Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem

I wouldn't suggest putting more people in heavely populated areas like Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles. Only PaleoCons can't get beyond the heavily populated cities to see the real America.

from http://www.detnews.com/2003/editorial/0310/05/a11-287321.htm

Well, there is a dramatic shift afoot in urban fortunes, weakening the clout of the biggest cities while spreading power and influence to scores of smaller centers, nowhere more markedly than here in the United States.

The nation's urban hierarchy is flattening out. What used to take place almost entirely in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago or San Francisco -- whether in high finance, advertising or marketing -- is now happening more and more in unlikely locales such as Omaha, Des Moines, Fargo, N.D., and Columbus, Ohio.

"Technology now gives each town the same global footprint," says Rich Nespola, a native New Yorker and president of TMNG, a communications consulting firm with headquarters in suburban Kansas City, Kan. "People can work where they are comfortable and where it's most profitable."

This is good news for America's cities -- and for America. For many cities in the South and Midwest, spreading the wealth could signal the dawn of an era of renewed urban development, a new cosmopolitanism and growing cultural, technological and economic influence. For the country, it means a more vibrant, heterogeneous landscape, more living choices, a livelier cultural and social panorama -- let's face it, a nation that's more vital and more fun.

End of excerpt...

I bet you complained when the whips and buggy industry collapsed.


119 posted on 08/19/2004 9:56:33 PM PDT by Once-Ler (Proud Republican. and Bushbot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]


To: Once-Ler
The fact of the matter is that most immigrants do not head for our sparsely populated rural areas-- they head right for our congested cities. Check out Los Angeles or even a rust-belt city like Detroit.

There is a very practical couple of reasons why we simply cannot throw open our borders and simply let anyone from Mexico who wants to move here to do so:

  1. If we did it for Mexico, we would, in all fairness, have to do it for China, India, Bangladesh or anywhere else.

  2. The United States simply cannot support 40% of the world's population (which I think is a reasonable estimate of those people worldwide who would like to move here if they could) on 4% of the world's land.

I do not dispute your statement that the United States could support a theoretical population of one billion. If everyone were as industrious as, say, the Mormon pioneers who settled what were then barren deserets on the west side of the Rocky Mountains, the figure could even be theoretically higher.

The point, however, is we simply will not get there with no immigration controls in place.

Even the so-called Golden Era of immigration from circa 1840-1920 had restrictions. You've no doubt heard of Ellis Island which turned back those with communicable diseases, those with no visible means to support themselves or those with criminal histories or even criminal profiles deemed likely to lead to a life of dependence or criminality. Other ports of entry operated in similar fashion.

Admittedly, the bars to entry (particularly in the peak period of this era) were rather low, but aspiring immigrants were required to clear them nevertheless. I have examples in my own heritage which both contrast to and confirm your Polish community example.

My wife's family came from Italy, settled in Italian neighborhoods and spoke little English. But they insisted that their children be educated in English and that the language of adopted country be spoken as much as possible in the home. The town I live in has an AMS Club (Americanization Mutual Society) whose original purpose was to do exactly as the name implies for Italian immigrants. My father-in-law is still active in the Sons of Italy, though he understands little of the language and speaks even less and he is one generation removed from Italy. Can you say the same of even an appreciable minority of illegal immigrants from Mexico who have been here three generations or more? And were not even asking that they forget Spanish as my wife's familty was told to forget Italian.

My own family background could also give you a lesson or two in what happens when you have an idiotic immigration policy. By blood, I am more native American than white. While I do not count myself as a victim and know many native Americans (full-blooded) who do not either, much of the good of our culture was destroyed by immigrants who neither cared no took the time to appreciate our culture-- some aspects of which we're glad is gone (abandoning the elderly, slavery, paganism, etc.) and some of which should have been saved (community cooperation, variety of natural seeds, appreciation for a slower pace of life and the arts which flow therefrom). The percentage of military veterans is higher among the Native American population than any other.

Patriotism is a necessary ingredient to preserve a civilization and patriotism requires time and nuturing to take root. Immigration does not need to be halted, but it needs to be slowed to a pace which allows this necessary nuturing to take place.

144 posted on 08/20/2004 3:56:06 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (crime would drop like a sprung trapdoor if we brought back good old-fashioned hangings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson