Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [energyresources] Re: Ban immigration to solve population problems?

Expand Messages
  • e_bittencourt
    Dear friends . Shipping them back to Africa Or Latin America ? Not shipping back the Irish, Italians , Greeks, etc etc? That is kind of funny.
    Message 1 of 41 , Apr 1, 2012
      Dear friends .

      " Shipping them back to Africa Or Latin America" ? Not shipping back the Irish, Italians , Greeks, etc etc? That is kind of funny. First, Brazilians and Argentine do not consider themselves "Hispanic." Brazil is "the" melting pot of the Americas. The word "minority" has not much use here. We had significant immigration of Portuguese ( of course...) , Germans, Japanese, Polish ,Spanish , Blacks, most of them were forced to Brazil, to mention a few inputs. The first sinagogue ever in the Americas, is in Recife , in Pernambuco.

      Shipping around a million brazilians to Brazil, probably most of them legal, and very productive, will not help much the United States. Besides, brazilians are spending a lot in the US, especially in NYC and Miami.

      See:
      " Brazilians are pouring into the Sunshine State. And spending money. Big money. $1.6 Billion dollars in 2011. 600,000 Brazilians landed in Miami and Orlando last year, another straight year of double-digit growth. They are buying real estate-sometimes, not just 1 condo with a Biscayne Bay view, but an entire floor of a high-rise, condo tower. And at the shopping malls, the Brazilians are perfecting the phrase "shop 'til you drop." "

      ( Brazilians Spending Big Bucks in Florida , available at http://www.spchamber.com.br/?p=noticia&id=650).

      See;

      " According to the latest statistics, Brazilians spent $5.9 billion in the U.S. in 2010 in a tsunami of cash that's shifting American immigration practices and boosting economies in hard-hit parts of the U.S. that remain in the doldrums.

      President Barack Obama recently ordered the State Department to speed up the visa application process for tourists coming from Brazil, China and other nations with newly flush consumers.

      After suffering decades of hyperinflation, Brazil has ridden high commodity prices along with some of the world's biggest offshore oil discoveries to expand its economy, lift millions out of poverty and multiply the ranks of the country's deep-pocketed elite "

      More:

      " According to the latest statistics, Brazilians spent $5.9 billion in the U.S. in 2010 in a tsunami of cash that's shifting American immigration practices and boosting economies in hard-hit parts of the U.S. that remain in the doldrums.

      President Barack Obama recently ordered the State Department to speed up the visa application process for tourists coming from Brazil, China and other nations with newly flush consumers.

      After suffering decades of hyperinflation, Brazil has ridden high commodity prices along with some of the world's biggest offshore oil discoveries to expand its economy, lift millions out of poverty and multiply the ranks of the country's deep-pocketed elite

      (" Brazil's New Consumer Class Spending Time And Cash In The U.S." available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/11/brazilian-spending-us_n_1337354.html )

      A student of mine , whose wife is pregnant told me it is cheaper to the couple go to NYC , stay a aweek, and buy the set of baby's cloth for significatly less than they pay in Brazil. This is not so good for us. Something is wrong to start , the over valued Real, at least ov er valued in 50% based on the Big Mac criteria ( "The Economist" ) In the present there are direct flighs from Manaus to Miami ( less than 5 hours) and Atlanta, opening new tourism and business oppotunities to both countries. Of course devaluation od the Real is a possiblity which will affect the present situation, altohough less with respect to commerce between Brazil and the US. Immigratio - in both directions - education ( undegraduate and graduate ) , exxhange programas are stron elements of integration , cultural and economic. The two major economic shools in Rio , have around 80% of the professors in economy having done their graduate studies in the US.

      Note:

      I lived for 9 years in the US where I got an ndegratuade degree as a self- supporting student , a PhD, and worked as a research associate- all at NCSU. Besides , I played acoustic guittarr in kind of a jazz club in Raleigh, in a joint that had people like Bill Evans, Dizzy Gillespie, Stan Getz ( and others) , and entertainers like George Carlin, Bette Midler, Lilly Tomlin, an experience I will never forget. I am active interacting with some Universities in the US, mainly with NCSU and Cornell, after being active in the invitation to Brazil of ( an estimate) around 20 professors from the US, since I came bak to Brazil, in 77

      Edison







      ----- Original Message -----
      From: papp20032000
      To: energyresources@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:06 PM
      Subject: [energyresources] Re: Ban immigration to solve population problems?



      Richard Pelto (RP) wrote:

      What do you think are the reasons for industrial success? Development of complex transportation systems? Medical and educational structures? Rural to urban movement of population? All laboriously achieved, and very difficult to undo. Some aspects may be at least partially sustainable but the choice of implementing a plan for achieving it may involve goals of making it through half of this century, and not much beyond.

      My comments (PP):

      Being proud of industrial success is being proud of the failure of the sustainability. We can live with dignity without too many transportation systems like the ones existing in the US. We can have medical and educational structures to allow people to live with dignity in levels of consumption several orders of magnitude lower than those of US. See the Cuban child mortality rates and education levels in the range of those of the US with less than 1/20 of energy consumption per capita.

      (RP) Then you write "If you stop mass immigration (if you can, which I doubt, even with barbed wires, hermetic fences, concrete walls higher than those splitting Palestine, night vision cameras, volunteers with the rifle and the telescopic sight, a la Charlton Heston or Chuck Norris..."

      Stopping immigration, as you note, will not be achieved by walls (or by legalizing all illegal immigration as Obama seeks to do). But it can be by enforcing already present laws and implementing legislation that requires only providing jobs to citizens (It's called E-Verify). What is pursued by those trying to seriously address the millions per year (more than 100 million since 1970) of illegal and legal immigrants coming here is corporate greed and capitalism assumption that unlimited growth is possible. Thus their money implements a wide variety of legislative benefits that reward illegal entry.

      (PP) That is not true. We have enforced here with laws. There are no simply resources to ship back to the countries of origin the millions entering into the country. We have tried several times to ship them back too Africa or Latin America and there is no simply capacity in the planes or ships and police efforts we cannot afford and even less now with the financial crisis. There are many legal hurdles also in the countries of origin. And the incoming flow always surpasses the outgoing flow. Besides, you correctly point about the corporate greed and capitalism assumption of unlimited growth as the main cause for the illegal immigration, but then focus on immigrants only. Don't you realize that if this is the first cause you should start abolishing corporate greed and capitalism assumptions first, instead of focusing obsessively on poor humans migrating? (But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well; Matthew 6, 3)

      (RP) Free education, subsidized housing, medical, and preferential hiring, etc. That is the unsustainability I and people like Virginia oppose. For some reason you choose not to understand this very simple message, despite being very capable of understanding something equally complex, the Middle East events.

      (PP) No. You are opposing these basic right for poor people because they "did not get the proper papers", not because they are unsustainable. There are basic rights that could be given with dignity, as explained before with a minimal fraction of our present consumerist costs of today, forced by an unsustainable model. And could well cover all humans with a fraction of consumption of the rich and wasteful minorities of today. For some reason you and Virginia systematically fail to understand that it is first the greedy system what has to be abolished and all the remaining things will be automatically given to you as well.

      Fred Elbel (FE) wrote:

      Good observation. People come to the US for material gain. Ironically, corporate interests want migrant labor because that labor is still much cheaper than American workers who still
      expect a living wage.

      (PP) Then first shoot internally to greedy corporations or abolish them, instead to poor humans. Perhaps if you do that, you will then realize than a big portion of the wealth of the tiny US wealthy minority in the world, has been obtained with the blood, sweat and tears of those immigrants and many others in remote countries that do not even have the possibility to migrate but are equally exploited to the bones from these greedy corporations.

      (FE) All we need to do is to keep illegal aliens from working, educating, and obtaining taxpayer-funded medical care. If we would simply enforce employment laws on the books, illegal aliens would self-deport and return home to reunite with their families.

      (PP) See my comments above to Richard Pelto on this subject.

      (FE) Ahhh - so your goal is to destroy America via overpopulation to the point where per-capita consumption equates to that of third-world nations. Unfortunately, total consumption would still be inordinately high because the per capita consumption would be multiplied by so
      many capitas. And of course, destruction to our supporting ecosystems would be at least as great as it is now. That would really not be very sporting of us.

      (PP) No. My goal is not destructing the United States of America (Even less the American continent, where two of my granddaughters and my son live in Brazil, that is part of America) and where I have very good friends. I would just suggest to abolish the greedy Corporations and the form of capitalism that believes that accumulation of wealth can be unlimited and has to be growing forever. It's that simple (and that complicated at the same time). Your point of view can be basically reverse, if you have flexible mind enough. If the American Way of living model is the main reason why the per capita consumption equates there one third of the world nations, of course the problems of the world will not be solved if only US is destroyed but ITS CONSUMERISM SYSTEM remains valid as an example for the rest of the world. You are very right. But if this absolutely unsustainable model that the US leads today is changed, not only for the US but also for the rest of the world, then the sit uation may dramatically change to better.

      (FE) Precisely. As mass immigration drives US population to double this century, living conditions will begin to converge to those in third world countries. In other words, destroy America via mass immigration. A noble Marxist concept which is playing out as we speak.

      (PP) Passing from 300 to 600 million in one country in one century is a dire thing, but it is not the main problem we have. The main problem is having 1.5 billion consuming like if it there is no tomorrow (about 70% of the world resources and causing the carrying capacity to be overwhelmed in 1.5 times the WHOLE WORLD CAPACITY (not the US with arriving poor people) and 5.5 starving billion pretending to reach this theoretical heaven of wealth accumulation promised by the propaganda of the very system you defend. So, it appears to be very cynic to parapet in your own wealth and unsustainable form of living from 310 million people and claim that if another 300 million arrive and start consuming like you, the problem will worsen. Of course it will, but you are pointing to the finger pointing the moon.

      Pedro





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • e_bittencourt
      Pedro Just imagine what an ice age would do with respect to migration! We thing short in time, not in geological or cosmological scale
      Message 41 of 41 , Apr 5, 2012
        Pedro

        Just imagine what an ice age would do with respect to migration! We thing short in time, not in geological or cosmological scale time.Whos wants to talk about death? This is waht is all about. The famous question , still unanswered, is " What is life" . We still do not know what life is, entirely. If we do not know what life is much less we know what death is. We all know what non existence is. Time does not exist for us before we are born ( I mean in the womb).
        The US is a melting pot too, but a tense melting pot.Each wave of immigrants had its share of suffering and bigotry. It may get worse as we are in a full world, and the US is not anymore an empty country , with endless praries to accomodate Europeans. But the US it is a melting pot and , lets admit, a great country, where the people who are good are very good indeed. In some situations one Just is enough to save a country.
        About Spain: I have a PhD student that did not get a student Visa to Spain although he had a scholarship from a Spanish bank with a huge operation in Brazil, to do some research in a University in the north of Spain. He had to get a tourist visa and stayed there only 3 months. Today he is in the US witha Fullbriht scholarship, and will return in June to brazil. He doing great

        Edison

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: papp20032000
        To: energyresources@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 3:49 PM
        Subject: [energyresources] Re: Ban immigration to solve population problems?



        Edison, you are right. Brazil is the real melting pot of the Americas, rather than the US. If melting is mixing, It does not seem a melting pot a place where each race is in its guetto or quarters. See the mixture in the races everywhere in Brazil.

        Second, being "legal" or "illegal" is a very abstract concept. Legal is to legally nationalize important sectors in a sovereign country, for instance and this has been contested and rejected by the affected powers that be. Legal were the native Indians living originally in America, even they had no one single paper.

        I am tired of explaining here that the high standards of living in the US, or Europe were not only obtained by the effort of clever and smart people, unless we assess "clever and smart" by human groups appropriating of the wealth of the rest, detrimental to the rest.

        Just paying a look to the Chart of the Year at http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7282, will show where the fortresses develop: in the absolutely unsustainable side of the world. Curiously enough, if we could trace the main energy and material flows, they will be from left to right; from basically developing to developed countries. Even more curiously, if we could envision the financial flows, contrary to the natural and environmental logic, they also move from developing to developed countries, due to abusive contracting forms created by the later, that eternize and worsen continuously this situation.

        In many cases, even this limitless appropriation of materials goods and resources does not yield all the supposed benefits to the developed. It is proved that when reaching a certain level, increments of material wealth do not correspond with equivalent increments in quality of living, but much on the contrary, they correspond to dire deterioration of the environment. But of course, this is a song that many benefiting of this levels do not want to hear about. It is also proved that some ways of living can respect the human life and the environment much more than our appreciated capitalist and consumerist system with a tiny fraction in the use of resources. Again a song that many do not want to listen.

        My discussion on immigration in the US was not focusing on the goods and services rendered by Latin American people (and from other nationalities) living there in economic terms. I perfectly know how much substance has been deposited in the US. For instance, the very rich Venezuelan state (pre Chavez) bankrupted twice and twice the Treasury resources ended in US Banks. The Open veins Of Latin America (Eduardo Galeano), a book that president Chavez gave as a present to president Obama, is a good piece to recap all the spoiling for decades of the resources in Latin America.

        This is not to convince US citizens on how good and profitable these exchanges are, so that they "forgive" the sin of illegal immigration and continue with this state of affairs. It is rather the opposite: if the differential will not be so scandalous, apart from unsustainable, the attractive will not be so high; attractiveness that has been and is still today promoted, by the way, during decades as the most desirable for the rest of the world; as the model (impossible) to copy.

        As an example of how things are evolving fast, as from yesterday, Spaniards entering into Brazil, visiting relatives, must carry a Brazilian notary public document, with the invitation form and proving that the hosts have or rent the property; about 650 US$ per person and week and/or credit cards certifying that the upper limit is enough. They are just using what in diplomacy is known as RECIPROCITY. It was lost by the emerging and developing countries and is now being recovered as a proof of national dignity and equal rights treatment. In Argentina, purchases of land plots are limited for foreigners to 10,000 Ha. (about 20,000 acres) as a first approach. And so on.

        Richard Pelto (RP) wrote (my comments interspersed as (PP):

        (RP) Like the world, U.S. population is expanding rapidly (and
        in the U.S. it is due primarily because of illegal and legal immigration
        policies). As a consequence of that growth efficiencies in cars or driving
        slowly.

        (PP) Look at yourself. Efficiency of cars needing to drive fast prioritized over humans. Do you realize your personal position?

        (RP) Vaclav Smil in Energy Transitions: History, Requirements,
        Prospects, 2010, made the point that per capita fossil fuel use in the U.S.
        remained constant from 1970 to 2010. What was not noted is that consumption
        increased at the same rate as population despite the efforts put into smart
        (or fancifully `sustainable') growth and green policies.

        (PP) And have you checked the per capita levels of US citizens in 1970 with respect to the rest of the world today? What has happened meanwhile with the `legal' US citizens? No one single birth over the death rates? And how is the thing?: we, the citizens of the US are entitled to spend five times more than the world average (this is the situation today; are the immigrants liable for 4/5 of the present resources consumption?), but the rest cannot have this right. We have to set the fortress now. Do you realize your personal position?

        Pedro





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.