Study: Immigration Biggest Contributor to Sprawl (87% of Growth Attributed to Immigrants)

Fox News ^

[Happy2BMe]

WASHINGTON

[Happy2BMe]

Are you "Pro" or "Anti" Sprawl?

[chris1]

I have been saying this for some time now. The immigration problem is what is causing the prices to skyrocket as there is more demand than supply due to increased amounts of immigrants looking for housing.

[greencow]

If you read Gerald Posner's new book, "Why America Slept", he says that for the past several years, the only way anyone would be denied a visa is if they had been convicted of an act of terrorism. It is time, in my opinion - long past time, in fact, to close the doors. We need to be much pickier about who we let in.

[raybbr]

Laura Olsen, spokeswoman for the Coalition for Smarter Growth, said immigrants can't be used as scapegoats everywhere.

Who then, is to blame for the rampant growth in population. These smart-growth people are nothing more than people herders. They want everyone in as little space as possible to have the most control.

Besides, I sure as heck don't want to live "in the barrio". What is wrong with everyone wanting some land and place to raise children with some space to play. I would much rather my son have the 2.8 acres of land we have than to force him to play basketball on asphalt. These cretins make me ill.

[RippleFire]

bump

[sauropod]

Pro. People should have the right to live pretty much wherever they want.

[Happy2BMe]

"If you read Gerald Posner's new book, "Why America Slept", he says that for the past several years, the only way anyone would be denied a visa is if they had been convicted of an act of terrorism."

What's wrong with a little "Urban Sprawl?"

Six months after Sept. 11, hijackers' visa approval letters received

March 13, 2002 Posted: 5:07 AM EST (1007 GMT)

Mohamed Atta

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- Six months to the day after Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi flew planes into the World Trade Center, the Immigration and Naturalization Service notified a Venice, Florida, flight school that the two men had been approved for student visas.

-AND-

October 9, 2002, 10:30 a.m.
Visas that Should Have Been Denied
A look at 9/11 terrorists’ visa applications.

he cover story in National Review's October 28th issue (out Friday) details how at least 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers should have been denied visas — an assessment based on expert analyses of 15 of the terrorists' visa-application forms, obtained exclusively by NR.

In the year after 9/11, the hand-wringing mostly centered on the FBI and CIA's failure to "connect the dots." But that would not have been a fatal blow if the "dots" had not been here in the first place. If the U.S. State Department had followed the law, at least 15 of the 19 "dots" should have been denied visas — and they likely wouldn't have been in the United States on September 11, 2001.

According to expert analyses of the visa-application forms of 15 of the 9/11 terrorists (the other four applications could not be obtained), all the applicants among the 15 reviewed should have been denied visas under then-existing law. Six separate experts who analyzed the simple, two-page forms came to the same conclusion: All of the visa applications they reviewed should have been denied on their face.

9/11 Terrorist Visa Applications

Hani Hanjour, 1997 (~167k file)
Hani Hanjour, 2000 (a) (~205k file)
Hani Hanjour, 2000 (b) (~169k file)
Waleed al-Sherhi, 2000 (~169k file)
Wail al-Sherhi, 2000 (~206k file)
Abdulaziz Alomari, 2001 (~259k file)

Even to the untrained eye, it is easy to see why many of the visas should have been denied. Consider, for example, the U.S. destinations most of them listed. Only one of the 15 provided an actual address — and that was only because his first application was refused — and the rest listed only general locations — including "California," "New York," "Hotel D.C.," and "Hotel." One terrorist amazingly listed his U.S. destination as simply "No." Even more amazingly, he got a visa.

[Happy2BMe]

9/11 Terrorist Visa Applications

Hani Hanjour, 1997 (~167k file)
Hani Hanjour, 2000 (a) (~205k file)
Hani Hanjour, 2000 (b) (~169k file)
Waleed al-Sherhi, 2000 (~169k file)
Wail al-Sherhi, 2000 (~206k file)
Abdulaziz Alomari, 2001 (~259k file)

[afz400]

"Pro. People should have the right to live pretty much wherever they want."
Problem is that most people who think like you do don't want to pay the true cost of the roads to their houses, the water and sewer connections, the increased police costs, etc.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

What's happening is exactly what many in Washington want. A Senator a few years back commenting on the open spaces in the West said "let's fill it up".

Those in power are totally out of touch with the people regarding this issue. We either give the mass-immigrationists the same treatment Spencer Abraham got in 2000 or it will never stop.

[sergeantdave]

Big government Marxists can’t do busy-body central planning without a Master Plan. Here's their "bible." It’s called the American Planning Association’s “Growing Smart Legislative Handbook.”

With great reverence, we consulted the seers at the American Policy Center, a think tank headquartered in Warrenton, Va., and asked what happens if the “bible” becomes law.

“Sustainable development,” as envisioned by its proponents, “calls for changing the concept of private property, protected by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution,” said the center.

The center added: “Under such a system, the federal government, backed by an army of private, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) like the Sierra Club will influence, if not dictate, property and other policies to the states and to local communities.”

The “bible” provides for “administrative warrants” - without probable cause - upon the complaint of a neighbor, or any third party, for bureaucrats to enter private property to investigate for noncompliance, says Wendell Cox of the Wendell Cox Consultancy in St. Louis. Violators are subject to criminal, not civil, penalties.

“The APA forfeiture proposal not only would help bureaucrats take people’s homes away, but also would undermine the wealth-creating engine that has made America the most prosperous nation in the world,” said Cox. “The Growing Smart Guidebook is a guide for increased poverty, not prosperity.”

Bureaucrats, land thieves and politicians think smart growth with its “administrative warrants” is a Christmas present to themselves. The soviets are clanging the bell: “Peasant property! Feast! Feast! Come and get it.” Of course we won’t tell these people that “general warrants” started the 1776 revolution.

Even the borscht slurping aparatchniks who wrote the “bible” admitted “its proposals may present some problems, one of which is the potential to violate the Constitution.”

Indeed, General Custer, said the Indians to the paleface, measuring his ears for awls.

[FITZ]

Everyone should go take a good long look at Mexico City.

[sauropod]

I'd much rather pay that than be told where I have to live and how big my car is and how big my toilet tank is and whether or not i can plant a garden and what kind of shrubs i can have on my property and how much of my property is "critical habitat" and whether or not my property is in a "viewshed."

I guess that "most people that think like I do" are pretty stoopid, huh?

Here's another coupla questions for you Einstein: Will the pro-"Smart Growth" people pay the property owners for the uses they exproprate due to new regulations?

If not, why not, and how can you justify taking someone else's property without paying for it (which is what Smart growth does)?

[Happy2BMe]

"Everyone should go take a good long look at Mexico City."

Where Immigrants Live
An Examination of State Residency of the
Foreign Born by Country of Origin in 1990 and 2000

September 2003

By Steven A. Camarota and Nora McArdle

Download the .pdf version

---

During the 1990s, the nation’s immigrant population grew by 11.3 million — faster than at any other time in our history. Using newly released data from the 2000 Census, this report examines the changing distribution of the nation’s immigrant population by country of origin at the state level. The findings show that in one sense, today’s immigration is more diverse than ever because people now arrive from every corner of the world. In another sense, however, diversity among the foreign born has actually declined significantly. One country — Mexico — and one region — Spanish-speaking Latin America — came to dominate U.S. immigration during the decade. The report also found that immigrants from some countries became more spread out in the 1990s, while the dispersion of others changed little.

Among the report’s findings:

• The dramatic growth in the nation’s immigrant population has been accompanied by a significant decline in diversity. In 1990, immigrants from the top sending country — Mexico — accounted for 22 percent of the total foreign born. By 2000, Mexican immigrants accounted for 30 percent of the total.

• In fact, Mexico alone accounted for 43 percent of the growth in the foreign-born population between 1990 and 2000.

• In 39 states the share of the immigrant population accounted for by the top sending country increased. The decline in diversity was most dramatic in Arkansas, North Carolina, Georgia, Indiana, Tennessee, Utah, Nebraska, and
Alabama.

• Even those states with little diversity among immigrants in 1990 experienced a continued decline in diversity between 1990 and 2000. In Arizona, for example, immigrants from Mexico grew from 55 percent to 67 percent of the foreign born and in Texas, Mexicans increased from 59 to 65 percent of the total.

• Looking at diversity as measured by the share of immigrants from just one region of the world also shows a significant decline in diversity. Nationally, immigrants from Spanish-speaking Latin American countries increased from 37 percent to 46 percent of the total foreign-born population during the 1990s.

• Immigrants from Spanish-speaking Latin America accounted for more than 60 percent of the growth in the foreign-born population nationally in the 1990s.

• In 2000, there were 33 states (including the District of Columbia) in which immigrants from Spanish-speaking Latin American countries were the largest single group. Europeans were the largest group in 11 states, East Asian immigrants were the largest in four states and Canadian immigrants were the largest in three states.

• Declining diversity was mainly due to very uneven growth in the size of different immigrant groups. For example, the number of immigrants from Spanish-speaking Latin America increased by seven million and those from East Asia rose by over two million. In contrast, the number of immigrants from Europe increased by less than 700,000 and those from Sub-Saharan Africa increased by about 400,000.

• Immigrants from some countries became much more dispersed during the decade. For example, the percentage of immigrants from Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador concentrated in only one state fell significantly during the
decade.

• In contrast, immigrants from Cuba became more concentrated, while the share of immigrants from such countries as Iran, Columbia, Jamaica, and Haiti concentrated in one state remained virtually unchanged in the 1990s.

[BIGZ]

Where are the Blacks? They are the ones getting and are going to get screwed.

. Maybe Arnold is right. Now we can add King/Drew to the list.

[Happy2BMe]

"If not, why not, and how can you justify taking someone else's property without paying for it (which is what Smart growth does)?"

Answer:

The United Nations Wants to Take Your Land!
"Private land ownership ... contributes to social injustice.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable."

- United Nations "Habitat I" Conference Report, 1976

Are you concerned...
...that the UN is militantly anti-property rights?

The UN is dominated by socialist, communist, and other collectivist regimes that are hostile to private property, the basis of our freedom and prosperity. Karl Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto that "the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property." Marx continued: "In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend."

Are you concerned...
...that the UN intends to carry out Marx's plan?

In true Marxist fashion, the report of the UN "Habitat I" Conference declares that private land ownership "contributes to social injustice.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...." Agenda 21, the UN's massive environmental manifesto, envisions a UN empowered to control and micro-manage our planetary environment and the actions of every person on Earth. It says: "All countries should undertake a comprehensive national inventory of their land resources" and "develop national land-management plans." The UN's Assessment would "reallocate" property rights and have "stakeholder groups," instead of property owners, make decisions on private land use.

Are you concerned...
...that our own U.S. government is adopting many of the UN's anti-property rights and policies and treaties?

The U.S. has signed Agenda 21 and has begun implementing the UN's "Wildlands Project," an incredible plan to push millions of Americans off their land to make vast nature preserves out of half of the nation. Also, under the UN's 1988 Convention on Narcotics, the U.S. has adopted unconstitutional "asset forfeiture" laws that allow seizure of property without due process.

Are you concerned...
...that UN treaties could destroy our heritage of freedom?

Nobel Prizewinning economist, Friedrich A. Hayek, noted that "the system of private property is the most important guaranty of freedom, not only for those who own property, but scarcely less for those who do not. It is only because the control of the means of production is divided among many people acting independently that nobody has complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to do with ourselves."

[Happy2BMe]

"Where are the Blacks? They are the ones getting and are going to get screwed."

You can say that again. Blacks held their own while they were the largest minority voting block. Now that the Mexicans have taken their place, everything is changing.

[blackie]

I'm with you, pod!

[sauropod]

I knew all that. Was just trying to lead this bozo to learn for himself (a trying task at times).

[Happy2BMe]

"Was just trying to lead this bozo. ."

There's no problem here - We Have PLENTY of FREE LAND!