Posted on 03/09/2007 8:38:29 AM PST by westcoastwillieg
Cities at the tipping point - overpopulation destroying major U.S. cities.
Ref: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html
Ref: http://www.carryingcapacity.org/
A common fallacy is to equate existing and seemingly open or "unused" spaces with the kind of resources and ecologically productive land needed to support human life under modern conditions. In fact, the criterion for determining whether a region is overpopulated is not land area, but carrying capacity.
Carrying capacity refers to the number of individuals who can be supported in a given area within natural resource limits, and without degrading the natural social, cultural and economic environment for present and future generations. The carrying capacity for any given area is not fixed. It can be altered by improved technology, but mostly it is changed for the worse by pressures which accompany a population increase. As the environment is degraded, carrying capacity actually shrinks, leaving the environment no longer able to support even the number of people who could formerly have lived in the area on a sustainable basis. No population can live beyond the environment's carrying capacity for very long.
The average American's "ecological footprint" (the demands an individual endowed with average amounts of resources, i.e., land, water, food, fiber, waste assimilation and disposal, etc. puts on the environment) is about 12 acres, an area far greater than that taken up by one's residence and place of school or work.
The CIA World Factbook lists the total land area of the United States (includes the 50 states and District of Columbia) as 9,161,923 sq km---converted to acres, the total land area of the United States is 2,263,911,173 acres. Dividing total area by the 12 acre ecological footprint per person yields a sustainable population of 188,659,264. Even if we lower the ecological footprint to 10 acres per person the calculation will yield a population of 226,391,117 far lower than our current population of 300 million. By this measure, the United States is overpopulated by well over 70 million people.
While some may quibble with the method used, the math is irrefutable. This back of the envelope calculation is one that every American should be aware of. Immigration is largely responsible for our population growth. Immigrants don't travel by covered wagon anymore, the majority congregate in our cities. The demands on our cities are overwhelming. Anyone who lives in a large city can see the results of overpopulation on their roads, schools, hospitals, courts and jails. While many reasons are given for electrical outages and the high price of oil, the root cause (usually not stated) is simply overpopulation. The amount of energy we require is largely a function of population. Just as two people require more water than one person so it is with energy in a modern society.
By the year 2050, census estimates predict that our population will be almost 500,000,000 and by 2075 may reach ONE BILLION. Behind China and India, the U.S. is the third most populous nation in the world and we’re fast catching up. According to the U.S. Census Bureau our population was 297,821,175 on January 1, 2006 an increase of 2.71 million in only one year. Unless we elect politicians who have the courage to reduce population growth, the future is grim.
We don't keep records as to whether a woman who gives birth is a citizen or not. If you look at the link I provided to you, you will see that the migration rate is figured into the population clock, which is why it is included under the heading COMPONENT SETTINGS FOR MARCH 2007. If you notice as well, the international migrant (net) every 27 seconds is net, which indicates that it takes into account emmigration and immigration. The other components to the clock are births and deaths. Taken together with net migration, you wind up with a net gain of one person every 12 seconds.
Here is the technical description on how the clock works.
So I'm reading it that US citizens are repopulating themselves at the replacement rate (but just squeaking by), but when you factor in immigration, we are an increasingly smaller percentage of the overall population.
And you would be wrong. Anyone born in the US is a citizen. We also take in one million LEGAL immigrants a year, most of whom become citizens. The important fact is that most of the US population increase can be attributed to immigration, legal and illegal.
You are right about the components of population growth. and as countless demographers have shown, we are still numerically healthy as far as our fertility/replacement rate goes, compared to other parts of the world, particulary Europe and Russia. Steyn has shown definitively how Muslim birthrates all over the West ( and not just the West) can threaten the very foundations of our political and social systems. In the current climate, however, we are faced with a deep-seated perversity, which is echoed in different ways in other contexts: we can't talk about closing our borders without having "racism" thrown in our faces, because the open borders crowd don't think Islamic terrorism represents a threat at the borders, and we can't talk about the presence of tens of millions of illegals here as if it's ALSO not just another component of a bigger, "non-denominational" problem, called overpopulation. This is the tricky way that NOT JUST THE SOCIALISTS have of demagoguing the issue, and deflecting the REAL and LEGITIMATE CONCERNS away from the issues themselves and into irrelevant areas that are the only concerns (and ONLY the concerns) of special-interest groups, like the open borders crowd AND the Islamics intent on gathering political power as they contemplate how they will eventually take over.
My stats come from the Bureau of the Census. What specifically doesn't jibe? I am not interpreting the data, just giving you the basis for it, i.e., the methodology the Census Bureau uses to record population increases. What interpretation of data are you disputing?
I am not a statistician but I have taken statistic courses in graduate school. However, you don't need to be a statistician to comprehend these data.
The fact of the matter is, despite the stats you quote, we don't have a firm grasp on the exact number of people in this country legally and illegally or what the repopulation rate (of rooted Americans) is. All I was saying is that we're slightly better than Europe, but we're still just squeaking by. We're making the same point. You're arguing over shades of gray.
If anything the numbers are understated since illegals don't comply with the census takers. I gather from your comments that you would like to see even larger population increases since we are only "squeaking by." Our current population growth amounts to .91 percent per year. That ranks us among the highest in the industrialized world. We have added 20 million people since 2000, which is the equivalent of adding the current total of our seven largest cities.
We are not making the same point. As a matter of public policy, we need to not only stop the flow of illegal aliens, we need to change our existing legal immigration policies. The 1965 immigration laws increased our annual intake of legal immigrants from 178,000 a year to more than a million. Those numbers will be increased if the Senate comprehensive immigration reform bill is passed. And you must add 500,000 to 1 million illegal aliens entering our country each year. Hence, you have 1.5 to 2 million people adding to the population in addition to the birth rates. The data are clear that by 2030 we will have a population of over 360 million if the status quo remains.
I don't understand your comment about the "repopulation rate (of rooted Americans)." What is your point?
what is the feasibility of ocean desalination plants powered by solar, wind, or nukes? just wondering....
I don't know why you are asking me, but desalinization is an existing technology. Israel and Saudi Arabia use it extensively. I am sure if potable water became a problem, we would figure out a way to get it on this globe that is covered 75% by water.
My solution: Sterilize all the leftist moonbats. Problem solved.
Yep, more than 40 million less taxpayers because of legalized abortion.
More likely votes Green.
The only way you will achieve that is by securing our borders and enforcing our existing immigration laws. By securing our borders, I am including the administrative wherewithal to track down and remove visa overstays, the source of about one-third of our illegal aliens. As long as we have 500,000 to 1 million "self-selected" immigrants and almost half of all legals of Hispanic origin, we are sowing the seeds for balkanization. They don't have to assimilate because of the existing support structure within the US and that is growing.
In only a few decades what we once thought of as France and the French will barely exist. It will be a colony of French Morocco.
It will take longer than a few decades and there is a growing backlash, as the upcoming French elections indicate. Even with this immigration, the French population growth rate is .35%, about one-third ours and their net migration rate is 0.66 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2006 est.) compared to our 3.18, i.e., we have almost five times the number.
That is my concern here in America. You are saying we are rapidly following France into this decline (I think we both degree that would be a decline). The studies I have read indicate that we are not following France as quickly as you indicate.
I have not said that. I am not against population growth. I just want it regulated and I want our immigration policies to attract the kinds of people we need to help our economy. Chain migration and the visa lottery program are not what we want or need. We can't continue to take in the poor and undeducated from Latin America.
That said, I think we agree: shut down all immigration to a bare trickle, assimilate everyone here, and let's increase the numbers of Americans who have some rooting here and are willing to preserve American culture and freedom by passing it on to future generations.
Our immigration policies need to be changed and not just the flow shut down to a trickle. The problem is that such changes will not be possible politically with the Dems demagoging the issue and seeing the new immigrants as future voters who will make them the permanent majority party. They have been joined by the Chamber of Commerce, which wants to see the flow of cheap, exploitable labor continue and the labor unions that want to increase their dwindling membership. And on top of all that, the WH supports a guest worker program and legalizing the status of the 12 to 20 million illegals already here.
I am pessimistic about the long term outlook. The American people are ignorant when it comes to the issue. Anyone who raises it is called a nativist and racist. Eventually, the American people will wake up when it comes deon to who do you believe, the politicians or your lying eyes. By that time, the open border types will have the political power to win the day. If the Senate bill becomes law, the battle and the war have been lost.
The liberals have all the coverage of the MSM - why post their lame crap here?
Average US corn yields run 145 bushels per acre, with a bushel meaning 70 pounds. 12 acres is enough to yield over 60 *tons* of eared corn from a single crop. That is about 330 pounds per day. I know people are supposed to be eating too much these days, but really is it utterly ridiculous.
The US would comfortably support a billion people. There is tons of available land, and we already feed a quarter of the world with our agricultural exports.
We need global warming or an asteroid to thin out the population. We fix it AND save money by not spending to try and stop these things.
Scroll down to the comment section on that AFL/CIO site.
Joe Lynch appears to be an anti-Bush, anti-immigration envirowacko. That's a narrow demographic indeed! Are you Joe Lynch?!?! LOL!
Comment by joe lynch 2006-11-02 18:48:26
If Democrats take Congress, Bush will get his amnesty for illegal aliens
============================================ Before you vote for a Democrat for the House or Senate, recall that a Republican House of Representatives prevented Hagel-Martinez amnesty legislation from being signed into law. Amnesty for over 66 million illegal aliens would have been a disaster for an already overpopulated country. If you think our roads, schools, hospitals, courts and jails are jammed today, just wait a few years. The article that follows should be required reading for every voter. =============================================
Cities at the tipping point - overpopulation destroying major U.S. cities
"Article" / comment continues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.