White Nationalist Alert

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

...

"... We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."

The reproductive strategy of human beings is quality over quantity. The reproductive strategy of rodents and insects, like cockroaches, is quantity over quality.

This is part of why our current public education system is broken. It is trying to produce human beings while the parents who are sending their anchor babies there are reproducing like insects.

[DerailAmnesty.com]

Originally Posted by Twoller

The reproductive strategy of human beings is quality over quantity. The reproductive strategy of rodents and insects, like cockroaches, is quantity over quality.

This is part of why our current public education system is broken. It is trying to produce human beings while the parents who are sending their anchor babies there are reproducing like insects.

That's sort of accurate.

The reproductive strategy of people in agricultural or blighted/impoverished areas is to crank kids out in volume (labor assistance and improved chances that some will survive difficult conditions).

The reproductive strategy of people in developed capitalist societies (i.e. just about any place you'd actually want to live) is few or no children (less expense, low child mortality rates), which is essentially why we are seeing this immigration dilemma across the globe. It's a byproduct of successful capitalism I'm not sure anyone anticipated. If you have an education and live in a city or suburban area, it is a more rational decision to reproduce later in life and to have fewer offspring. It's more cost effective.

The problem with this, and this is happening in every advanced society (Japan, UK, Australia, France, U.S. ... even So. Korea now) is that the people you want to have children (can afford kids and enjoy middle-class or better existences) aren't producing at replacement levels or better. That's why the impoverished are flooding into advanced nations around the globe to fill the vacuum.

The Europeans have been getting the Sheets and the U.S. has been getting Mexicans and Central Americans.

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com

The problem with this, and this is happening in every advanced society (Japan, UK, Australia, France, U.S. ... even So. Korea now) is that the people you want to have children (can afford kids and enjoy middle-class or better existences) aren't producing at replacement levels or better. That's why the impoverished are flooding into advanced nations around the globe to fill the vacuum.

I don't think that really explains it. I have to confess that I was steadily employed between 1981 and 1996, there is a lot of stuff I didn't pay great attention to during that time period (I had "mine"), but did observe what happened in the construction trades during that time period. Prior to 1981 I was primarily employed in the construction industry.

I don't believe the work situation was all that good in the 70's, and a lot of employment was derailed during the 1981 recession. Then when the recession came to an end, American employers hired illegals rather than idled American workers within their own trades - an industry originally full of American citizens was now taken over by illegal foreign labor almost overnight.

I believe it had more to do with contractors who got their licenses during the late 70's stabbing each other in the back for work, and felt that hiring three or four unskilled illegals for the price of one skilled Americans was worth it to underbid their competitors. And if you actually saw the construction as it went up then you would see what shit work was being thrown up and sold to unknowing home buyers. That is until homeowners banded together en mass to sue developers for faulty construction.

It's been going on ever since, with some better than others.

As I said, I was busy with other things so I wasn't even aware of the 1986 amnesty law until 2005.

I believe that after the 1981 recession ended and so many Americans were still out of work that there was a loud outcry concerning illegality, so the politicians in Washington cynically put together a "reform" law which, if enforced, would have largely taken care of the illegal immigration problem. However, Washington refused to fund or enforce its own immigration law.

All these years later, during the worst economic period since the depression, I know people who have been out of work for a long time, and still Washington refuses to enforce immigration law in order to clear up some jobs for American citizens - of all races.

I think illegal immigration was originally more about who gets a bigger piece of the dollar rather than low national reproductive rates. Now I believe the driving factor is the Democratic party gaining a constituency through amnesty they just can't muster Among Americans.

[wetibbe]

Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com

That's sort of accurate.

The reproductive strategy of people in agricultural or blighted/impoverished areas is to crank kids out in volume (labor assistance and improved chances that some will survive difficult conditions).

The reproductive strategy of people in developed capitalist societies (i.e. just about any place you'd actually want to live) is few or no children (less expense, low child mortality rates), which is essentially why we are seeing this immigration dilemma across the globe. It's a byproduct of successful capitalism I'm not sure anyone anticipated. If you have an education and live in a city or suburban area, it is a more rational decision to reproduce later in life and to have fewer offspring. It's more cost effective.

The problem with this, and this is happening in every advanced society (Japan, UK, Australia, France, U.S. ... even So. Korea now) is that the people you want to have children (can afford kids and enjoy middle-class or better existences) aren't producing at replacement levels or better. That's why the impoverished are flooding into advanced nations around the globe to fill the vacuum.
The Europeans have been getting the Sheets and the U.S. has been getting Mexicans and Central Americans.

Absolutely 100% correct. The USA recognizes the problems of excess population and is cutting back.

The infernal illegal aliens are spoiling it all by flooding in and dropping anchor babies by the car loads.

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com

That's sort of accurate.

The reproductive strategy of people in agricultural or blighted/impoverished areas is to crank kids out in volume (labor assistance and improved chances that some will survive difficult conditions).

The reproductive strategy of people in developed capitalist societies (i.e. just about any place you'd actually want to live) is few or no children (less expense, low child mortality rates), which is essentially why we are seeing this immigration dilemma across the globe. It's a byproduct of successful capitalism I'm not sure anyone anticipated. If you have an education and live in a city or suburban area, it is a more rational decision to reproduce later in life and to have fewer offspring. It's more cost effective.

The problem with this, and this is happening in every advanced society (Japan, UK, Australia, France, U.S. ... even So. Korea now) is that the people you want to have children (can afford kids and enjoy middle-class or better existences) aren't producing at replacement levels or better. That's why the impoverished are flooding into advanced nations around the globe to fill the vacuum.

The Europeans have been getting the Sheets and the U.S. has been getting Mexicans and Central Americans.

That's not true, and it is a commonly held myth that industrial societies are not sustaining their populations. You completely ignore the labor demands of industrial societies. But the labor demands of industrial societies is decresing as technology increases. Robots have largely replace human labor in just about every level of productivity and in just about every economic sector.

And also, the middle class used to take up a lot of labor in the workplace that is also now being done by computers.

The only reason that people are floodiing industrialized countries is because of Catholic and Muslim license to do so. The countries where these beliefs dominate are incapable of sustaining their own population, both ideologically and economically and they must export their surplus populations. It is a perfect strategy for them to export them to countries where peoples have been able to live free and protect themselves from the influence of these beliefs. They prop them up there and the natural resistance to the degenerative influence of these belief systems create foment and corrode the productivity of the host countries.

We don't need these people here. We don't need people who reproduce over one child per family. The truth is, we never did. The whole notion that agricultural families have to be large to sustain themselves is a myth. Large agricultural families have only ever served empires and emperial belief systems. Their children were born to be serfs with the bulk of their productivity going somewhere else.

[PochoPatriot]

Originally Posted by Twoller

That's not true, and it is a commonly held myth that industrial societies are not sustaining their populations.

Looks to me as if you are wrong.

[DerailAmnesty.com]

Originally Posted by Twoller

That's not true, and it is a commonly held myth that industrial societies are not sustaining their populations. You completely ignore the labor demands of industrial societies. But the labor demands of industrial societies is decresing as technology increases. Robots have largely replace human labor in just about every level of productivity and in just about every economic sector.

... We don't need people who reproduce over one child per family. The truth is, we never did. The whole notion that agricultural families have to be large to sustain themselves is a myth. Large agricultural families have only ever served empires and emperial belief systems. Their children were born to be serfs with the bulk of their productivity going somewhere else.

I can see that a couple of you are unconvinced by what I stated (regarding the large-scale flow of the impoverished and undereducated into prosperous countries largely b/c of the native population's failure to adequately reproduce in sufficient numbers). The only thing I'll say in response is that you might want to check out two books that cover the subject in pretty good detail:

The Pentagon's New Map - Thomas P.M. Barnett

The Death Of The West - Pat Buchanan

Insofar as what is asserted above by Twoller, dude, you're just flat-out wrong.

A reproduction level of 1.0 children per couple would be a disaster for any first world society. To the extent that the nation or area would be unrecognizable and/or gone in a matter of decades.

Reasons: The population would have a much higher average age than most other nations and there would be an imbalance among the age groups. The two biggest problems are that 1) in a relatively short period of time, there wouldn't be enough workers to fill necessary jobs, and 2) the people young enough to work would be drowned in tax burden to support the giant pool of retirees.

1.0 would be a first magnitude catastrophe in any modernized nation. Even Japan is not close to being that low and that country is already undergoing serious hardship resulting from an aging population and low reproduction numbers ... to the extent that the Japanese are going to have to do what most of them consider to be the near unthinkable - allow in a lot of immigrants.

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com

....

Insofar as what is asserted above by Twoller, dude, you're just flat-out wrong.

A reproduction level of 1.0 children per couple would be a disaster for any first world society. To the extent that the nation or area would be unrecognizable and/or gone in a matter of decades.

Reasons: The population would have a much higher average age than most other nations and there would be an imbalance among the age groups. The two biggest problems are that 1) in a relatively short period of time, there wouldn't be enough workers to fill necessary jobs, and 2) the people young enough to work would be drowned in tax burden to support the giant pool of retirees.

1.0 would be a first magnitude catastrophe in any modernized nation. Even Japan is not close to being that low and that country is already undergoing serious hardship resulting from an aging population and low reproduction numbers ... to the extent that the Japanese are going to have to do what most of them consider to be the near unthinkable - allow in a lot of immigrants.

Not only is this not true, but it is, in fact, pro-illegal immigration propoganda.

The most important thing overlooked in the myths you cite is not just the lack of need for increased employment, which you ignore. But also, dwindling resources.

Healthy economics is never based on a pyramid scheme of constant population growth. Not at the local level, not at the national level and certainly not at the global level.

If we have to allow immigrants in -- and this would inevitably be illegal immigrants -- to pay for old age, then what are the old people doing in the countries this imported labor is coming from? Does anyone want to be old in a country like Mexico or any of the communities these people are coming from?

No. Population growth always has to stop somewhere in a healthy cycle of a relatively constant number of people that works in some way for everyone within a nation. Else what is a national economy for?

The Russians are also not sustaining population growth. And my sense is that they are not as concerned about it. Putin argues that Russians need to reproduce more, but he himself is a product of Stalin's Soviet baby farming policies. Nothing good came out of that.

If Russia can sustain a low population level into this century, they could wind up with a standard of living better than the Germans before the middle of this century. More resources for fewer people in a free market industrial economy driven by quality labor supported by mechanization and information technology.

[ilbegone]

I'm not sure about all this, I think our "immigration" situation over the last thirty years is more of an economic nature rather than a replacement problem.

As in the old model of subsistence farmers, there has to be enough of a younger population to support the elderly, but I don't believe it would be at such a high rate of young to old.

What I saw in the 80's was not due to a lack of able bodied and skilled workers, but a recession recovery in America and a small Mexican middle class essentially wiped out by a necessary devaluation of the Peso after the oil industry crisis in the early 80's. American employers took advantage of the situation by hiring illegal foreigners for pennies on the dollar. Word got out, and the third world flood began.

One of the problems with the way our economy is set up is that if a locality or region isn't growing, it's dying. Hence all the housing boom fueled in part by all those people coming here in such a great mass, "white flight" from overpopulated cities increasingly packed with foreigners, the notion of a house being an investment/ATM rather than a home, and artificial inflation of real estate values. Then the inevitable collapse.

As well as the fact that we can pave over only so much farmland before the population becomes unsustainable.

Currently we do have quite a number of older people who aren't quite done with their working lives who are unemployed while a stroll through town will find all sorts of jobs filled with people who shouldn't be here in the first place and wouldn't be if the government had enforced the 1986 immigration/amnesty law. I know people of all ages who have been out of work for a couple of years who would do those jobs.

I believe our situation at this time is more about who gets the money, or perhaps who gets a bigger cut than an aging population, and it's in the interest of "got mine" Republican party backed business to have a excess of people competing for jobs, as well as a Democratic party "leadership" blindly seeking a constituency.

Regardless of how many citizens lose their homes or people in their fifties who end up sleeping on their PARENT'S couch.

Importing people while exporting jobs as well as shoveling all our capital to China just isn't going to work, and either people in Congress are too stupid to see it, or they just don't friggin' care.

[ohighlass]

I heard something last week that farmers in No Cal were offering picking jobs to anyone unemployed due to the recession. Odd, I say, that illegals have "moved" (or taken over, if you will) into construction and blue collar jobs like trucking; only to have dispossed Americans offered the jobs that THEY NO LONGER WILL DO. Something's wrong with this picture. I remember when those jobs required apprenticeships and memberships into unions that actually cared about their people - not just the money from the dues.

Maybe this is the wrong thread as it has nothing to do with white nationalists, really.