Immigration Could Add 100M to U.S. by 2060

CNSNews ^ | August 31, 2007 | Randy Hall

[bill1952]

Immigration Could Add 100M to U.S. by 2060 Written by Randy Hall, CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor

If both legal and illegal immigration continues at its current pace, the U.S. population will grow by 1.25 million per year and reach a net total of 468 million by 2060, according to a report issued Thursday by a Washington think tank.

That increase of 167 million people over the next 53 years "is equal to the combined populations of Great Britain, France and Spain," said Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), during a news conference at the National Press Club.

Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Camarota wrote in his report, "100 Million More: Projecting the Impact of Immigration on the U.S. Population, 2007 to 2060," that "about 1.6 million new legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year.
About 350,000 immigrants go home, so net immigration is about 1.25 million."

Immigrants who will arrive in the future and their descendants "will account for 105 million, or 63 percent of the increase," a total that by itself "is equal to 13 New York Cities," he said.

"If the United States actually started enforcing its immigration laws and reduced illegal immigration, that would have a very significant impact on future population increases," Camarota said.
However, net immigration "has been increasing to the United States for about five decades."

"While illegal immigration is certainly a very large number, the overwhelming majority of the population increase will come from legal immigration, which is very high," he said.
"Last year, for example, the United States allowed 1.2 million people to settle in the country permanently on a legal basis."

"The central question these projections raise and the American people must answer is what costs and benefits come from having a much larger population and a more densely settled country," he added.

Roy Beck, executive director of Numbers USA, said during a panel discussion on the report that he found the study "thoroughly depressing" and "a devastating prognosis for the country" because of what its data predict about the future quality of life in America.

"Every time an American complains about traffic congestion, infrastructure overload, private schools, loss of natural habitat, the possibility to get out of town and have some spiritual recreation in nature, that is a result of federal policy" on immigration, he said.

- here comes the liberal counterpoint -

However, Ben Wattenberg, senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI), responded that despite the findings in the report, he considers the U.S. to be "under-populated" as evidenced by all the "flyover country" he sees when traveling "from sea to shining sea."

The AEI scholar dismissed the phrase "'population explosion,' which we have been told is something to dread.
That is putting into two words something that can be put in one, which is 'growth.' The question is whether or not that growth is harmful."

"In 1790, there were 4 million Americans in our first census.
Today, there are 301 million in the country, a 75-fold increase," he said.
"Now, what happened to that nation, which suffered from the most terrible population explosion?
It became the most prosperous and influential nation in human history - so what's the problem?"

-the problem, Benny, is that a couple of million people 200 hundred years ago, has nothing to do with a 100 million increase in 50 years today-

Wattenberg also said America "is a wonderful place to live, because wonderful people live here," but there is "always some kind of nativist, anti-immigrant feeling."
All immigrant groups "start out being hated," but one or two generations later, "they end up being assimilated into U.S. society."

- Nothing to do with today, benny - -

Today's "hate du jour" is toward Mexicans, even though the largest percentage of Medal of Honor winners are Mexican immigrants, he added.

"I hope you're not suggesting that anybody who's critical of current immigration levels is wearing a white sheet," Camarota replied.

Regarding history, "World War I came along in 1914, as well as restrictive legislation in the 1920s, and immigration was low for about 50 or 60 years," he continued.
"If that's to be our guide, then we need to have low immigration for many years so we can assimilate the immigrants already here."

"Immigration is not the weather.
It is not something outside our control,"

Camarota added. "What the American people have to decide is whether they want to live in the society these projections lead us to."

[ran20]

If our elites invited in the best available candidates only.. there would be a decent argumetn in favor of immigration. For example if we were getting well educated 20-30 year old Russians, Chinese and Brits.. all eager to live in a free and capitalist society to make their own way in life.. Our nation would be slowly being improved by immigration.. Becoming younger, more intelligent and more freedom oriented.

Our elites don’t want those people.. they want the poorest, least able to assimilate and prosper immigrants. Who will not compete against elite children for the good jobs, and who will demand an expansion of the welfare state.

[gubamyster]

ping

[Fishrrman]

It's way past time we reform and reduce *legal* immigration to sensible, manageable numbers.

I believe a moratorium on even LEGAL immigration is in order, say for a period of about 40-50 years.

There are enough people here now. I realize others' opinions on the subject may differ.

And for survival's sake, we must cast off the millstone of multiculturalism, and return to admitting ONLY the kind of folks we admitted prior to 1950....

- John

[Ohioan]

These projections should alarm; but then the idiotic Kennedy backed Immigration Act of 1965 should have alarmed. The lack of interest in preserving the essential characteristics of the Nation the Founding Fathers created--which includes not only certain ethnic traits, but large open spaces, with less hustle and bustle than the old world, and more opportunity to reflect on the nature of Government and a political society--has long saddened me. Yes, those who want to internationalize America use the tactics of the smear and intimidation to silence dissent; but it should never have worked as well as it has.

Well, some of us continue to fight on. The September Essay for The Return Of The Gods Web Site is very much in point on one aspect of the problem:

September, 2007 Feature>>
A Bicentennial Ignored [200th Anniversay Of Intended End To Bringing In Others To Do Work Americans Do Not Want To Do]

William Flax

[dragnet2]

I believe a moratorium on even LEGAL immigration is in order, say for a period of about 40-50 years.

This is obvious to anyone that's awake.

I was envisioning sitting in bumper to bumper traffic with a large sign on my car saying, "We need more traffic, cars and people". My next thought was people started jumping out of their cars and attacking me.

[rellimpank]

—ditto that—

[TypeZoNegative]

And do any of those people in those large cities speak English?

[RC2]

Without control of immigration it is estimated that the population in California will grow by 30 million more people by 2050. Standing room only. But hey..........even the illegals don’t realize that they will used by the politicians and they will have nothing.

[dragnet2]

And do any of those people in those large cities speak English?

Look, I don't care if the bark like dogs, or make song bird noises. We have too many people...

[Moderate right-winger]

I don’t agree with that. That’s too counterproductive and seems quite racist. Not even Duncan Hunter would stand for such an unrealistic proposal.
I’m for border security, background checks and the expulsion of illegals, and even for the limiting of legal immigration. But to actually stop the flow? You’re insane!!

[Popocatapetl]

Immigrants from where?

Right now, the birthrate of Mexico has dropped to between 2.1 and 2.3 children per family. So unless Mexico opens the door wide to immigrants from central and South America, everybody else will have to cross either the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.

On top of that, though few people realize it, most of the people in the US are clustered around New York and Los Angeles. The secondary clusters are on the East and West coasts. But look at the rest of the US! There are about 13 ENTIRE STATES that don’t have hardly any people at all!

http://www.mapsofworld.com/usa/thematic-maps/usa-population-map.html

[Ohioan]

And for survival's sake, we must cast off the millstone of multiculturalism, and return to admitting ONLY the kind of folks we admitted prior to 1950....

Yes. You have touched upon the point that I intended in my reference in Reply #24, to the Kennedy Immigration Act of 1965. But even with reference to traditional European immigration, we need to screen out more of those wedded to Socialistic dogma than we succeeded in doing previously. America, in all her institutions, depends upon a population that assumes a level of personal, individual responsibility, which very few today exhibit. We have got to face this problem or we will go the way of Classic Rome--only in a far shorter time frame.

[Moderate right-winger]

The problem with most of you is that you are not studying the economic ramifications of totalling limiting immigration. You prefer to live in a fantasy world.

[nathanbedford]

I first posted this a couple of years ago. Alas it is only more drearily true today:

THE POPULATION OF AMERICA HAS DOUBLED IN MY LIFETIME

If you have lost control of your local school system and you believe it is because liberalism is triumphing over conservatism, you are right but you have identified the symptom and not the cause: The population of America has doubled in my lifetime.

If you have lost control over your own real property, if your rights to manage, improve, and develop your property have passed over to bureaucrats, if you can no longer choose whom to rent to or whom to sell to, if you have lost confidence that your deed in fee simple absolute will protect you against a venal government or one wholly given over to interest groups, and for all of this you blame liberalism, you have identified the symptom but not the cause: The population of America has doubled in my lifetime.

If you are a rancher who has lost his rights to graze his cattle upon lands licensed to his family for generations, if you're a fox hunter who has been deprived of his sport, if you must wait three hours for a tee time, if you have given up taking the family to the Jersey shore because the travel time now exceeds three hours, if, after hours of travail, you finally arrive at the Jersey shore with your family and you find your neighbors to close, too numerous, polyglot, and uncongenial, know this;The population of America has doubled in my lifetime.

If you look at Broward and Palm Beach counties in Florida as-miracle of the jet age-suburbs of New York City, and you watch helplessly as the politics of these counties veer ever farther left potentially dragging all Florida and, with Florida, the soul of the Republican Party in America, be advised: The population of America has doubled in my lifetime.

If, as a parent or grandparent, you find yourself mightily boring your children or grandchildren with descriptions of how Christmas used to be, descriptions of a time gone by when shopkeepers were permitted to say, "Merry Christmas," when Christmas carols were really that, carols, when the public square was a place for the exuberant celebration of the birth of Christ, rather than a forum for the celebration of the pagan, then you instinctively know: The population of America has doubled in my lifetime.

If you are old enough to remember America before the vietnamization of America, then you must love your country and you see her "a shining city on the hill" as the last best hope for men.

You know what to do.

[Moderate right-winger]

The dialogue about limiting immigration is beginning to border on racism, in my observation

[dragnet2]

I want you put a big sign on the back of your car, that says, I want more "traffic, people and cars" and hit the road at 6:00 a.m.

Hey, I know, lets build 50,000 more schools, and make our freeways 32 lanes wide...Each direction

[Cacique]

btt

[Moderate right-winger]

Wealth is expanding and economically empowers more people. Who could have imagined this?

[Ohioan]

I have most certainly considered the economic aspects of immigration, and have debunked the notions that your comment reflects.

You have apparently bought a line that leads to a very vicious circle. For example, consider this:

A Vicious Circle.

You apparently also put no value on the type of societies, which those who created America sacrificed a great deal, originally to create.

William Flax

[dragnet2]

Profits regardless of consequences.