$, for one, can produce this junk in his sleep by now. Meanwhile, unchecked immigration continues...as planned.

Btw, we already have a national ID. The Social Security Number (SSN). Not to worry. That one was subverted; and the next one will be, too.

Obstacles to elite profit have no staying power in America.

Anonymous said...

Mexico is f-ked without emigrants, who provide her with her second largest source of income.

Mexico would feel more pain without emigrants to America than America would feel without Mexican immigrants Mexico isn't that poor asked Carlos Slim to contribute his income is higher than the remittances money sent back by mexican immirgants to Mexico.

Anonymous said...

Well, the current economic dogma, (which the entirety of the political class subscribes to), is that more warm bodies per acre = more wealth.
I really don't understand the reasoning behind this dogma - but I'm sure that there are pages and pages of self-justifying trash written in its support, which bamboozles tiny political minds (shades of 'Emperor's New Clothes), so therefore pile in the warm bodies.

Anonymous said...

Mexico isn't that poor asked Carlos Slim to contribute his income is higher than the remittances money sent back by mexican immirgants to Mexico.

A great deal of Slim's income is derived by those Mexican emigrants making long distance phone calls back to Mexico. Remove the Mexican emigrants and Slim loses a lot of revenue.

Anonymous said...

A great deal of Slim's income is derived by those Mexican emigrants making long distance phone calls back to Mexico. Remove the Mexican emigrants and Slim loses a lot of revenue He also makes money from Mexicans in Mexico, Mexico is a country over 100 million.

Daniel said...

For anyone who thinks that 500, 600 900. 1200.. million residents of the USA is not too much because at such number we will still have a lower population to land density than India or even the Netherlands well I invite you to investigate a cool web application named Google maps.

Yes, spend an hour with Google maps (or Bing, I don't care which amoral, autistic, billionaire plutocrat you enrich), drill down on the Indian country side. Notice that there is hardly any wilderness at all. No place for respite, no place for escape, no place for solace, no place for wildlife except for the monkey, rat, wild, rabid dog and snake. Outside the fetid, overgrown megapolises there is dreary, monotonous expanse of parched countryside, interspersed in all directions by dusty villages every 1/2 mile or so. Villages without adequate water, let alone sewers for adequate wast treatment, or the merest cultural or civilizational amenities. I don't kid you, rural Indians sh*t whenever and wherever they can. This is India, and this is our future too if we don't immediately halt ALL immigration, for, you see, population growth has a dynamic all it's own, that cannot be stopped once it is set in motion, short of genocidal war or massive famine, or determined legislative fiat.

Oh, you may say, what about the Netherlands? Well the Netherlands is a precious, little garden of industrious Europeans, about the size of New Jersey, that cannot be scaled up, and you wouldn't want to live in a scaled up Netherlands anyway. Again: overpopulated by prim, censoring Protestants. Tight, hemmed in, no wilderness, nothing vast, hidden or unobserved. No unexplored or barely explored lands, no refuge. The perfect redoubt for neutered Elois. You can have it, I prefer Antartica.

Carthago delend est => ALL immigration must end, now. Do it for the children, seriously.

Devil's Advocate said...

Okay, but the average age of white women in America is 43. So we're talking about a slowly dying population which basically will not grow, at all.

In fact, if you look at the white-only population in America, it isn't far off the demographics that Japan has. Also, we'd seen declines in the working-age population a long time ago.

Secondly, Roy Beck has little credibility. He overshoots or undershoots. In the Republican primaries he seemed incapable of understanding the notion of pandering. So he took Romney at his word and was then shocked by having to make panicked, last-minute changes to Romney's immigration grades on his website a month before the election.

Romeny was just a flip-flopper, he has always been one. He was for amnesty before the primaries and then switched to win them.

Similarly, this analysis needs careful consideration.
Another thing you ought to remember that these 11 million people are already here.

They are not new people in our labor force. They are already inside America. Many of them have worked here for several decades. So we're not talking about 33 "new" people in the proper sense of the word.

Of the people who would actually be new, most of them will be foreign workers and the H1B visa's expansion is a good example.

Today, 57% of all new immigrants to California are Asian. That share will only increase. Mexico's birth rate is 2.1, barely keeping up with their population, and their economy is in some ways better for their working class than it is in America. You won't see a housing boom because the Fed can't push the rates any lower(and nothing much has happened thus far, the 'recovery' in housing is very, very modest) and in 1-2 years, the Fed will push the rates significantly higher anyway.

Lastly, hispanics who are between 25 and 30 now have completed a 4 year bachelor at about 22%, double the rate for their parents and this is rising fast. U.S. hispanics have also seen a deep drop in their birth rate post-recession and it isn't climbing back fast.

Then there are those who fetishize Asian immigration but culturally, they will probably be harder to assimilate than hispanics, where 50% consider themselves white.

I think many here underestimate the level of left-wing indoctrination many Asians are now undergoing, especially the younger generation.

They may be skilled, but they are far more culturally alien in the long run.

Then there are those who say: "no immigration" but again, then the fate we would have would be Japan.

If you could get white women to give birth to about 2.5 children consistently in this country, we wouldn't have to worry about immigration.

But white women have a birth rate of 1.79, not 2.1 which many believe(that's for the total births for women of all races and black women are at 2.0 and hispanic women are now at about 2.1).

Without an increasing population, or at the very least a stable one, a de-facto welfare state like America is impossible. You'd have to destroy social security all-together. As long as the work force increases, you won't have to.

And I think a high-IQ population in the future will be less relevant than now because of gene-therapy and because of an increasing role that machines have.

That, plus the general reduction in crime we've seen the past 20 years.

Ideal? No. But there are systemic flaws with Beck's numbers and many assumptions on this comments' section, even if I don't share the utopian view of immigration either, things are more complicated than the black/white worldview many here have(no pun intended).

elvisd said...

After the village is burned, what should we do with the ashes?


It takes a village to raze a village.

Anonymous said...

Is the same story Drudge and Ace of Spades are reporting? Third of Mexican adults would come to the US.

goatweed

Anonymous said...

Devil's Advocate,
You write a load of absolute damned crap.
Firstly, the USA is nation of chronic high mass unemployment, so your 'argument' that immigration is 'needed' for the 'workforce' is merely sheer nonsense.
Secondly, I read figures the other day concerning the ridiculous and enormous percentage of Americans who rely on food stamps for their survival. Why, in God's Green Earth does a nation bursting at the seams with milliards of useless paupers wishes to imort more paupers is beyond me, but you know better than I do.
Thirdly, your point on the future funding of social security is just another pile of doggy-doo, just like the others. Third world immigrants take more out of the fund tham they *ever* put in, the aggregate total runs into an enormous figure. Any informed (and, of course, that doesn't mean you), commentator on immigration realises that the 'funding welfare' 'argument' is pure bullpoopy, since it implies a Ponzi scheme (who pays for the immigrants once they retire?) and exponential growth in immigrant numbers. In fact the number of immigrants needed rises to astronomical numbers (you couldn't find that number even if you tried, as no doubt you would love to), surprisingly quickly - we are talking about the admission of hundreds of millions per annum here.

Anonymous said...

"Then there are those who say: "no immigration" but again, then the fate we would have would be Japan." - Japan is packed to the brim with people. shedding population will not be a problem for them, And America would likewise do just fine with only 200M people.

sunbeam said...

Devil's Advocate wrote:

"Then there are those who fetishize Asian immigration but culturally, they will probably be harder to assimilate than hispanics, where 50% consider themselves white. "

I kind of wonder about this myself. If present trends continue we will see asians become an even more significant presence in the overclass.

It's possible they could come to think of themselves as another separate "overclass." I kind of think they won't, I think they will stay assimilated into that mass of free range chicken eating, pilates addicted, mass of people who go to the right schools and live in the right places.

Be kind of dangerous for a lot of reasons if they start to identify ethnically more than they do, coupled with the success they have and will continue to have in this ocuntry.

"And I think a high-IQ population in the future will be less relevant than now because of gene-therapy and because of an increasing role that machines have. "

I don't know anything about gene therapy, or what it portends. But robotics and computer science is coming on like a freight train. You don't have to have HAL or COLOSSUS to change everything.

A large population is no longer particularly useful. Heck even if they are all super smart there is a limit to how many you can gainfully use as scientists and physicists.

Basically most of the immigrants we have coming, at least most of the ones we talk about are destined to be future beneficiaries of a welfare state.

If we are lucky.

They aren't going to enhance the economy or well being of this country. They'll just be more of the unproductive lower portion of the population, which we have an ample amount of now, and will expand in future years. Expand to some segments of the population and to areas that think of themselves as something very different right now.

I got my eye on you Kansas. One day bot tractors and combines are going to prowl the fields of the Midwest, and you guys aren't going to serve much in the way of a useful economic purpose.

Of course there is a lot of that already in rural areas if you look closely at them.

Lastly Devil's Advocate, you seem to think a declining population is bad in some way.

I have one response: "Cool!"

A declining population is a feature, not a bug. I'd be happy to see US population decline to 200 million or so.

In the new world gross numbers won't have much to do with GDP anyway, as much as that number will apply.

Mr. Anon said...

"Nick Diaz said...

America will converge to Third World status WITHOUT immigrants. This is what I have explained to you many times, but your brain can's seem to grasp."

You have explained nothing to anyone, you stupid d**k-head.

"America is f-ked without immigrants."

America is f**ked with them. As if the nation needs more peole like you.

Idiot.

Chicago said...

They'll all demand first-world quality of health care, educational facilities for their children, nursing home and rehabilitation services, etc. Probably will be filing plenty of lawsuits so as to hit the lottery. Who's going to pay for all this? They're not, that's clear. Degradation of medical care, environment, school crowding, will all follow and pull the rest of us with them. There's record numbers of people receiving Food Stamps as it is. We'll end up with thousands of favelas all over the country. The racial balkanization of the country will really go into high gear. All this is for the benefit of that small percentage of the population who want more slaves for their plantations.

Luke Lea said...

Tsarnaev family received $100G in benefits

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/04/tsarnaev_family_received_100g_in_benefits

Who says immigrants don't pay their way?

Svigor said...

Nicky baby, where would we be without you?

If there's one thing we know for sure, it's that Nick de Ass (and all the rest of the immigrants) have our best interests in mind, first and foremost. The fact that everything they say serves their own best interests is just a happy coincidence.

Anonymous said...

Asian Americans have some of the highest intermarriage rates in the country especially women. Now this maybe slowing down a bit due to growth in Asian population.

How many full or even mostly 4th generation Asian-Americans are running around outside of Hawaii? Not many but there are quite a few full blood Mexican Americans into their 4th generation and beyond for example Mark Sanchez.

Asians are actually easier to integrate into the white hegemony.

Rohan Swee said...

This is what I have explained to you many times, but your brain can's seem to grasp.

I can's haz brain?

I wonder on what point down the scale a Dunning-Kruger effect for IQ kicks in. Just how bright do you have to be to understand that you're not very bright? Or is it something uncorrelated to g, that prevents people across the spectrum from gauging their relative intelligence?

Anonymous said...

Anyone remember the influence of well funded "Zero Population Growth"?
Seemed that was the American Ruling Class Mantra not so long ago. Use to be bombarded with their propaganda relentlessly on a daily basis from every bastion of big media, year after year. Now, not so much ;)
"America needs millions upon millions more people!"
Truly Orwellian.

Rohan Swee said...

Devil's Advocate: Okay, but the average age of white women in America is 43. So we're talking about a slowly dying population which basically will not grow, at all.

In fact, if you look at the white-only population in America, it isn't far off the demographics that Japan has.


Ah, so a population of fertile females in the millions necessarily means demographic death-spiral. In itself that cannot be so (or there wouldn't be billions of humans around now), so there must be some mysterious property that makes it so under certain conditions, apparently having to do with its size relative to the number of geezers in the population, or maybe relative to other populations.

I take a quick poke around and see that Japan is predicted to have only a few million females of breeding age in 2050. A dying population! So how come they didn't die out in centuries past when they had "only" that many millions or fewer? I guess human populations have always just sprung from the earth with at least, what?, 10-20 millions of those females, which have to be increased exponentially over the generations, or it's doomsday, baby.

Look, TFRs go down, TFRs go up. There is no law of nature that a top-heavy demographic pyramid is THE END. A pain in the ass as it's worked out in modern Ponzi states, yes, with greedy geezers trying to vampirize the young. But again, no law of nature says the young have to lie down and let themselves be bled dry, and the predicitions that they will do so and be a "dying population" is just foolish extrapolation based on nothing but belief that what can't go on, will just keep going on. Only marginally less foolish than the belief that letting the Third World's populations pour into advanced countries is going to maintain and expand anything but the Third World.

dsgntd_plyr said...

off topic, but steve, in response to zuckerberg the atlantic has silicon valley employment/income data of immigrants broken down by continental origin: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/04/mark-zuckerberg-supports-very-specific-kind-immigration-reform/64153/

whites on top followed by asians. africans nearly double latinos wrt income. the piece is anti-zuckerberg.

Paul Mendez said...

I read that Grover Norquist got gun owners and religious right people in the late 1990's to oppose e-verify because it would lead to a national ID card.

Grover Norquist is perhaps the most evil person on the planet.

Tristero said...

I'm big on NumbersUSA for its efforts to cut back on illegal immigration, and I encourage everyone I can to register on their website and join the many thousands of activists who bombard the Congress with faxes and phone calls to close the door to amnesty.

But another website that I think does excellent work reports on the problems created by legal immigrants brought here as refugees. It's http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/

It's a great source to follow stories of the "vibrancy" that this diversity brings us.

The reason I raise this now is that the State Department is seeking comments from the public on refugee resettlement programs, which must be sent in the NEXT WEEK. If the Boston bombing Chechens aren't sufficient reason to question (and cut back substantially on) these programs, the stories you can read on this blog about Somalis and other groups will convince you that it's not only illegal aliens that are sending the country down the tubes.

Directions on writing to the State Department can be found at this entry: http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2013/04/30/your-one-chance-to-tell-the-us-state-department-what-you-think-about-refugee-resettlement-is-coming-up-in-may/

Read it carefully and note that, in order for your comments not to be disregarded, it's important to document that you're also sharing them with your legislative representatives.

There's a self-serving industry of refugee resettlement groups whose funding and salaries depend on keeping the numbers of such refugees high, regardless of the damage they do to communities where they're resettled, and theirs have generally been about the only voices heard. But particularly in the wake of the Boston bombing, we may now have a chance to bring about a policy that more closely accords with the interests of the average American. (We can hope, at any rate!)

So I urge anyone with an interest in the matter to visit the above highly informative blog and, if possible, chime in with the State Department on the issue.

Anonymous said...

"In fact, if you look at the white-only population in America, it isn't far off the demographics that Japan has."

And Japan has become a horrid place. Just horrid.

Anonymous said...

"Mark Zuckerberg's Self-Serving Immigration Crusade"

http://gawker.com/mark-zuckerbergs-self-serving-immigration-crusade-484912430

"The implicit argument behind FWD.us is that the U.S. doesn't have enough high-skilled domestic workers to meet tech companies' needs. This is a myth, and Zuckerberg and FWD.us are just the latest tech players to promote it. In fact there is no shortage of domestic IT workers, as shown in a new study from the Economic Policy Institute. While there is an unusually low unemployment rate among American tech workers (3%), they haven't enjoyed the large salary increases that would signal a shortage. There is also little evidence that the foreign workers tech companies hire are any better than Americans. The real reason tech companies want to hire more high-skilled immigrants is that they can pay them less than Americans, since immigrants are in a more economically precarious position. More than 80 percent of workers hired under the H-1B program are paid less than their American counterparts, according to the EPI. This kind of outsourcing benefits tech companies while hurting domestic tech workers.

The self-serving motives behind Zuckerberg's immigration reform push can be seen clearly in Facebook's corporate lobbying efforts. As FWD.us promotes high-minded ideals of openness and opportunity, Facebook's lobbying firms have been doing the dirty work of making sure immigration reform means they can freely hire high-skilled immigrants for less money than their American counterparts. Specifically, Facebook has been trying to insert language into the Senate immigration bill to eliminate a requirement that American companies make a "good faith" effort to hire Americans before looking abroad, according to the Washington Post. And Facebook wants to axe rules that would require companies to pay these foreign workers more. Facebook isn't just a fan of outsourcing its high-skilled jobs: Last year we reported that much of Facebook's dirty and unpleasant content moderation was done by outsourced third-world workers making as little as $1 an hour."

Anonymous said...

"Nick Diaz said"

"America is F***** without immigrants".

(Don't you just love this clown?)

Putting aside the obvious fact Senor Diaz, that you are hardly an unbiased or disinterested source, your comment is not only untrue, but probably the opposite of the truth. America basically ended immigration in 1924 and the country did very well for 41 years. The Ellis island descendents were assimilated and the country enjoyed wealth and social peace. The trouble all began when the Democrats re-opened the doors in 1965. This time too the third world and without any input from Americans. In any case why couldn't we just stop immigration and ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WOULD REALLY, TRULY HAPPEN? If your dire predictions come true, America could always just re-open the doors again. Its not like Mexicans are going to feel snubbed and refuse to invite themselves back in again now is it sport?

Anonymous said...

"...then the fate we would have would be Japan."

Japan has extremely low rates of crime and very little social strife.

And the Japanese would probably welcome a little more elbow room...

Anonymous said...

To Nick Diaz:

What have you ever explained to any of us? All you do is engage in rants and name-calling.

Tell you what. Explain to me why allowing millions of Spanish-speaking, educationally and technologically backward people into my country is such a slam dunk? Also bear in mind these people came here unlawfully, which is a very poor augury right there. And if these people were so valuable, why would Mexico not want to keep them? Why wouldn't Mexico have greatly benefitted from their presence in the first place?

Anonymous said...

Ah, the enlightened wisdom of huge-brained Nick De Ass (thanks, Svigor).

It's early days yet, but Little Nicky gets my vote for iSteve troll of the year 2013.

Anonymous said...

Non-Hispanic White Total Fertility Rate I US has been around 1.8-1.9 for some time, depending on economy. That is hardly catastrophic, just a bit below replacement level (especially given that fertility among older women is rising which can imply replacement level below 2.05).

TFR in Japan is 1.3-1.4.

It is easy to raise fertility. Putin has Russia back to 1.75 from 1.1 in a few years. Studies show that people on average want more children than they have, they decide against it because of cost of money and time. Subsidies, tax breaks, better day-care, longer maternity leave can fix this and improve life quality.

JSM said...

"If you could get white women to give birth to about 2.5 children consistently in this country, we wouldn't have to worry about immigration.

But white women have a birth rate of 1.79, not 2.1 which many believe(that's for the total births for women of all races and black women are at 2.0 and hispanic women are now at about 2.1)."

1950s: Rosie the Riveter quit her accursed job she took to Win the War and went home to birth her 3 contributions to the boomiest baby boom that ever boomed.

1950s: (White) Americans enjoyed the highest standard of living the world had ever seen, with vast numbers of great tract-housing neighborhoods newly built consisting of small, eminently affordable, 2-bedroom houses, the mortgages funded by FHA and VA loan guarantees.

1950s: (White) American nuclear family consisted of employed dad, housewife mom, and 3 kids. See: Father Knows Best

1973: Wages for an average, high-school-graduate (White) American man peaked. It's been downhill for that demo ever since. (While mass immigration since 1964 has continued apace. Graph them, they're very nearly a mirror image.)

You want a White baby boom? Affordable Family Formation -- which begins with immigration restriction.

Don't you DARE try to present the CAUSE of the (White) American birth-dearth as the solution to the birth-dearth.

Toulouse Boy said...

In this story comparing the similarities between 2012 Toulouse shootings' Merah and the Tsarnaev Bros, we learn that :

Le jeune frère, Dzhokhar (de l'arabe jawhar : joyau)...

The younger brother, Dzhokhar (from Arabic jawhar: jewel)

We decidedly need to import more of those Jewels.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Daniel's post (12:52 am) is profound. No more frontier, no more virgin lands. I think this is unhealthy. Population will be culled for these sacred spaces to reappear or humanity will go insane. Apologies for the dramatic tone.

Anonymous said...

"Oh, you may say, what about the Netherlands?"

One reason the Netherlands is probably a very bad argument for high population density is that it is basically the delta of the Rhine river (the big river between France and Germany, essentially).

So talking about the Netherlands is like talking about a large New Orleans. Hum, isn't New Orleans also under water level...

The "carrying capacity" of a large river delta is unusually high, for all sorts of reasons.

Anonymous said...

"Okay, but the average age of white women in America is 43. So we're talking about a slowly dying population which basically will not grow, at all."

I'm completely lost at why you think this is an argument. Just because you measure population growth one decade and the replacement rate is .9, you can't say it's always going to be that way. You can't say it's going to stay that way. You might measure it the next decade and find it 2.1. Fertility is not "linear".

Let me put it another way. First, the scene. Some giant KKK-space-aliens attack the earth! OMG!!! Those funny looking hat-things were ufo space ships! They are heroically beaten back. But the empire will strike back. We all know this can go on a long time.

It becomes clear that large families are going to be important. Prevailing attitudes change rapidly. Within a decade you could probably see female fertility over 5, or somesuch.

Didn't English women back in Darwin's day have around 10 births, on average? (Infant/child mortality was high.)

Anonymous said...

The Anti-Gnostic said...
Daniel's post (12:52 am) is profound. No more frontier, no more virgin lands. I think this is unhealthy. Population will be culled for these sacred spaces to reappear or humanity will go insane. Apologies for the dramatic tone.

No apologies needed for the dramatic tone. It is wholly appropriate.

Without them, you can have a place to live, but not a homeland. I recently visited a national park in northern California, and was surprised at my own reaction.

The smells dredged up more than childhood memories, they awoke a feeling that I had lost after years in a Los Angeles that is no longer an American city. For the first time since I was a teenager, I had the visceral sensation that California is MY fucking land. Demoralization followed within a week of my return.

-The Judean People's front

Vilko said...

Daniel's post (12:52 am) is profound.

Very profound, and the implication is obvious and worth stating clearly: if agricultural output decreases - because of a shortage of anything, from oil to fertilizers, or because of a thousand reasons you can imagine - it means FAMINE.

Devil's Advocate said...

Many people here have said that Japan isn't in a bad shape.

I beg to differ. Sure, lower crime etc. Fair point.

But a debt of over 220% of GDP. They literally going bankrupt and can only cover their tracks by massive debt. U.S. debt on the other hand(net debt) is at 76% and will be at that level for the next decade. If we reform medicare, we'll be fine. Social security, with an increasing population, is fine.

So no, Japan isn't doing "fine". It's facing financial disaster within a very short time.

Secondly, immigration to America is already increasingly Asian and increasingly high-skilled. The immigration bill, which has no chance of passage as of now(which Rubio admitted today) will skew the intake even more towards high-skill immigrants(primarily from Asian but also increasingly from Europe).

Immigration can be our superweapon. Everyone wants to come to America. This means we can be super selective about who comes in and get the best. You say: but we don't this now.
I say: true, but that's no excuse to get things right.

China has tried to poach their immigrants back but this has failed massively, despite media hype. 60% of the richest Chinese want to immigrate or are already planning to do so to a Western country(and usually America).

If America is seen as friendly to immigrants in places like China then that creates a cultural boot on the Chinese leadership's neck. We can just say, but your richest and brightest want to come to us. And we'll let them.

Now, a case can be made that our immigration system is a mess as of now. No debate there. But there would be no Google and no Yahoo if we didn't get in skilled non-WASP immigrants.

Look at the engineering or science PhD departments, full of Asians. The vast majority of them stay on in America.

The big challenge is culture. And the big negative influence is the left-wing academia which is relentlessly anti-white. But if that is fixed, and no small task admittedly, then assimilation would be much smoother even if it's pretty smooth already.

But even if you said no to immigration, the cultural problem would persist and rot. So that problem isn't fixed by saying no to immigration.

TL;DR:

1. Japan is a huge mess and a bug in search of a wind shield. MUCH worse than America has any chance to be within decades.

2. Immigration to America is already changing fast, increasingly high-skill, Asian.

3. Even if immigration is pretty badly thought out today(but getting better), that's no excuse not to make the system work for us more. Past is not prologue. Everyone wants to get to America. Let's use that to our advantage and be very selective with who we take in. This isn't the case now, but as I said, past failures is no excuse to get things right.

4. Main issue is cultural assimilation of East Asians, many of whom are getting radicalized in colleges by constant anti-white propaganda from cultural left. This appeals for obvious selfish reasons(everyone wants to be a victim), but also because race politics is getting increasingly serious in America. The issue here is the cultural rot at the root of all this, not the immigrants themselves. If East Asians were told that they have a place in America but were not indoctrinated with resentment, things would be smoother.
Indian-Americans are much less of an issue culturally.
But cultural challenge is a domestic rot that exists with or without immigration.

Best way forward would be to reform immigration to make it more like the Canadian system but even harsher. They recently made a priority to English-speakers and younger immigrants. Skip the diversity lotto. Increase H1-B but take away the cheap-labor function and make it work like it was intended and then cut off all refugee immigrants. And on top of it, get to work on the cultural rot in humanities. Do all these things, and things look not-bad for America. The main argument against this is actually feasability of getting it done, not substance.

Anonymous said...

Luke, don't buy the $100K number. The Commonwealth cops to Section 8 for the Bomb Family as soon as they got off the plane. Given that 2-bedroom apartments even in the crappy parts of Cambridge go for between $1,500-1,800/month, do the math jsut for housing for 5 to 10 years. Then we get to SNAP (food), Medicaid and the infamous "cash benefits".

People in the more sane parts of the country have no concept of the welfare generosity here.

Anonymous said...

They just legalized Plan B over the counter. I hope they will have the advertisements and directions in Spanish. If we are going to have free Plan B over the counter for any slut who is willing to take it, how about free sterilization at Planned Parenthood for anyone who will show up to take it? The left can use their favorite tool to promote it: education (and shaming)! If you don't stop at two kids, then you are ignorant!

Anonymous said...

Vilko said: Daniel's post (12:52 am) is profound.

Very profound, and the implication is obvious and worth stating clearly: if agricultural output decreases - because of a shortage of anything, from oil to fertilizers, or because of a thousand reasons you can imagine - it means FAMINE.

Vilko, I always appreciated your postings in the late John J. Reilly's discussion forum. I hope that retirement is treating you well.

-The Judean People's Front

Anonymous said...

Reply to Devil's advocate;

Canada is the last country in the world America should look to for immigration reform. Our country is an even bigger disaster then America when it comes to immigration. The vast and overwhelming number of arrivals are "family re-unification". These people do not have to qualify for anything, and they contribute nothing. So-called "refugees" also crowd out skilled workers.

Anonymous said...

Notice how 'Devil's Advocate' doesn't answer any of the real and substantive criticisms of his piece?

Svigor said...

Immigration can be our superweapon.

It already is. The "us" is non-whites, of course.

I prefer to do as the smart people do, rather than as they say, especially when I'm facing them over the negotiating table. China and Israel don't allow significant levels of immigration, and neither should we. China and Israel don't allow critical sectors of their economy to fall into foreign hands, and neither should we.

Notice how 'Devil's Advocate' doesn't answer any of the real and substantive criticisms of his piece?

I wonder if he's Yan Shen, AKA Kato.