300 Million Strong

[Whoha]

Because there will essentially be two different cultures in the US at that point. Even the French in Quebec clamor for independence. The French. Why would it be any different with this group? They may realize that the US is good for them today, or that violence will get them smashed flat today, but that will change.

It is also important to note that the earlier immigrants were assimilated during a period of half a century of negligible immigration.

[Will9]

Originally posted by DanS
Today's the day!

I'm tired. just read the first line of my sig.

[Narz]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


It isn't. We're discovering new sources all the time, and developing alternatives to burning oil in cars.

Really? Affordable, cost-effective solutions that will be able to completely replace oil within the next twenty to thirty years?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
It isn't. We're discovering new sources all the time, and developing alternatives to burning oil in cars.

What part of cheap didn't you understand. All of the easy oil has been found. The new stuff we find is the difficult to extract oil.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Dis
Yes it is true that many mexicans do not assimilate like the europeans did when they came over.

I disagree. Traditionally, the first generation of [Italians, Russians, Germans, Japanese, whatever] comes over, doesn't learn the language and takes poor-paying jobs with long hours and horrible working condictions. The second generation begins the change over; they acts as translators for their parents. The third generation is Americanized, speaking English -- often only English -- they play baseball, go to college and complain about the immigrants moving into the country.

[Dr Strangelove]

So in 2 more generations who will the Mexican-Americans be complaining about? Europeans named Ahmed who fled Europe to escape the social conditions created by throngs of chavs?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
So in 2 more generations who will the Mexican-Americans be complaining about? Europeans named Ahmed who fled Europe to escape the social conditions created by throngs of chavs?

No, that's not too likely.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


No, he was wrong on both points. Look at the population growth [decline] rates in the industrialized world.

Its not honest debating to ignore 2/3 of humanity and pick and choose the groups you decide to illustrate human growth with.

Human population has gone frm 1 Billion in 1840 to 6 Billion in 2006, when it took 15,000 years plus to get to 1 Billion. Last time I checked, that is exponential growth.

As for declining birth rates, I fail to see how someone like Malthus could have forseen the declines in fertility which have lead to that without knowledge of the deep social changes that brought them about. For the most part he was pretty accurate about where human populations were going. He was till wrong about the ability of the specieis to feed and clothe those numbers.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


I disagree. Traditionally, the first generation of [Italians, Russians, Germans, Japanese, whatever] comes over, doesn't learn the language and takes poor-paying jobs with long hours and horrible working condictions. The second generation begins the change over; they acts as translators for their parents. The third generation is Americanized, speaking English -- often only English -- they play baseball, go to college and complain about the immigrants moving into the country.

You have a point. I suppose it only seems more noticable today because of the sheer numbers of first generation immigrants from mexico.

[Mr. President]

How in the hell did this thread go for four pages?

[Winston]

Originally posted by Mr. President
How in the hell did this thread go for four pages?

It didn't.. This is the first post of the 3rd page.

I hereby dedicate it to the 300,000,001st American, who will always be just a poor second to that little bugger who managed to elbow himself into eternal fame just ahead of him.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Mr. President
How in the hell did this thread go for four pages?

Beats me considering this is a copycat thread...

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
What part of cheap didn't you understand. All of the easy oil has been found. The new stuff we find is the difficult to extract oil.

I remember during the crisis of the seventies - we were going to run out in 30 years. Well, here we are, and Russia has 40 years worth of output ahead of it on known sources alone. Those cunning Rooskies also seem to have the knack for finding it in places where western oil companies couldn't find any. Funnily enough, Russian theories on oil are considered whacko in the west, but still they keep coming up with the goods. Estimates of Russia's reserves as are much as three times higher than they were a few years ago.

As for the difficult-to-extract oil, I have confidence in human ingenuity and engineering that extraction techniques can be developed to make it worthwhile, if somewhat more expensive.

Some of us already pay far more for our petrol than USAians could imagine in their worst nightmares, because of high taxation. If oil prices rise due to extraction costs, this can be offset by tax adjustments. If high-consumption motorists in the US were faced with higher pump prices then there would be incentive to trade in the gas-guzzler for something a little less thirsty.

Besides, there are alternatives to oil. The motorsports industry has been developing and racing ethanol engines for some years now, and I think next years IRL series, including the Indy 500, will be all-ethanol. I don't know offhand what the potential output could be, but with Europe growing more food than it can consume there should be room for some beet farms for fuel.

And we still have decades ahead of us to develop further alternatives and solutions.

What part of advancing the forces of production do you not understand?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Winston
It didn't.. This is the first post of the 3rd page.

Actually, it's still on the 2nd page

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by GePap


I thought what did not obey his rpedictions was the growth in food supply. His point was that food supply would grow arithmetically while human population would grow exponentially. He was right about the growth of the human population. He was wrong about its ability to feed itself.

Population growth was supra-exponential for a while (meaning the rate of growth was increasing). And now it is very sub-exponential.

The rate of growth is decreasing, and the population will stabilize soon.