By Frosty Wooldridge
June 14, 2012

“Most Western elites continue urging the wealthy West not to stem the migrant tide [that adds 80 million net gain annually to the planet], but to absorb our global brothers and sisters until their horrid ordeal has been endured and shared by all—ten billion humans packed onto an ecologically devastated planet.” Dr. Otis Graham, Unguarded Gates

Throughout the world in 2012, we see accelerating consequences of population growth. We see starving people from third world countries migrating in large numbers to first world countries. In Somalia today, a mass migration floods into Kenya and neighboring countries.
But once they get there, what’s next?

There is no plan. No path. No understanding of that it means to just feed starving people!

Migration, the Underestimated Variable.

Lindsey Grant, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environment and Population talks about what America faces with endless immigration.

“This takes us to the issue of migration,” said Grant. “Migration is and probably will be a principal driver of population changes as people flee poverty for richer lives. Where the United The UN 2010 Population Projections: A Proposal Page 3 States and Europe are heading will be determined in large degree by the levels of immigration from poorer societies.

“Estimates and forecasts of migration are particularly weak because much migration is illegal and unrecorded in official statistics. The Census Bureau derives its estimates and projections from a “2006 survey and administrative data”, and does not elaborate. The official U.S. data for immigration are irrelevant, since they record persons legally admitted, whether or not they were already here illegally.

“The Population Division should have better data, since it uses records from both sending and receiving countries, but their data from Mexico (our principal source of migration) do not tally with those for the United States. For what they are worth, the two projections of net U.S. immigration differ enough to explain much of the difference in the population projections.

“The Population Division shows a peak of 1.7 million per year in 1995- 2000 and a decline to 991 thousand in 2005-2010; it projects annual immigration at 900+ thousand through 2050 and a decline to zero in 2095-2100. The Census Bureau shows similar figures for the past decade, but net immigration rises to 1.318 million in 2010 and thereafter is projected to rise steadily to 2.055 million by 2050.

“Note that these are net figures, but the U.S. Government has not attempted to measure emigration since 1957– and migration figures are hopelessly entangled with non-migratory flows. I have no idea where either organization got its figures. Until the 1980s, the Population Division and the U.S. Census Bureau ignored migration as a factor in population growth, and both are still trying to come to grips with it. Both groups have regularly had to raise their U.S. population estimates and projections as the decennial Census has shown them too low. And the Census itself is hardly the final answer, since illegal immigrants are likely to avoid enumeration. Immigration raises the present population numbers.

“It also raises growth rates, since much migration typically is from poorer groups in poorer countries, with higher birth rates. The real expert on U.S. fertility is the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which assembles the raw data. It thinks that the U.S. total fertility rate (TFR) dropped to about 1.7 – far below replacement level – in the 1970s. It has risen gradually since then but has stayed below replacement level except for 2006 and 2007. It went back down slightly to 2.08 in 2008, and down another 4% to 2.007 in 2009. Hispanic women drove much of the post-1970s increase in fertility. The TFR for non-Hispanic White women is still only 1.78. (National Vital Statistics Reports vol.59, No.3, 12-21-10: “Births: Preliminary Data for 2009", Table 1) But NCHS knows the numbers of births, not the rates. It uses Census Bureau population data.

“If the population figures are too low, the imputed fertility rates will be too high. This phenomenon is usually ignored, but it is particularly important with regard to U.S. Hispanics because of their surging numbers and high fertility. The 2008 TFR among U.S. Hispanics is given as 2.91, declining (fortunately!) to 2.73 in 2009. Both figures are remarkably high. If, as I have suggested, we have failed to count all that growth, and if we speculate that the Hispanic population is 10% larger than has been counted, that would lower its 2009 TFR to 2.49. That is good news, and it is bad news.

"The raging monster upon the land is population growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct. To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people, but to poor ideology and land-use management is sophistic.” Harvard scholar and biologist E.O. Wilson

“It would mean that Hispanics are a bit less fertile than we thought, which is good if we don’t want population growth. But it would mean that the total present U.S. population is larger than we think.

“The Population Division is having comparable problems with its estimates and projections for Europe. Italy is the prime example, both because of its extremely low fertility (1.2) and its role as the favored pathway from the Arab lands into Europe. In 1998, the Population Division thought that Italy's population had peaked in 1995 at 57.4 million and would be declining past 55.8 million in 2010. The new figures give the 2010 population as 60.6 million, and rising.

“The difference is 9%, and the continuing growth markedly changes the perspective. The surge of Arabs through Italy into Europe, driven by the present instabilities in the Middle East, has led to a sharp debate within the European Union as to whether it can afford to keep the Schengen accords, which eliminated border inspections within much of Europe. Denmark has announced that it is re-imposing the inspections.”

"Unlimited population growth cannot be sustained; you cannot sustain growth in the rates of consumption of resources. No species can overrun the carrying capacity of a finite land mass. This Law cannot be repealed and is not negotiable.” Dr. Albert Bartlett,, University of Colorado, USA.

Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.

© 2012 Frosty Wooldridge - All Rights Reserved

Frosty Wooldridge possesses a unique view of the world, cultures and families in that he has bicycled around the globe 100,000 miles, on six continents and six times across the United States in the past 30 years. His published books include: "HANDBOOK FOR TOURING BICYCLISTS"; “STRIKE THREE! TAKE YOUR BASE”; “IMMIGRATION’S UNARMED INVASION: DEADLY CONSEQUENCES”; “MOTORCYCLE ADVENTURE TO ALASKA: INTO THE WIND—A TEEN NOVEL”; “BICYCLING AROUND THE WORLD: TIRE TRACKS FOR YOUR IMAGINATION”; “AN EXTREME ENCOUNTER: ANTARCTICA.” His next book: “TILTING THE STATUE OF LIBERTY INTO A SWAMP.” He lives in Denver, Colorado.