White Nationalist Alert

[wetibbe]

Just to expound on my attitude:

The USA is rushing to the brink of the cliff with immigration. It is absolutely a lunatic, self destruction.

I would like to see ALL immigration halted immediately both legal and illegal until we see some semblance of common sense.

Furthermore I would like to see a reduction in US population little by little. But I am a realist, not an ideologue.

The "system" is structured to increase, build more homes, make more cars, increase, proliferate, make more money .........................................

The consequences of a reduction in population are already understood. Disaster!

Thus we are on a Nantucket sleigh ride. The politician, the businessmen will want more and more.

I could expound on the dilemma but it would fall on deaf ears. It takes people with insight and vision to understand that we, as a people, are bent on destroying our planet in the coming decades.

The species Homo Sapiens could certainly become extinct. And there are too few who really understand.

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

...

The consequences of a reduction in population are already understood. Disaster!

...

I could expound on the dilemma but it would fall on deaf ears. It takes people with insight and vision to understand that we, as a people, are bent on destroying our planet in the coming decades.

The species Homo Sapiens could certainly become extinct. And there are too few who really understand.

Is this a misprint? "The consequences of a reduction in population are already understood. Disaster!" Or explain what you mean by that.

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by Twoller

Is this a misprint? "The consequences of a reduction in population are already understood. Disaster!" Or explain what you mean by that.

I believe he's speaking of implosion, a collapse of society and all that maintains it if the forward momentum of growth in population, productivity, and profit isn't maintained.

Depleted of energy, the star falls in on itself.

There will eventually be an end to it, the question is not if - it is when.

[wetibbe]

Originally Posted by ilbegone

I believe he's speaking of implosion, a collapse of society and all that maintains it if the forward momentum of growth in population, productivity, and profit isn't maintained.

Depleted of energy, the star falls in on itself.

There will eventually be an end to it, the question is not if - it is when.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
Exactly precise

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

...

Furthermore I would like to see a reduction in US population little by little. But I am a realist, not an ideologue.

The "system" is structured to increase, build more homes, make more cars, increase, proliferate, make more money .........................................

The consequences of a reduction in population are already understood. Disaster!

...

So, you would like to see a reduction in US population, but you think the consequences of a reduction in population are "already understood" to be a disaster.

If you would like to see a reduction in US population, then you at least agree that the US population, at least, should be stabilized at some fixed number. How many fewer people should the US have and what about the rest of the world?

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by Twoller

So, you would like to see a reduction in US population, but you think the consequences of a reduction in population are "already understood" to be a disaster.

If you would like to see a reduction in US population, then you at least agree that the US population, at least, should be stabilized at some fixed number. How many fewer people should the US have and what about the rest of the world?

Not speaking for wetibbe...

Prosperity of a nation concerning conventional economics and regardless of individual prosperity is based on viable trade and ursury, not cutting back a population.

All of that is in one way or another dependent on traditional growth.

What we need is a viable economic model which doesn't depend on traditional growth for prosperity, something which brings in wealth from the outside and in which every citizen participating in a meaningful manner gets a cut.

And recycled 1960's social theory doesn't cut it.

[wetibbe]

Originally Posted by Twoller

So, you would like to see a reduction in US population, but you think the consequences of a reduction in population are "already understood" to be a disaster.

If you would like to see a reduction in US population, then you at least agree that the US population, at least, should be stabilized at some fixed number. How many fewer people should the US have and what about the rest of the world?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>

According to environmental report I read many years ago, from a biological, environmental standpoint the land mass of the USA should accommodate 50 million.

Remember that I spent a lifetime in Earth History and I am an aficionado of archaeology. In my area of discipline I think in terms of hundreds of millions of years, geology, evolution and the development of the primates including the predecessors of the Neanderthals and Cro-magnons.

The Europeans didn't even know that North America existed in the early 1,500's. Williamsburg, Virginia may have been an early attempt to populate but Plymouth, Massachusetts was the first successful colony in 1620. Then it was a few hundred, then hundreds of thousands, then millions and then hundreds of millions.

I would like to see over 100 million disappear over time. The USA could deal with 100 to 150 million. *( From an environmental standpoint, but that's absolutely impossible to achieve, ever, without some dramatic changes in politics, economy and lifestyle ). Indeed even from the national security aspect our standing Army would be to small to cope with the massive increases in China, with the Muslims and other adversaries.

I lived overseas for more than 14 years on several continents. I saw how they "live" - exist. The world is very seriously overpopulated now.

Here is Roy Becks explanation in gumballs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

....

The Europeans didn't even know that North America existed in the early 1,500's. Williamsburg, Virginia may have been an early attempt to populate but Plymouth, Massachusetts was the first successful colony in 1620. Then it was a few hundred, then hundreds of thousands, then millions and then hundreds of millions.

....

But of course the Americas was richly populated with people when the Europeans got here.

And also there were settlements in the northeast by Scandinavians before the 1500's. They just never took hold.

I don't think military concerns are important when considering ideal populations. Too much of military confrontations have to do with populations encroaching on one another, especially these days. And again, even with the military, quality wins out over quantity every time.

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>

According to environmental report I read many years ago, from a biological, environmental standpoint the land mass of the USA should accommodate 50 million.
[/url]

Sources?

To clarify my above post concerning population shrinkage...

I believe the United States currently has a population of something like something around 210,000,000 as a high figure.

Illegals should be deported in order to open up some jobs for American citizens, there is no argument from me.

However, looking at it from a purely business angle:

Business is heartless, with loyalty only towards a PERCEIVED bottom line concerning profit.

People are a commodity to business, a part of trade. In various guises people are a market to extract profit from, an employable asset to be capitalized, a burden to be discarded (the disabled, incompetent, and elderly), and even a potential crisis or conflict to engineer and exploit with an aim towards profit. People sell productive time, often to the highest low ball offer of compensation.

No matter the state of the economy. Tens of millions of illegals in good times to displace "overpriced" domestic employees, fewer in bad times to the same result, what matters to big business is an over sized pool of people to over compete for jobs in whatever job market there is.

!9th century Robber Barons Jay Gould (Union Pacific) and Cornelius Vanderbilt (shipping) said respectively "I can hire half of the working class to hire the other half" and "The public be damned, I'm working for my stock holders".

The burden of welfare or other public subsidization of illegal aliens by society is not of a major concern or consequence to business -it is paid through the public tax burden rather than corporate payroll - a cost of the public subsidizing business.

I'll get into this some more tomorrow or so concerning trade, ursury, and some more, I'm tired.

[ilbegone]

This thread wandered off topic. To view discussion about the white nationalist alert, go to the first post and read the thread through.


*********

A bird in the hand is worth what it will bring. --Anonymous



The other day while on the freeway, it struck me as to what is the true nature of our economy.

The early European exploration and far flung imperial colonization was rooted in merchantalist competition and cutting out the overland middle man in the spice trade. However, one had to either have sufficient wealth to outfit an expedition, have a wealthy sponsor who would gamble on success and take a cut of the anticipated profit, or the money had to borrowed.

I believe that, due in part on Spanish royal proclivity to run an empire on the cheap as well as a continual attempt to monopolize trade in the Spanish colonies (glacial, limited, and prohibitively costly), the majority of pre revolutionary American colonial wealth was derived from smuggling and piracy. Once again there had to be financial backing and a return, ships don't build themselves for free and crews don't sail for the simple fun of it.

Post revolutionary America expanded west and business interests took advantage of natural resources and trade. Carnegie's foundry provided steel for locomotives and rails, which moved beef from Kansas City to slaughter houses in Chicago, and coal to foundries which smelted the steel as well as coal to power locomotives.

People were transported as well as two way shipment of goods to and from towns and rail head settlements, jumping points for more growth. All this required investors and stock holders, as well as subsidization in part by the government, such as the checkerboard pattern of land grant to the railroads on either side of the right of way.

The gold rush in California required some mode of transportation, either by overland expedition or by ship around the horn of Tierra Del Fuego. Yet, with few exceptions, the wealth derived from the gold rush was not in busting one's personal posterior extracting gold from the earth, but by providing outfit gear, supplies, booze, and whores.

The crash, which came about by reckless investment gambling and over leveraging of stocks, as I understand it. In spite of great deficits in a bankrupt nation, I believe the war brought us out of the depression - I'm not sure how. Maybe it had to do with mobilization of great industrial might to prosecute the war, and veterans leaving the cities after the war.

The post war move to the suburbs, which became truly insane over the last two decades, was made possible by investors and an efficient transportation system. Simplified, trees were cut and milled; lumber shipped, houses built, sold, and financed, and everyone in the chain got a cut. Wages were paid, returns on investment were profitable.

Then greed got in the way again, as well as political agenda. Reckless investment, fraud, lenders strong armed by politicians into providing "affordable housing" to those who could not afford to buy in a market burdened by wildly over inflated real estate values. Which led to the "liar loans" and further contribution to artificially inflated values as well as blind shedding of human assets by corporate interests.

So (as I see it) we crashed again.

We don't make much of anything anymore. About our only exports are money and high tech weapons, we import much of what we consume as well as take in people who enter and stay without benefit of legal port of entry. As I have stated, we are becoming a nation of leaf rakers, hamburger flippers, and welfare recipients. What's left of the middle class is due to take a massive redistribution of whatever wealth they have left through taxes. And through it all, our politicians pander and dither and make hollow promises while collecting "campaign contributions" as well as preparing for a post political career as a special interest lobbyist.

"An honest politician is one who when he is bought will stay bought." Simon Cameron, US Senator, 26th United States Secretary of War.

There has to be some greed, or nothing will get done. the trick is to balance greed with what should be satisfaction, or at least control excessive greed by those who pull the strings and reasonably oil the gears of the machine - the common man who's labor makes it all possible. Capital investment doesn't provide return without someone else's labor. On that note, we need to kick some Congressional ass.

And, as stated before, we need to find another economic model which provides prosperity without insane growth and boom - bust cycles, and worn out 60's alternative social theory isn't going to do the trick.


The politician is someone who deals in man's problems of adjustment. To ask a politician to lead us is to ask the tail of a dog to lead the dog.
--Buckminster Fuller