Turtle Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Sorry mate. You are not correct. Each of the following countries has higher migrant per capita than the US: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2112.htmlPortugalMayotteNew ZealandAustraliaGuernseyMacauHong KongLiechtensteinIrelandAnguillaIsle of ManBotswanaCanadaJordanAndorraBurundiNorthern Mariana IslandsMonacoSingaporeLuxembourgBritish Virgin IslandsBosnia and HerzegovinaTurks and Caicos IslandsArubaSan MarinoQatarKuwaitCayman IslandsUnited Arab EmiratesLiberia Well enough for them. :shrug: And how does their population compare to ours? And what is their past history of immigration? Democratic governments are they all? Do you invite a hundred people to dinner when you have only settings and food for 20? I am not against immigration or immigrants here; I am against the historically unprecedented high rate of their introduction. Not only is it not good for current citizens, it's not good for the legal immigrants. :cup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Well enough for them. :shrug: And how does their population compare to ours? And what is their past history of immigration? Democratic governments are they all? Do you invite a hundred people to dinner when you have only settings and food for 20? I am not against immigration or immigrants here; I am against the historically unprecedented high rate of their introduction. Not only is it not good for current citizens, it's not good for the legal immigrants. :cup: Please stop moving the goal posts after I've kicked the football. I'm starting to feel like Charlie Brown. My bigger point is that it's not so much the immigration causing strains on some local infrastructure, but population growth causing strains on the globe as a whole. That is all. Think big picture, Chuck. :cup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackson33 Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 in the US, we have internal migration on a daily basis. tens of thousands move from state to state monthly and effect the economies of both their new state and the ones left. the problem in accepting the notion of illegal entry, add this to our laws which relate to persons in, not citizens of, the entire social structure is under pressure from the third world mentality, with the expectation of rights and privileges of the total host population. (this not true in most of Infinites list) we have immigration laws which Cedar's has offered in, US Immigration History. there is cause and justification for each change over the years.currently we in the US have a two fold problem. lack of a work force and a need to protect our social structure. we also have a history of what happens when there is an abuse in the system, Mr. Reagan's amnesty. the short of a long story, if we accept the current Immigration Bill as written, we make Mexico our 51st State, but in obligations only. pick your number of ILLEGAL immigrants in the country today, 12 to 20 million, add the families in Mexico which can join their family here and also immune from deportation and are entitled to all programs you will have a collapse in the already threatened social, medical, disabled, prison, educational and host of programs. when the status illegal is dropped, the immigrant, becomes legal with no possible enforcement for compliance with the said requirements. they are and their families the breeders of future naturalized citizens, or born in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cedars Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 It is the embodiment of the philosophy the US is all about. Or was about. And it's sad, really, to see how immigrants who found their fortunes under the philosophy of freedom and liberty are now denying other immigrants the same opportunity, based on arguments such as lacking infrastructure, etc. The infrastructure currently in place, was, after all, built on the sweat and tears of immigrants, yet again. Nationalism is a disease of the mind. Nationalism have given us nazism and apartheid. And all of that in the last 100-odd years. That "built by a nation of immigrants" line is irrelevant when you consider that; #1 there is no nation that isnt a nation of immigrants at some point in their past.#2 the parameters of what was a legal immigrant were clearly defined originally as people of england (when it was a colony) or people of spain or france, etc, (in other clearly defined territories), each with their own standards of who can be within those borders.#3 as my link shows, it wasnt even 20 years before the youthful USofA defined that an immigrant is a free white person. There wasnt a philosophy of wide open for whom-so-ever manages to float a boat, ride a horse, walk across a desert, etc, until approx 1968 when some aspects of immigration were changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Please stop moving the goal posts after I've kicked the football. I'm starting to feel like Charlie Brown. :cup: I moved nothing; you simply mistook a side marker for the goal. :cup: My bigger point is that it's not so much the immigration causing strains on some local infrastructure, but population growth causing strains on the globe as a whole. That is all. Think big picture, Chuck. :shrug: Yes; C1ay said as much earlier. >> For the U.S. the current issue is the rate of immigration but for the world, it is the rate of population growth. The topic of this thread is the US immigration however, and not world population growth. In either case, precipitous rates of growth precede precipitous rates of fall. I see the forest and the trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 I moved nothing; you simply mistook a side marker for the goal. :shrug:<...>The topic of this thread is the US immigration however, and not world population growth. Here's a great presentation on the effects of immigration and the runaway population growth of third world countries....Considering what I've bolded in C1ay's post, how do you figure what I've bolded in yours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racoon Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 I feel somewhat vindicated from the pounding I took from similar earlier threads.. Some people see the future and reality clearer than others... Turtle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 I moved nothing; you simply mistook a side marker for the goal. <...>The topic of this thread is the US immigration however, and not world population growth. Here's a great presentation on the effects of immigration and the runaway population growth of third world countries.... Considering what I've bolded in C1ay's post, how do you figure what I've bolded in yours? I watched the presentation. :shrug: :cup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 I watched the presentation. :shrug: :cup:Ditto. Did you intend to imply I hadn't? I feel somewhat vindicated from the pounding I took from similar earlier threads..Why? In other threads, you posted a lot of hate filled garbage and failed to back anything up with facts. Do you know what vindication means? Some people see the future and reality clearer than others...Yes, you're right. Reality is only that which aligns with your own biases. :cup: Quit being led around like a puppy with a nose ring and make your own decisions Racoon. You've ranted about so many topics on this site that I've lost count, and frankly your continued empassioned outcries became boring long ago. I want to be absolutely clear to anyone reading. I am not some blinded optimistic idiot suggesting that no limitations be in place. I am a person who recognizes that framing this issue in terms of national immigration practices is short-sighted and misguided. The issue of immigration is one of many topics used to stir up strong emotions in the populace. The issue of importance is that the global populace itself is increasing in size exponentially, and we are not taking steps to prepare the infrastructure to support that growth. Blocking people from entering a country will do nothing to curb the already problematic growth we are facing as a planet, and only reinforces an outdated "us and them" mentality. Distraction and misguided targets of anger are Americas drugs of choice, and it will take a lot more than methadone to assuage the addiction. Treat the root of the illness, not just the symptoms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 Ditto. Did you intend to imply I hadn't? No; only that you clearly misunderstood it. :shrug: ...[i want to be absolutely clear to anyone reading. I am not some blinded optimistic idiot suggesting that no limitations be in place. I am a person who recognizes that framing this issue in terms of national immigration practices is short-sighted and misguided. The issue of immigration is one of many topics used to stir up strong emotions in the populace. [b]The issue of importance is that the global populace itself which is increasing in size exponentially, and we are not taking steps to prepare the infrastructure to support that growth.[/b] Blocking people from entering a country will do nothing to curb the already problematic growth we are facing as a planet, and only reinforces an outdated "us and them" mentality. Distraction and misguided targets of anger are Americas drugs of choice, and it will take a lot more than methadone to assuage the addiction. Treat the root of the illness, not just the symptoms. How is not taking steps at home not contributing to taking steps globally? One way or the other, we block people from entering the US to live. It is irresponsible not to recognize the rate of this entry is critical to maintaining a sustainable and balanced socio-economically viable US citizenry. That critical rate is shown in the presentation to have gone beyond the sustainability of the current population. What's not to understand about the numbers in the presentation? (you appear to rant on this topic yourself; is that blinding you to the math?:cup: :cup: ) Want to help the third world people? Do something in their own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jungjedi Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 iran contra,panama, grenada ,haiti.next im guessing columbia.we are doing things in thier countries turtle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 Sorry mate. You are not correct. Each of the following countries has higher migrant per capita than the US: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2112.htmlPortugalMayotteNew ZealandAustraliaGuernseyMacauHong KongLiechtensteinIrelandAnguillaIsle of ManBotswanaCanadaJordanAndorraBurundiNorthern Mariana IslandsMonacoSingaporeLuxembourgBritish Virgin IslandsBosnia and HerzegovinaTurks and Caicos IslandsArubaSan MarinoQatarKuwaitCayman IslandsUnited Arab EmiratesLiberiaSome more detail... Country Population Im/1000 Annual Im Growth w/o Im Portugal 10,623,000 3.31 35162 0.334 3.34 0.03 Mayotte 182,000 3.35 610 3.617 36.17 32.82 New Zealand 4,230,000 3.43 14509 0.95 9.5 6.07 Australia 20,990,000 3.78 79342 0.824 8.24 4.46 Guernsey 65,000 3.81 248 0.239 2.39 -1.42 Macau 481,000 4.42 2126 0.841 8.41 3.99 Hong Kong 7,206,000 4.72 34012 0.561 5.61 0.89 Liechtenstein 35,000 4.73 166 0.745 7.45 2.72 Ireland 4,234,925 4.82 20412 1.143 11.43 6.61 Anguilla 13,000 5.12 67 1.375 13.75 8.63 Isle of Man 79,000 5.27 416 0.513 5.13 -0.14 Botswana 1,882,000 5.49 10332 1.503 15.03 9.54 Canada 32,930,000 5.79 190665 0.869 8.69 2.9 Jordan 5,924,000 6.11 36196 2.412 24.12 18.01 Andorra 75,000 6.42 482 0.842 8.42 2 Burundi 8,508,000 7.13 60662 3.593 35.93 28.8 N Mariana Isl 84,000 7.64 642 2.461 24.61 16.97 Monaco 33,000 7.65 252 0.386 3.86 -3.79 Singapore 4,436,000 7.98 35399 1.275 12.75 4.77 Luxembourg 467,000 8.64 4035 1.207 12.07 3.43 Brit Virgin Isl 23,000 8.83 203 1.923 19.23 10.4 Bosnia and Herz 3,935,000 9.65 37973 1.003 10.03 0.38 Turks and Caicos 26,000 9.98 259 2.722 27.22 17.24 Aruba 104,000 10 1040 1.522 15.22 5.22 San Marino 31,000 10.57 328 1.219 12.19 1.62 Qatar 841,000 13.12 11034 2.386 23.86 10.74 Kuwait 2,851,000 16.05 45759 3.561 35.61 19.56 Cayman Islands 47,000 17.34 815 2.496 24.96 7.62 United Arab Em 4,380,000 26.04 114055 3.997 39.97 13.93 Liberia 3,750,000 26.86 100725 4.836 48.36 21.5 United States 301,139,947 3.05 918477 0.894 8.94 5.89 *data from CIA database and Wiki Of the 30 countries with higher immigration rates, 20 actually have higher population growth rates than the US. Only 15 have higher growth rates when immigration is excluded. I found the comparison of Anguilla's 67 immigrants to the United States' 918,477 quite amusing as well. This goes to the purpose of immigration. In some cases immigration is used to grow a country's work force because their own population cannot keep up with the labor needs to exploit natural resources. In other cases it is necessary because the native population is actually falling, and without immigration the economy can collapse. It should also be noted that the total number of immigrants between these 30 countries and the US combine for less than two million people annually. A drop in the bucket of world population. Another interesting exercise is to look up the immigration requirements of these nations; what must a person do the qualify for permanent residence. As an example, Canada requires professional training, and even a college degree for the vast majority of their immigrants, you must have a mastery of English, and you cannot have a medical condition that will cost more than 15,000 over five years (without requiring an exemption because of your estimated contribution to the economy). The CIA site does not detail their methods of determining immigration rates, and it does not say if it included illegal immigrants in the numbers. The US has had a high sustained rate of immigration. How long have these other countries had the immigration rates that are listed? How long will they sustain these rates? Is it mandatory for the US to do something just because some other country is doing it? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 "Give me your tired, your poor,Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to meI lift my lamp beside the golden door!" The times they are indeed a'changing.Here is a good site about the history of US immigration and details about Ellis Island.You will find that the changes are in the world's sense of entitlement to the fruits of the USA, not the USA's attitude toward welcoming immigrants. The Statue of Liberty was the light over a port of legal immigration. All those welcomed by her did so above the board following the rule of law. Ellis Island was also a deportation center - right under the light of the Statue of Liberty - kicking people right back out that golden door. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 iran contra,panama, grenada ,haiti.next im guessing columbia.we are doing things in thier countries turtle Oh I agree completely that we are, and moreover that we should continue, helping make peoples' lives better around the world. In those countries you list and more. The US has given billions of dollars to Africa alone just to fight AIDS. The wealth the US has that allows us to give so much comes from hard work and stability within our own country. The more problems we have here to spend money on, the less we can spend overseas. The numbers in the presentation make clear the results of trying to help too many people by allowing them to immigrate to the US. Which gob of gum balls wasn't clear? The added load of a flood of immigrants is only compounding many of our existing unresolved problems . Too little jail space, not enough schools, people without health care, low wages, shrinking middle class, etcetera. Slowing down immigration substantially from current rates makes as much sense to me as legislating 25MPH speed zones in residential neighborhoods. It's OK to drive there, just do it slow because driving fast is reckless endangerment. Is it mandatory for the US to do something just because some other country is doing it? Absolutely not; nor is it mandatory for us to sit by and do the same nothing other nations facing immigration problems have done. The big picture is people want to come to the US because we do it better, regardless of what 'it' is that they don't like where they're coming from. If we get more valid applications than we have spots, then we can damn well hold a lottery. It was good enough a scheme for the Vietnam draft of American citizens. MTCW :cup: :doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racoon Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 Why? In other threads, you posted a lot of hate filled garbage and failed to back anything up with facts. Do you know what vindication means? Yes, you're right. Reality is only that which aligns with your own biases. :cup: Quit being led around like a puppy with a nose ring and make your own decisions Racoon. You've ranted about so many topics on this site that I've lost count, and frankly your continued empassioned outcries became boring long ago. You need to step off your high horse there partner! :evil: Yeah, and I posted facts that you chose to ignore..Like how Illegals cost Texas taxpayers Billions of dollars anually without return. Shall I re-post them? It wasn't "hate" filled, but I alluded to the actuality of the situation.Maybe you need better interpreting skills, Amigo. I've met your kind before as well. Nothing new there. So get off your supremely righteous schtick and enter reality... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 You need to step off your high horse there partner! :evil: Yeah, and I posted facts that you chose to ignore..Like how Illegals cost Texas taxpayers Billions of dollars anually without return. Shall I re-post them? It wasn't "hate" filled, but I alluded to the actuality of the situation.Maybe you need better interpreting skills, Amigo. I've met your kind before as well. Nothing new there. So get off your supremely righteous schtick and enter reality... Amen. Peace, guys. :cup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 You need to step off your high horse there partner! :evil: Yeah, and I posted facts that you chose to ignore..Like how Illegals cost Texas taxpayers Billions of dollars anually without return. Shall I re-post them? It wasn't "hate" filled, but I alluded to the actuality of the situation.Maybe you need better interpreting skills, Amigo. I've met your kind before as well. Nothing new there. So get off your supremely righteous schtick and enter reality... When our children have grown to be as old as you and I are now, we'll see which one of us was approaching this issue from the proper perspective. Back to life... Back to reality... :cup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.