Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LoSboccacc]

the problem with that is that migrants cluster in certain areas. sometimes it becomes a cultural neighborhood, sometimes a segregated slum. 2 million are peanuts averaged on the usa population, but they don't spread out like that.

[miauw62]

While those figures aren't valid in the sense of trying to maintain a steady population, they are a valid argument against trying to maintain age balance. I'll cite this example:

A 1999 Australian parliamentary research paper, entitled "Population Futures for Australia: the Policy Alternatives", looked at the claim that immigration could offset an ageing population. It found that in order to maintain the proportion of the population aged 65 and over at present levels, "enormous numbers of immigrants would be required, starting in 1998 at 200 000 per annum, rising to 4 million per annum by 2048 and to 30 million per annum by 2098. By the end of next century with these levels of immigration, our population would have reached almost one billion."The paper went on to say "It is demographic nonsense to believe that immigration can help to keep our population young."

Basically, if Australia tried to maintain working/retired age balance by immigration, then within the century we'll have to bring in more people per year than the total who live here now ... so while there are supportable benefits for immigration to maintain population levels if that's needed, the "prevent aging population" benefit of younger immigrants is doomed from the start, because those people age too. The real problem is that the proportion of people working vs those supported (children and old people etc) is worked out by taking the average age people live to, divided by the average number of years a person works. Adding more people doesn't change those averages.

I thought shortsighted solutions that will come crashing down on us in some years or decades was what Trump is best at?

[EnigmaticHat]

And the reason why our (and Europes and Japans, and most of the West) population is shrinking is simply age demographics. There was a population boom after WWII, but the birth rate didn't stay there, it went back to normal rates, plus the fact that the baby boomer generation is, well, dying off slowly, to put it bluntly. Simply put, we are just seeing the population drop because there wasn't an accompanying and stable increase in the birth rate to keep the populations at the levels that they are now.

Anyone who tells you white people are going to be a minority to Hispanics is talking out of their ass.  You don't even need statistics for that one.

I'm gonna ask you to provide a source for that.

Have some sources from the front page of google.

For white people to become less than half, there would have to be ~45 million less white people or more non-whites.  That's not totally unreasonable.  However, this is a bullshit statistic, because for white people to be outnumbered by Hispanics, if we assume every single illegal immigrant is Hispanic and will gain citizenship, there would have to be 130 million less whites or more Hispanics.  That's a difference of third of our entire population, just for them to outnumber whites by 1 person.

This is using the most generous statistics.  Contrary to what certain people in the US would like to believe, Mexico/Central America/South America are not homogenous, they contain people that identify as white or from white ethnicities.  If you count those people as white but not Hispanic the statistics get way more lopsided.

On top of that, the average Hispanic immigrant doesn't identify as Hispanic and they don't identify as Latino either.  They're Cuban, Honduran, Mexican.  In some cases they're at least as racist against each other as we are against them.  That's why people look at Marco Rubio and they're like "lol he's a Hispanic immigrant who wants to stop Hispanic immigration."  No, he's a Cuban immigrant who wants to stop immigration along the mexican border, and his policies are popular among Cubans.

So even if 100 million illegal immigrants come over right now and they all somehow gain a voter registration card right now, they won't all vote the same way, they won't vote the same way as African Americans, and white people will still outnumber them.

Tl:dr: The only way white people will not be the dominant voter bloc is if everyone else, including White Hispanics, suddenly decide to form a homogenous voter bloc *and* magically gain the same voter turnout as white people *and* the US population somehow goes up by 50% without any of that increase being white people. 

[SirQuiamus]

While those figures aren't valid in the sense of trying to maintain a steady population, they are a valid argument against trying to maintain age balance. I'll cite this example:

A 1999 Australian parliamentary research paper, entitled "Population Futures for Australia: the Policy Alternatives", looked at the claim that immigration could offset an ageing population. It found that in order to maintain the proportion of the population aged 65 and over at present levels, "enormous numbers of immigrants would be required, starting in 1998 at 200 000 per annum, rising to 4 million per annum by 2048 and to 30 million per annum by 2098. By the end of next century with these levels of immigration, our population would have reached almost one billion."The paper went on to say "It is demographic nonsense to believe that immigration can help to keep our population young."

Basically, if Australia tried to maintain working/retired age balance by immigration, then within the century we'll have to bring in more people per year than the total who live here now ... so while there are supportable benefits for immigration to maintain population levels if that's needed, the "prevent aging population" benefit of younger immigrants is doomed from the start, because those people age too. The real problem is that the proportion of people working vs those supported (children and old people etc) is worked out by taking the average age people live to, divided by the average number of years a person works. Adding more people doesn't change those averages.

I thought shortsighted solutions that will come crashing down on us in some years or decades was what Trump is best at?

I'm pretty sure any "far-sighted" solutions would be very much appreciated at this point, whether or not they'd be practically more viable in the long run.

[Sergarr]

Trump Strategist Steve Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut’

“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for awhile,” Mr. Bannon said during a telephone call.

“I want you to quote this,” Mr. Bannon added. “The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”

Mr. Bannon, who rarely grants interviews to journalists outside of Breitbart News, the provocative right-wing website he ran until last August, was echoing comments by Mr. Trump this weekend, when the president said he was in “a running war” with the media and called journalists “among the most dishonest people on earth.”

On the telephone, Mr. Bannon spoke in blunt but calm tones, peppered with a dose of profanities, and humorously referred to himself at one point as “Darth Vader.” He said, with ironic relish, that Mr. Trump was elected by a surge of support from “the working class hobbits and deplorables.”

Asked if he was concerned that Mr. Spicer had lost credibility with the news media, Mr. Bannon chortled. “Are you kidding me?” he said. “We think that’s a badge of honor. ‘Questioning his integrity’ — are you kidding me? The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard work.”

“You’re the opposition party,” Mr. Bannon said. “Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”

Mr. Bannon mostly referred to the “elite” or “mainstream” media, but he cited The New York Times and The Washington Post by name.

“The paper of record for our beloved republic, The New York Times, should be absolutely ashamed and humiliated,” Mr. Bannon said. “They got it 100 percent wrong.”

“You’re the opposition party,” Mr. Bannon said. “Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”

...FTFE?

[TheBiggerFish]

What the fucking hell, pardon my language.

[smjjames]

It's Steve freaking Bannon, nobody should be surprised

[Frumple]

FTFE indeed. On the flip side, apparently the projectionism is still strong, and definitely finding roots in trump's supporting staff.

The real question may be whether that's a lack of self-awareness, or the presence of it and confusing amount of honesty. Either way the intent goes, at least you can say bannon's being honest about his own character... for once. Possibly unintentionally.

I don't see what the practical point of kicking out illegal immigrants is.  Almost half of them immigrated legally anyway,

Uh, if they immigrated legally, then why are they called illegal immigrants? Your statement contradicts itself.

overstay, duh

This, with a side of rhetorical bullshit. Strong majority of those folks have committed either no illegal act, or none any greater than your average citizen does going to work in the morning. If they had, they'd be facing criminal charges with all the procedural concerns that entails, and we probably wouldn't have a functioning judiciary system anymore.

The term's used to slap a pejorative label across a demographic many of the folks driving anti-immigration sentiment are bigoted as hell towards, in order to drive public sentiment towards their corner. They're called illegal immigrants in an attempt to get people that aren't paying as much attention to more or less reflexively react negatively to issues involving the people in question. You'd be looking at a similar situation if you started calling everyone that sped criminal drivers.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

This is not even the first time Steve Bannon has called himself Darth Vader.

[SirQuiamus]

“You’re the opposition party,” Mr. Bannon said. “Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”

...FTFE?

He's just doing his job as a stock soap opera villain.

[smjjames]

Trump wants Congress to impose a 20% tax on Mexican imports to pay for the wall. He's trying pretty hard to start a trade war isn't he? Mexico has said that they'll retaliate if Trump does some kind of tax or tariff.

[TheBiggerFish]

I just can't even.

[MrRoboto75]

If mexico wanted to pay for a wall, they would have built it themselves

[smjjames]

May also be a violation of NAFTA. I read somewhere that Bush 43 and Obama had actualy done something in small scale for steel and bananas respectively, but I don't think any President has done anything this broad, to my knowledge, since it's talking about ALL Mexican imports, food, cars (maybe?), not sure what else.

[MrRoboto75]

May also be a violation of NAFTA.

Considering Trump wants to kill that agreement anyway...