Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Chris E Obinwa
Johnny,
The policy of most governments affect global food production, not only in the developed countries but also in the developing countries. The world is experiencing hike in virtually everything. The continuous hike in gasoline, as we are made to believe has triggered most hikes. Yes, we should aportion blames to most governments that have politicized and downplayed their responsibilities to carter for their citizenry. It is not the number of children the 'Hispanics' are breeding in the U.S or the number of children the Asians are breeding in the U.K that has contributed to the current food crisis or the overall migrations. America has been able over many years to swallow complex migrants while utilizing cheap labour to its advantage than any country in the world. Whatever the world is facing now in terms of war, terrorism,food shortages and adverse weather conditions are as a result of pitfall in government policies from the 'Super powers'.
If I may ask based on anecdotal, research and my experience in the U.S and Britain, does migration confer any type of benefit at all to the host country?
Cheers,
Dr. Chris E. Obinwa
|
Dr. Obinwa, migration only benefits a host country or area if that country or area is below the sustainable long term human population. Just because a place or country is absorbing migrants, or has been, has little to do with if they should ecologically. The harsh reality is that this maximum long term sustainable population hit various regions at various times long ago. On a world scale it was around 1900, and for the USA the early 1920s. Since then everywhere, except for some small remote areas, have been in the state of human population overshoot. In any mammal population this leads to die-off.
Demographically, from a variety of studies, the only ones not over-breeding for the conditions at hand, such as soil and water depletion, have been the highest spectrum of human intelligence, except those overly influenced by culture and religions. My own studies were from 10 years of obituaries, and there were the well documented and hated data collected in the book "The Bell Curve". Lindsey Grant's "Elephants in the Volkswagen" was very good, also, for maximum sustainable human population figures for various standards of living in the world scale and the USA scale in particular.
Acceptance of immigrants or invaders when a host country is past long term sustainable at an acceptable standard of living is stupid in that it will cause everyone's standard of living to go down and lead to first economic hardships, then ecological collapse. This generally starts with loss of pure water, but includes soil depletion and pollution effects as well. Food supply drops, malnutrition diseases rise, as fighting over resources breaks out. The over-compassion and over-tolerance of host countries becomes their albatross and downfall, unless they fight hard for their national identity.
When I re-did "Mammal Populations in Ecological Niches, Including Humans" (1967) in 1995 (unpublished), I realized the cascading nature of the collapse and die-off of the human species. First economic effects, then migrations, and economic effects to the host areas, then shortages, fighting, cannibalism, diseases, ecological collapse, social collapse, government collapse, until few were left. Dr. Leakey proposed human extinction in 1996, and I thought at first this was a 50-50 chance(with speciation the other half). With the acceleration of pollution effects, especially climate change, I now believe the over-breeding that started this mess will probably lead to an uninhabitable biosphere with 87% of species extinction, disruption of the Malenkovitch glacial epoch cycle, and human extinction shortly after 2100, with the main crash still starting in the 2040s and culminating mostly by the 2050s. Small groups will survive for a while as the ELE (geologically) continues. The chances for this not happening are slimmer each day, each extra baby born and each belch of exhaust. The population of humans and their demands can not be reduced fast enough(most likely). Lindsey Grant talks about living in the post fossil fuel world. I have seen Prof. Grant become overly optimistic as he gets older. No one wants to be without hope for our future generations. I think it is very slim indeed, and have reluctantly gotten closer to Dr. Leakey's views.
Immigration now kills the host country in most cases, and the immigrants die with the rest, from their own over-breeding and pollution, like birds fouling their own nests.
I had always hoped a group of strong intelligent humans, in numbers above the genetic erosion limit, would survive through the very long recovery period, and live within the sustainable limits of the biosphere as a matter of culture and religion to do so. Pure Will Power, like my mother said she used to only have two children in the pre-pill days.
With the data coming in on accelerating pollution and climate effects(especially methane releases becoming self-perpetuating), it looks more like a scenario of the Eocene Max with a recovery period of several million years. Intelligent cockroaches in the future? No one will know in this life.
It brings to mind the announcer's words as the Hindenburg fell on fire---"Oh, the humanity!".....................