Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Immigration Fallout

I am going to probably step on toes, feet, and a whole bunch of other bodily parts with this entry...so, in advance, I apologize. 

But George W. Bush, as I said before, is acting as he always has....and I will explain that. 

In addition to being a Religious Republican, GWB has always looked at things from a ‘big picture’ perspective.  His tax cuts, his War on Terror....and there are probably more examples that this, but you get the picture.  He has always looked at things through the litmus of the question, “What will this mean in the long-term?”

I truly believe that this is the same thing that he is doing now.  I honestly believe that, even though what he is saying is not popular to his base, he is acting in the long-term interest of the United States. 

In the year 2005, the average age of someone in Mexico was 25.  The world average at that same time was 28.1.....what that means is that the reproductive population of Mexico is higher than average, hence, their rate of population growth is higher.  For the USA, that average age is 36.1, and the population growth rates for the countries, per year, are 1.34% for Mexico and 1.05% for the United States. 

However, watching the trends over time, we see that in 2050 (two generations from now), the average age for Mexico jumps to 43 years old, while the United States goes to 41.1.  That yields population growth rates of -.02% (yes, negative population growth) in Mexico, and .38% in the United States. 

So what, you ask?  Well...let me explain. 

Let’s look at the following....a country, their median age, and their growth rate in 2005:

USA---30.0---1.05%
Mexico---25---1.34%
China---32.6---.65%
Japan---42.9---.17%
Russia---37.3---.46%(negative)
France---39.3---.41%
Brazil---26.8---1.39%

OK...now, for the year 2050:

USA---41.1---.38%
Mexico---43---.02% (negative)
China---44.8---.35%(negative)
Japan---52.3---.49%(negative
Russia---43.5---.46%(negative)
France---45.5---.13%(negative)
Brazil---40.3---.2%

There is an obvious trend, but that’s not all. 

How about fertility rates....what about those?  Well, predictions for 2050 are as follows:

USA--1.85
Mexico--1.85
China--1.85
Japan--1.85
Russia--1.85
France--1.85
Brazil--1.85

There is a good amount of uncertainty there...it’s hard to predict these things.  However, look again at the population changes....what is the difference?  Why is the United States shown to be gaining population, while most other countries are shown to be losing population, EVEN WHEN THE FERTILITY RATE IS PREDICTED TO BE THE SAME?

Immigration. 

In order for our economy to be stable, we need young people to be in school, to be educated and entering the workforce to replace those who are aged and not able to work.  Our social systems, our government, and our economy are all based on the amount of people that can produce.  Our military is formed with ‘excess’ young people that are able to serve as opposed to joining the workforce...in simpler terms, we are able to field a sizable army of young men (and women) without damaging our economy to do so...we have enough other young people to replace those who are retiring, or dying, or otherwise leaving the cohort of the working aged-people.

Immigration is the key, because the birth rate in this country, not including immigrants, is not at replacement rate.  Immigration, and offspring born in this country from immigrants, represents at least 58% of our current population growth.  Our immigration policies, or even the lack thereof, is the reason we aren’t turning out into a demographic mess like China and/or India, a economic mess like France, Germany, Russia, or Japan (think of their populations, socialist marketplaces, and government responsibilites for cradle-to-grave care), or a civil nightmare like Mexico.  We still have room to grow and flourish, but an aging population, shrinking workforce, and depleted treasure and defense would cripple that ability we have. 

We need immigration.  We need those that are already here.  We need a coorect and proper immigration policy that rewards long-term immigrants, slows illegal immigration, punishes corporations that hire illegals, and encourages assimilation.  Bush has drawn that idea up, via his ideas of learning English, applying for citizenship, and paying back taxes and fines. 

He took the first steps last night. 

We cannot close the borders.  We can’t turn inward out of defensiveness or fear of the outsider.  We can enforce the laws we have, increase the ease of legal immigration, and preserve our futures at the same time.  I’m not for open borders, by any stretch.  I am for realizing the big picture.  This program described by the POTUS is best in the long run....and that is why I think he is pushing it.

I see Michelle Malkin’s point of view, and Polipundit’s POV, as well as the other ex-bloggers on Pli’s site.  And I’m not blindly supporting Bush...but I think the picture is being looked at in too narrow of a way by a lot of people, and Bush can’t just get on a microphone and start talking demographics to a nations hell-bent on watching ‘24’.  He can’t do that with any real success.  So, he is moving ahead without his flanks protected, knowing he’s going to take some hard shots for his plan.....and deciding that it’s best for America, in the long run, if he does. 

Link to population info is here

Comments

Trackbacks: