|
If immigration, then, serves as a contributor to U.S.
population growth, what is the basis for excluding immigration
from any comprehensive analysis of the consequences of U.S.
population growth? It's time to look at and evaluate the
arguments that are used against viewing immigration as a
domestic population issue." http://www.npg.org/specialreports/imm&uspopgrowth.htm
This report is very dated, but the argument that leads off the
report isn't.
The reason I think this is a TPOV is related to a new design
for immigration, and our society.
While one could argue that immigration is a good or bad thing,
I see it as a necessary thing based on an entirely different
POV @F-L-O-W. In our design @F-L-O-W, we have to look at a
myriad of factors, such as, where is it in the world where the
right people could be added to create design for the planet?
There are few places, but none more than the USA, because of
it's money, capital and innovation, and entrepreneurial
infrastructure. If we wanted to add people anywhere, it would
be here.
Now, the caveat,
UNLESS we re-train the consumption, then we invite increasing
numbers of environmental issues, however, in my view, we can
do both at the same time using Innovation @F-L-O-W.
I'm not naive to think just because its a goodi dea it will be
perfect, but it makes the most design sense for the transition
period.
I wonder if we agreed to get out of the middle east, whether
ISLAM would leave us alone terror wise, if so, we should do
that, and then even provide a bigger reason to do what is
necessary with unraveling the immigration dilemma, to allow
people the right to be, but to offer a choice to the best and
brightest to come design with us?
In order to renew our social covenant, and unwind it along
with producing a new design, we need to increase our young
population by about 30% in concert with--improving our
productivity globally, which means the young educated people
would have important jobs in glocal design, in other words, if
we reduce consumption by 30%% overall, we could easily assume
30% increase in population to 500 million or so by 2025,
adding 30 million in gifted people, and another 100 million in
population through natural means, to redraw the average age of
our population, and this would be better for the world in many
ways, albeit controversial, and not without fallout.
But a platform as I've suggested to "cool-off" the world,
along with the opportunity to re-design society would seem a
fair, low-risk gambit to me, while at the same time, actually
bolstering, with redesign, our military, a seemingly
counter-intuitive strategy, but increasing the role of the
military to do more civilian work, albeit nation-building has
it's drawbacks from a military guided by
CORPORATE interests,
but perhaps it could be different.
|
