Protect and Defend

Welcome to my blog, Protect and Defend. You don’t have to understand me. You only have to agree with me. I can live with losing the good fight, but I can not live with not fighting that good fight at all. - Publius

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Are you an environmentalist? Then you too should be against illegal immigration

The environmental load of 300 million: How heavy?

From The Christian Science Monitor : September 26 , 2006.

…In many ways, Americans have mitigated the impact of their increasing presence on the land. Since reaching the 200 million mark back in 1967, they have cut emissions of major air pollutants, banned certain harmful pesticides, and overseen the rebound of several endangered species. Despite using more resources and creating more waste, they've become more energy efficient.

The danger, experts say, is that the US may simply have postponed the day of reckoning. Major environmental problems remain, and some are getting worse - all of them in one way or another connected to US population growth, which is expected to hit 400 million around mid-century. Some experts put the average American's "ecological footprint" - the amount of land and water needed to support an individual and absorb his or her waste - at 24 acres. By that calculation, the long-term "carrying capacity" of the US would sustain less than half of the nation's current population.

"The US is the only industrialized nation in the world experiencing significant population growth," says Vicky Markham, of the Center for Environment and Population, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization in New Canaan, Conn. "That, combined with America's high rates of resource consumption, results in the largest ... environmental impact [of any nation] in the world."

The boomer challenge

The changing nature of the population also has environmental consequences.

"Today's baby boomers - 26 percent of the population - are the largest, wealthiest, highest resource-consuming of that age group ever in the nation's history, and they have unprecedented environmental impact," says Ms. Markham.

The generation's preference for bigger houses and bigger cars - and the proliferation of them - are gobbling up more resources and creating more pollution, according to a recent study by the Center for Environment and Population. For example:

Land is being converted for development at about twice the rate of population growth. When housing, shopping, schools, roads, and other uses are added up, each American effectively occupies 20 percent more developed land than he or she did 20 years ago.

Nearly 3,000 acres of farmland are converted to nonagricultural uses daily.

Each American produces about five pounds of trash daily, up from less than three pounds in 1960.

While the US is noted for its wide open spaces, more than half of all Americans live within 50 miles of the coasts where population density and its environmental impact are increasing….

It's no coincidence, for example, that the modern environmental movement began about the same time that US population ticked past the 200 million mark 39 years ago.

Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich's controversial book "The Population Bomb" had predicted that humanity's numbers around the globe would overwhelm natural resources, especially food production, in a Malthusian catastrophe…

What this article says is that by the time the Baby Boomer generation came around this country had reached a population of 200 million. So, after the the two large waves of European immigration of the late 1800s and early 1900s, and then the largest growth rate period in America by the Greatest Generation of their Baby Boomer children, this country had 200 million people. But, the baby boomers had a growth rate of just over a 2 children per household which is enough to sustain the population with a small growth. However, this growth rate of 100 million people in 30 years is not caused by an aging population or large numbers of Generation X and Y children. Instead, this growth rate is caused by the US allowing more than 1 million new immigrants to come to this country each year to become citizens. That is 1 million legal immigrants who become citizens. The US allows more legal immigration than every other country in the world combined. By comparison, Mexico allows 3,000 immigrants to become citizens each year.
The Statue of Liberty had stood these past 30 years and we have taken the world’s tired and poor, and those yearning to be free. But with projections that the US population will increase by another 100 million over the next 50 years, it is time to say, “Sorry, we’re closed.”
We as Americans use too much, we waste too much, and we have reached the point where we will go from a net-exporting food country to a net-importing food country to sustain the population.
So for those of you who are still against immigration enforcement, here is some more information to think about.


Blogger Rogue Mariner said...

And tell everyone to stop having babies. Is it China where they have the law about 1 child per couple?

Thu Sep 28, 12:30:00 PM  
Blogger Publius said...

China is the one baby per household country. To have more you have to pay fines and taxes which many people in China can not afford. The sad thing is that because of those laws and because in China it is a very male-dominated society, many couples with abort a female child and wait for a male.
But, it does take two children per household to sustain a population. Many of the countries in Europe are seeing their populations decline because they have a negative growth rate. In the US it is still about 2.3 children per household but in some European countries it is as low as 1.1 children per household. With an aging population, and a socialist economy with early retirement and long vacations, Europe actually needs immigration to sustain their economies. But, the US does not have the same problem. Without any immigration we would still have a positive growth rate, but it would be much slower than the additional 100 million people over the next 50 years.

Fri Sep 29, 02:53:00 AM  
Blogger Bobkatt said...

Enviromentalist are worried. They are concerned that a fence will disrupt the migration of birds and Jaguars. I had to read the rest of the article to find out how a fence would disrupt the flight of hawks and hummingbirds but they explain it is the bright lights on top of the fence. I wonder what the poor land owners on the border will do without Jaguars coming and going?
Seriously, I also wonder why liberals don't see that supporting unlimited immigration has an extreme detrimental effect on their own agenda. Do they really believe that the illegals are enviromentalist or concerned about population control or civil rights other than their own, or global warming?

Fri Sep 29, 05:32:00 AM  
Blogger Publius said...

I am going to assume it is all about getting votes. There are now more Hispanic voters in the US than black voters, and whereas both parties have forgotten about black voters because they either don’t vote or vote Democrat, Hispanic voters are still relatively undecided.
But selling out America for future votes because they can not attract Hispanic voters on other issues is shortsighted and wrong.

Fri Sep 29, 10:31:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home