Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
Read the previous posts. Immigration to wealthy nations reduces overall birthrates, obviously. The migrating families produce fewer children than if they hadn't immigrated.
Again, read the previous posts. We aren't talking about the "West", but the U.S. The U.S. can dictate its relative population growth for centuries, as long as it remains the most attractive destination, even if overall global population plummets.
|
Posts seemed to mention rich countries in Europe as well.
First generation immigrants tend to mirror the rates in the old countries. That, I know for a fact. Maybe your just assuming, because the overall rates for all people of entire ethnic groups in the US regardless of how many generations they’ve been here for.
And no we won’t be the shining nation on the hill for centuries, going forward. All you have to do is look at modern immigration rates from Europe, for that reality. Unless you think only Japan and Europe have the ability to improve their lot. Even in 2050, the only places on the planet with potential for high emigration will be sub-Saharan Africa and India, and by that time automation will be in full effect.
In 2100, our population will be what it is now and the global economy will be 3 times as large at least. We will be almost completely automated by then. Africa will be where Southeast Asia is now and India will be like South America at worst.