http://www.fairdebate.org/service/getFeed.kickAction?quantity=25 New blogs from FAIR_HQ on FAIRDebate Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:38:14 GMT Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:38:14 GMT comments@fairus.org (FAIR_HQ) comments@fairus.org (FAIR_HQ) KickApps Feed Builder 2010-08-20T20:38:14Z 30 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/searchEverything.kickAction?as=117906&sortType=recent 0 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Gallup-Poll-Shows-Millions-Would-Move-to-US/BLOG/2569679/117906.html "Amid an ongoing debate in the U.S. on immigration from Mexico, Gallup estimates 6.2 million Mexican adults say they would like to move permanently to the United States if given the chance. That's close to half of the 14 million Mexicans -- or 19% of the adult population -- who say they would like to resettle somewhere else; would-be migrants in Mexico choose Canada and Spain as their other top desired destinations," the Gallup polling organization said earlier this summer. "While Gallup's migration findings reflect people's aspirations rather than their intentions, they reveal the desires of potential migrants around the world -- an important consideration for leaders seeking to proactively manage migration and migrant policy in their countries." "Amid an ongoing debate in the U.S. on immigration from Mexico, Gallup estimates 6.2 million Mexican adults say they would like to move permanently to the United States if given the chance. That's close to half of the 14 million Mexicans -- or 19% of the adult population -- who say they would like to resettle somewhere else; would-be migrants in Mexico choose Canada and Spain as their other top desired destinations," the Gallup polling organization said earlier this summer. "While Gallup's migration findings reflect people's aspirations rather than their intentions, they reveal the desires of potential migrants around the world -- an important consideration for leaders seeking to proactively manage migration and migrant policy in their countries." Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:38:14 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Gallup-Poll-Shows-Millions-Would-Move-to-US/BLOG/2569679/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-08-20T20:38:14Z FAIRDebate "Amid an ongoing debate in the U.S. on immigration from Mexico, Gallup estimates 6.2 million Mexican adults say they would like to move permanently to the United States if given the chance. That's close to half of the 14 million Mexicans -- or 19% of the adult population -- who say they would like to resettle somewhere else; would-be migrants in Mexico choose Canada and Spain as their other top desired destinations," the Gallup polling organization said earlier this summer. "While Gallup's migration findings reflect people's aspirations rather than their intentions, they reveal the desires of potential migrants around the world -- an important consideration for leaders seeking to proactively manage migration and migrant policy in their countries." nonadult false Gallup Poll Shows Millions Would Move to U.S. text blog 7 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 2569679 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Confessions-of-a-recovering-environmentalist/BLOG/2562412/117906.html Paul Kingsnorth, author of several books including Real England: The Battle Against the Bland (Portobello, 2008), talks about the change in environmentalism from a movement concerned about ecology to one primarily about political activism. "Now it seemed that environmentalism was not about wildness or ecocentrism or the other-than-human world and our relationship to it. Instead it was about (human) social justice and (human) equality and (human) progress and ensuring that all these things could be realised without degrading the (human) resource-base which we used to call nature back when we were being naïve and problematic. Suddenly, never-ending economic growth was a good thing after all: the poor needed it to get rich, which was their right. To square the circle, for those who still realised there was a circle, we were told that "(human) social justice and environmental justice go hand in hand" - a suggestion of such bizarre inaccuracy that it could surely only be wishful thinking," he says. Read his whole post at Energy Bulletin. Paul Kingsnorth, author of several books including Real England: The Battle Against the Bland (Portobello, 2008), talks about the change in environmentalism from a movement concerned about ecology to one primarily about political activism. "Now it seemed that environmentalism was not about wildness or ecocentrism or the other-than-human world and our relationship to it. Instead it was about (human) social justice and (human) equality and (human) progress and ensuring that all these things could be realised without degrading the (human) resource-base which we used to call nature back when we were being naïve and problematic. Suddenly, never-ending economic growth was a good thing after all: the poor needed it to get rich, which was their right. To square the circle, for those who still realised there was a circle, we were told that "(human) social justice and environmental justice go hand in hand" - a suggestion of such bizarre inaccuracy that it could surely only be wishful thinking," he says. Read his whole post at Energy Bulletin. Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:50:54 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Confessions-of-a-recovering-environmentalist/BLOG/2562412/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-08-18T18:50:54Z FAIRDebate Paul Kingsnorth, author of several books including Real England: The Battle Against the Bland (Portobello, 2008), talks about the change in environmentalism from a movement concerned about ecology to one primarily about political activism. "Now it seemed that environmentalism was not about wildness or ecocentrism or the other-than-human world and our relationship to it. Instead it was about (human) social justice and (human) equality and (human) progress and ensuring that all these things could be realised without degrading the (human) resource-base which we used to call nature back when we were being naïve and problematic. Suddenly, never-ending economic growth was a good thing after all: the poor needed it to get rich, which was their right. To square the circle, for those who still realised there was a circle, we were told that "(human) social justice and environmental justice go hand in hand" - a suggestion of such bizarre inaccuracy that it could surely only be wishful thinking," he says. Read his whole post at Energy Bulletin. nonadult false Confessions of a recovering environmentalist text blog 11 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 2562412 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Global-Warming-Could-Force-Millions-to-US/BLOG/2528341/117906.html "A reduction in crop yields caused by global warming could mean up to 6.7 million additional Mexicans will emigrate to the United States by 2080, says a study by Princeton University researchers," theChristian Science Monitor reports. The study itself, by Alan Kruger and two other professors at Princeton, focuses on agricultural yields by studying the 1995 - 2005 period, to determine the impact of an expected decline in yield from warming over the next 80 years. The study's appendix has more information about how the calculations were done. The total calculated "extra" migration is an estimate, although most media reports picked the high number of 6.7 million and not the lower 1.4 million. "A reduction in crop yields caused by global warming could mean up to 6.7 million additional Mexicans will emigrate to the United States by 2080, says a study by Princeton University researchers," theChristian Science Monitor reports. The study itself, by Alan Kruger and two other professors at Princeton, focuses on agricultural yields by studying the 1995 - 2005 period, to determine the impact of an expected decline in yield from warming over the next 80 years. The study's appendix has more information about how the calculations were done. The total calculated "extra" migration is an estimate, although most media reports picked the high number of 6.7 million and not the lower 1.4 million. Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:05:01 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Global-Warming-Could-Force-Millions-to-US/BLOG/2528341/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-08-04T19:05:01Z FAIRDebate "A reduction in crop yields caused by global warming could mean up to 6.7 million additional Mexicans will emigrate to the United States by 2080, says a study by Princeton University researchers," theChristian Science Monitor reports. The study itself, by Alan Kruger and two other professors at Princeton, focuses on agricultural yields by studying the 1995 - 2005 period, to determine the impact of an expected decline in yield from warming over the next 80 years. The study's appendix has more information about how the calculations were done. The total calculated "extra" migration is an estimate, although most media reports picked the high number of 6.7 million and not the lower 1.4 million. nonadult false Global Warming Could Force Millions to U.S.? text blog 16 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 2528341 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Environmentalist-Guide/BLOG/2333903/117906.html The Environmentalist's Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy The Environmentalist’s Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy makes the connection between one of the most important issues facing Americans in their everyday lives — urban sprawl — and its principal cause: immigration-related population growth. All too often, so-called environmentalists pretend as if this connection does not exist. Can you imagine discussing the U.S. trade deficit without mentioning China? Or analyzing the looming Social Security crisis with no mention of retiring baby boomers? Well, that’s what is happening when environmentalists discuss the problem of urban sprawl or efforts to reduce U.S. CO2 emissions without mentioning immigration and its enormous impact on population growth.   [image] Read the full report The Environmentalist's Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy The Environmentalist’s Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy makes the connection between one of the most important issues facing Americans in their everyday lives — urban sprawl — and its principal cause: immigration-related population growth. All too often, so-called environmentalists pretend as if this connection does not exist. Can you imagine discussing the U.S. trade deficit without mentioning China? Or analyzing the looming Social Security crisis with no mention of retiring baby boomers? Well, that’s what is happening when environmentalists discuss the problem of urban sprawl or efforts to reduce U.S. CO2 emissions without mentioning immigration and its enormous impact on population growth.   [image] Read the full report Tue, 11 May 2010 14:49:24 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Environmentalist-Guide/BLOG/2333903/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-05-11T14:49:24Z FAIRDebate The Environmentalist's Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy The Environmentalist’s Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy makes the connection between one of the most important issues facing Americans in their everyday lives — urban sprawl — and its principal cause: immigration-related population growth. All too often, so-called environmentalists pretend as if this connection does not exist. Can you imagine discussing the U.S. trade deficit without mentioning China? Or analyzing the looming Social Security crisis with no mention of retiring baby boomers? Well, that’s what is happening when environmentalists discuss the problem of urban sprawl or efforts to reduce U.S. CO2 emissions without mentioning immigration and its enormous impact on population growth.   [image] Read the full report nonadult false The Environmentalist Guide text blog 217 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 1 0 2333903 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Groups-that-want-to-reduce-immigration-warn-of-an-unsustainable-population-surge/BLOG/1931052/117906.html Some national groups advocating reduced immigration contend that the United States faces unsustainable population growth, due in part to illegal immigrants, that would lead to greater unemployment for legal workers. Statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau project a population of between 313 million and 552 million by 2050, up from the current 309 million. Click here for the whole story. Some national groups advocating reduced immigration contend that the United States faces unsustainable population growth, due in part to illegal immigrants, that would lead to greater unemployment for legal workers. Statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau project a population of between 313 million and 552 million by 2050, up from the current 309 million. Click here for the whole story. Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:08:49 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Groups-that-want-to-reduce-immigration-warn-of-an-unsustainable-population-surge/BLOG/1931052/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-03-04T15:08:49Z FAIRDebate Some national groups advocating reduced immigration contend that the United States faces unsustainable population growth, due in part to illegal immigrants, that would lead to greater unemployment for legal workers. Statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau project a population of between 313 million and 552 million by 2050, up from the current 309 million. Click here for the whole story. nonadult false Groups that want to reduce immigration warn of an unsustainable population surge text blog 209 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1931052 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Population-Growth-Will-Make-2050-Emission-Cuts-Hard/BLOG/1805004/117906.html The United States will have a much harder time meeting goals for 2050 greenhouse gas emission cuts than Russia and a number of other wealthy countries that have decreasing populations, according to the results of a Reuters survey. Click here to read the whole story. The United States will have a much harder time meeting goals for 2050 greenhouse gas emission cuts than Russia and a number of other wealthy countries that have decreasing populations, according to the results of a Reuters survey. Click here to read the whole story. Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:51:29 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Population-Growth-Will-Make-2050-Emission-Cuts-Hard/BLOG/1805004/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-02-03T16:51:29Z FAIRDebate The United States will have a much harder time meeting goals for 2050 greenhouse gas emission cuts than Russia and a number of other wealthy countries that have decreasing populations, according to the results of a Reuters survey. Click here to read the whole story. nonadult false US Population Growth Will Make 2050 Emission Cuts Hard text blog 231 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1805004 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Immigration-Will-Keep-Australia-From-Meeting-C02-Goals/BLOG/1805001/117906.html Monash University's Centre for Population and Urban Research has produced a report saying that immigration will keep Australia from reducing C02 emissions. "The paper's authors calculated that if the Government did not take steps to reduce emissions, emissions would grow by 40 per cent by 2020, and 83 per cent of that increase would come from the extra people. The Government wants more people because it means more young taxpayers as the rest of the population ages," the Herald Sun wrote. Monash University's Centre for Population and Urban Research has produced a report saying that immigration will keep Australia from reducing C02 emissions. "The paper's authors calculated that if the Government did not take steps to reduce emissions, emissions would grow by 40 per cent by 2020, and 83 per cent of that increase would come from the extra people. The Government wants more people because it means more young taxpayers as the rest of the population ages," the Herald Sun wrote. Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:50:10 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Immigration-Will-Keep-Australia-From-Meeting-C02-Goals/BLOG/1805001/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-02-03T16:50:10Z FAIRDebate Monash University's Centre for Population and Urban Research has produced a report saying that immigration will keep Australia from reducing C02 emissions. "The paper's authors calculated that if the Government did not take steps to reduce emissions, emissions would grow by 40 per cent by 2020, and 83 per cent of that increase would come from the extra people. The Government wants more people because it means more young taxpayers as the rest of the population ages," the Herald Sun wrote. nonadult false Immigration Will Keep Australia From Meeting C02 Goals text blog 188 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1805001 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Mass-Amnesty-Group-Tries-to-Shut-Off-Debate-Over-Growth-Sustainability/BLOG/1716455/117906.html In response to charges of “hatred” by the open-border radical group Imagine2050, Progressives for Immigration Reform Executive Director Leah Durant says that if the group considers all organizations that examine immigration policy for its impact on U.S. growth and environmental sustainability as “anti immigrant,” they also labeling the late Barbara Jordan, and all Americans concerned with the swelling of our population as such. The fact is that, according to the U.S. Census, the United States has the highest annual growth rate of any developed nation, and that it is time for policies that address the impact of uncontrolled growth on our environment. Click here to read Ms. Durant’s response in its entirety. In response to charges of “hatred” by the open-border radical group Imagine2050, Progressives for Immigration Reform Executive Director Leah Durant says that if the group considers all organizations that examine immigration policy for its impact on U.S. growth and environmental sustainability as “anti immigrant,” they also labeling the late Barbara Jordan, and all Americans concerned with the swelling of our population as such. The fact is that, according to the U.S. Census, the United States has the highest annual growth rate of any developed nation, and that it is time for policies that address the impact of uncontrolled growth on our environment. Click here to read Ms. Durant’s response in its entirety. Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:06:44 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Mass-Amnesty-Group-Tries-to-Shut-Off-Debate-Over-Growth-Sustainability/BLOG/1716455/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2010-01-14T21:06:44Z FAIRDebate In response to charges of “hatred” by the open-border radical group Imagine2050, Progressives for Immigration Reform Executive Director Leah Durant says that if the group considers all organizations that examine immigration policy for its impact on U.S. growth and environmental sustainability as “anti immigrant,” they also labeling the late Barbara Jordan, and all Americans concerned with the swelling of our population as such. The fact is that, according to the U.S. Census, the United States has the highest annual growth rate of any developed nation, and that it is time for policies that address the impact of uncontrolled growth on our environment. Click here to read Ms. Durant’s response in its entirety. nonadult false Mass Amnesty Group Tries to Shut Off Debate Over Growth Sustainability text blog 277 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1716455 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Population-Energy-Climate-Change-Interactive-Map/BLOG/1616386/117906.html The world's population is on track to reach 7 billion people in two years, just twelve years after reaching 6 billion. In the meantime, global climate change, as a result of human activities, is having unprecedented effects on the planet's sea level rise, weather patterns, species habitat and freshwater resources. The United States uniquely demonstrates how these two issues – population and climate change – are inextricably linked. Check out the interactive map by clicking here. The world's population is on track to reach 7 billion people in two years, just twelve years after reaching 6 billion. In the meantime, global climate change, as a result of human activities, is having unprecedented effects on the planet's sea level rise, weather patterns, species habitat and freshwater resources. The United States uniquely demonstrates how these two issues – population and climate change – are inextricably linked. Check out the interactive map by clicking here. Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:56:14 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Population-Energy-Climate-Change-Interactive-Map/BLOG/1616386/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-12-15T16:56:14Z FAIRDebate The world's population is on track to reach 7 billion people in two years, just twelve years after reaching 6 billion. In the meantime, global climate change, as a result of human activities, is having unprecedented effects on the planet's sea level rise, weather patterns, species habitat and freshwater resources. The United States uniquely demonstrates how these two issues – population and climate change – are inextricably linked. Check out the interactive map by clicking here. nonadult false U.S. Population, Energy & Climate Change Interactive Map text blog 214 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1616386 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Are-Environmentalists-In-Copenhagen-Really-Concerned-About-the-Environment/BLOG/1614168/117906.html By Eric Ruark, Research AnalystThe political elite have jetted to Copenhagen for the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) taking place December 7-18, 2009.  While being ferried around in limousines, munching on caviar sculptures, and generally emitting a huge carbon footprint, they are in the midst of discussing how the rest of us must be forced to drastically reduce our own standards of living in order to reduce global warming.  If one buys the premise of anthropogenic climate change, then one also has to accept that that there are two ways to reduce this cause and effect. The first is to reduce consumption and emissions per capita.  The second is to reduce the size of the world’s population, especially in developed countries where per capita emissions are disproportionately high.  So one has to ask: if President Obama is serious about ending global warming why does he support growing the U.S. population by tens of millions of people through immigration over the next decade, admitting those whose carbon footprint will be greater in the U.S. than it would have been in their home countries?The Copenhagen conference is not about U.S. immigration policy, but it is precisely because of our immigration policy that the United States can not provide any real leadership on environmental issues.  While the rest of the world looks to us to set an example, we can only provide bad precedent.  Given the opportunity to stabilize our population and to work toward a sustainable future, our approach has been to grow our population by 80 million over the last thirty years and to put the United States on course to reach a billion people by century’s end.  The U.S. population is rising faster than any other developed nation and our per capita energy consumption is the highest in the world.  This is environmentally and economically unsustainable, but the few who reap the financial benefits of U.S. immigration policy have funded politicians who push for amnesty and continued mass immigration at the expense of the American people.  Many Americans are skeptical about the claims being made at Copenhagen, and the release of e-mails hacked from computers at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit have only added to this growing skepticism.  It’s not that Americans are not concerned about the environment; it’s that they mistrust blatant political posturing and resent the dearth of responsible and capable governance.  The first step toward a responsible environmental policy would be to recognize the environmental impact of U.S. population growth, and to understand that our fixation on economic growth no matter the cost to the environment is a grave error.  Despite what politicians in D.C. may say, we can not continue to grow at an unprecedented rate and preserve the environment for future generations.  This is simply not possible.  We have to make a choice.We do not have to accept the doom and gloom forecasts of Al Gore, and certainly should reject his push to circumvent our democratic process so that he can “save the planet.”  We can, however, affect real and lasting change by ending our rapid population growth due to mass immigration.  Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) has reminded President Obama that any agreement signed in Copenhagen would not be binding on the U.S. unless approved by Congress.  As American citizens we can use the same democratic process to send members to Congress who will put the interests of American citizens first and foremost, and who will finally stop giving given lip-service to environmentalism and instead enact polices that actually protect the U.S. environment. By Eric Ruark, Research AnalystThe political elite have jetted to Copenhagen for the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) taking place December 7-18, 2009.  While being ferried around in limousines, munching on caviar sculptures, and generally emitting a huge carbon footprint, they are in the midst of discussing how the rest of us must be forced to drastically reduce our own standards of living in order to reduce global warming.  If one buys the premise of anthropogenic climate change, then one also has to accept that that there are two ways to reduce this cause and effect. The first is to reduce consumption and emissions per capita.  The second is to reduce the size of the world’s population, especially in developed countries where per capita emissions are disproportionately high.  So one has to ask: if President Obama is serious about ending global warming why does he support growing the U.S. population by tens of millions of people through immigration over the next decade, admitting those whose carbon footprint will be greater in the U.S. than it would have been in their home countries?The Copenhagen conference is not about U.S. immigration policy, but it is precisely because of our immigration policy that the United States can not provide any real leadership on environmental issues.  While the rest of the world looks to us to set an example, we can only provide bad precedent.  Given the opportunity to stabilize our population and to work toward a sustainable future, our approach has been to grow our population by 80 million over the last thirty years and to put the United States on course to reach a billion people by century’s end.  The U.S. population is rising faster than any other developed nation and our per capita energy consumption is the highest in the world.  This is environmentally and economically unsustainable, but the few who reap the financial benefits of U.S. immigration policy have funded politicians who push for amnesty and continued mass immigration at the expense of the American people.  Many Americans are skeptical about the claims being made at Copenhagen, and the release of e-mails hacked from computers at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit have only added to this growing skepticism.  It’s not that Americans are not concerned about the environment; it’s that they mistrust blatant political posturing and resent the dearth of responsible and capable governance.  The first step toward a responsible environmental policy would be to recognize the environmental impact of U.S. population growth, and to understand that our fixation on economic growth no matter the cost to the environment is a grave error.  Despite what politicians in D.C. may say, we can not continue to grow at an unprecedented rate and preserve the environment for future generations.  This is simply not possible.  We have to make a choice.We do not have to accept the doom and gloom forecasts of Al Gore, and certainly should reject his push to circumvent our democratic process so that he can “save the planet.”  We can, however, affect real and lasting change by ending our rapid population growth due to mass immigration.  Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) has reminded President Obama that any agreement signed in Copenhagen would not be binding on the U.S. unless approved by Congress.  As American citizens we can use the same democratic process to send members to Congress who will put the interests of American citizens first and foremost, and who will finally stop giving given lip-service to environmentalism and instead enact polices that actually protect the U.S. environment. Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:25:25 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Are-Environmentalists-In-Copenhagen-Really-Concerned-About-the-Environment/BLOG/1614168/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-12-14T19:25:25Z FAIRDebate By Eric Ruark, Research AnalystThe political elite have jetted to Copenhagen for the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) taking place December 7-18, 2009.  While being ferried around in limousines, munching on caviar sculptures, and generally emitting a huge carbon footprint, they are in the midst of discussing how the rest of us must be forced to drastically reduce our own standards of living in order to reduce global warming.  If one buys the premise of anthropogenic climate change, then one also has to accept that that there are two ways to reduce this cause and effect. The first is to reduce consumption and emissions per capita.  The second is to reduce the size of the world’s population, especially in developed countries where per capita emissions are disproportionately high.  So one has to ask: if President Obama is serious about ending global warming why does he support growing the U.S. population by tens of millions of people through immigration over the next decade, admitting those whose carbon footprint will be greater in the U.S. than it would have been in their home countries?The Copenhagen conference is not about U.S. immigration policy, but it is precisely because of our immigration policy that the United States can not provide any real leadership on environmental issues.  While the rest of the world looks to us to set an example, we can only provide bad precedent.  Given the opportunity to stabilize our population and to work toward a sustainable future, our approach has been to grow our population by 80 million over the last thirty years and to put the United States on course to reach a billion people by century’s end.  The U.S. population is rising faster than any other developed nation and our per capita energy consumption is the highest in the world.  This is environmentally and economically unsustainable, but the few who reap the financial benefits of U.S. immigration policy have funded politicians who push for amnesty and continued mass immigration at the expense of the American people.  Many Americans are skeptical about the claims being made at Copenhagen, and the release of e-mails hacked from computers at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit have only added to this growing skepticism.  It’s not that Americans are not concerned about the environment; it’s that they mistrust blatant political posturing and resent the dearth of responsible and capable governance.  The first step toward a responsible environmental policy would be to recognize the environmental impact of U.S. population growth, and to understand that our fixation on economic growth no matter the cost to the environment is a grave error.  Despite what politicians in D.C. may say, we can not continue to grow at an unprecedented rate and preserve the environment for future generations.  This is simply not possible.  We have to make a choice.We do not have to accept the doom and gloom forecasts of Al Gore, and certainly should reject his push to circumvent our democratic process so that he can “save the planet.”  We can, however, affect real and lasting change by ending our rapid population growth due to mass immigration.  Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) has reminded President Obama that any agreement signed in Copenhagen would not be binding on the U.S. unless approved by Congress.  As American citizens we can use the same democratic process to send members to Congress who will put the interests of American citizens first and foremost, and who will finally stop giving given lip-service to environmentalism and instead enact polices that actually protect the U.S. environment. copenhagen, global, warming nonadult false Are “Environmentalists” In Copenhagen Really Concerned About the Environment? text blog copenhagen,global,warming 302 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1614168 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Global-Warming-and-Population-Growth/BLOG/1533984/117906.html Bonnie Erbe writes at Politics Daily that while President Obama is talking about reducing C02 emissions, he won't address the main driver of increases in greenhouse gas emissions - population growth. Erbe says that a coalition of groups invested in mass immigration has curtailed public discussion on the merits of unlimited population growth in the U.S. Read the entire article here. Bonnie Erbe writes at Politics Daily that while President Obama is talking about reducing C02 emissions, he won't address the main driver of increases in greenhouse gas emissions - population growth. Erbe says that a coalition of groups invested in mass immigration has curtailed public discussion on the merits of unlimited population growth in the U.S. Read the entire article here. Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:42:10 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Global-Warming-and-Population-Growth/BLOG/1533984/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-12-01T20:42:10Z FAIRDebate Bonnie Erbe writes at Politics Daily that while President Obama is talking about reducing C02 emissions, he won't address the main driver of increases in greenhouse gas emissions - population growth. Erbe says that a coalition of groups invested in mass immigration has curtailed public discussion on the merits of unlimited population growth in the U.S. Read the entire article here. global warming, obama, pollution, population growth nonadult false Global Warming and Population Growth text blog global warming,obama,pollution,population growth 240 1 5.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1533984 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Land-Use-Change-an-Overlooked-Cause-of-Global-Warming/BLOG/1499656/117906.html "Across the U.S. as a whole, approximately 50 percent of the warming that has occurred since 1950 is due to land use changes (usually in the form of clearing forest for crops or cities) rather than to the emission of greenhouse gases," said Georgia Tech City and Regional Planning Professor Brian Stone. "Most large U.S. cities, including Atlanta, are warming at more than twice the rate of the planet as a whole -- a rate that is mostly attributable to land use change. As a result, emissions reduction programs -- like the cap and trade program under consideration by the U.S. Congress -- may not sufficiently slow climate change in large cities where most people live and where land use change is the dominant driver of warming." Professor Stone is publishing a paper in the December edition of Environmental Science and Technology that suggests policymakers need to address the influence of global deforestation and urbanization on climate change, in addition to greenhouse gas emissions. Read the full article on the Science Daily Web site here. "Across the U.S. as a whole, approximately 50 percent of the warming that has occurred since 1950 is due to land use changes (usually in the form of clearing forest for crops or cities) rather than to the emission of greenhouse gases," said Georgia Tech City and Regional Planning Professor Brian Stone. "Most large U.S. cities, including Atlanta, are warming at more than twice the rate of the planet as a whole -- a rate that is mostly attributable to land use change. As a result, emissions reduction programs -- like the cap and trade program under consideration by the U.S. Congress -- may not sufficiently slow climate change in large cities where most people live and where land use change is the dominant driver of warming." Professor Stone is publishing a paper in the December edition of Environmental Science and Technology that suggests policymakers need to address the influence of global deforestation and urbanization on climate change, in addition to greenhouse gas emissions. Read the full article on the Science Daily Web site here. Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:18:11 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Land-Use-Change-an-Overlooked-Cause-of-Global-Warming/BLOG/1499656/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-11-17T17:18:11Z FAIRDebate "Across the U.S. as a whole, approximately 50 percent of the warming that has occurred since 1950 is due to land use changes (usually in the form of clearing forest for crops or cities) rather than to the emission of greenhouse gases," said Georgia Tech City and Regional Planning Professor Brian Stone. "Most large U.S. cities, including Atlanta, are warming at more than twice the rate of the planet as a whole -- a rate that is mostly attributable to land use change. As a result, emissions reduction programs -- like the cap and trade program under consideration by the U.S. Congress -- may not sufficiently slow climate change in large cities where most people live and where land use change is the dominant driver of warming." Professor Stone is publishing a paper in the December edition of Environmental Science and Technology that suggests policymakers need to address the influence of global deforestation and urbanization on climate change, in addition to greenhouse gas emissions. Read the full article on the Science Daily Web site here. global warming, land use nonadult false Land Use Change an Overlooked Cause of Global Warming text blog global warming,land use 244 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1499656 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Why-Doesnt-Anyone-Talk-About-Immigration/BLOG/1481988/117906.html U.S. Overpopulation....Why Doesn't Anyone Talk About Immigration? Eric Ruark, Sr. Researcher, FAIR The size of the world’s population receives a lot of attention from scientists and academics.  The overwhelming consensus among them is that there are simply too many people already on the planet, and that earth’s burgeoning population growth is a recipe for disaster.  Most also believe that governments around the world are not taking this issue very seriously, ignoring what may become an intractable political crisis.  But what to do about it?That is the question that divides those who deal with population issues.  There are some who advocate direct government intervention in family planning, such as preventing couples from having more than one child.  Most, however, take a more moderate and humane approach, endorsing greater education on family planning, or eliminating tax incentives for couples who have multiple children.  There is a lot of room for discussion when it comes to the question of population policy.  Unfortunately, one thing that often gets left out of the discussion, but what is crucial to any public policy decision, is immigration.  Even those who work in population related fields many times choose to ignore how international migration fits into the picture.A good example of skirting the issue was the forum “Population Growth and Rising Consumption: What’s Sustainable?” sponsored by the Population Institute, the Population Media Center and the Wallace Global Fund and held on October 6, 2009.  The forum featured “five prominent experts on population, economics and sustainability” yet there was virtually no mention of immigration.  Only one speaker raised the issue, a Canadian economist and Professor of Environmental Studies at York University, who said “talking about immigration as a tool for population policy, it’s a very touchy and difficult area, but I don’t think we can shy away from it.”The problem is we are shying away from it, just as the speakers at the population forum did.  Immigration is driving population growth in the U.S., and we are on course to reach a population of one billion by the end of this century.  Isn’t that something that should be discussed by our political leaders, and shouldn’t so-called environmentalists be concerned about the ecological disaster that a billion people in the U.S. would cause?  Right now, politicians in D.C. want to pass legislation that markedly increases the number of people who come into the U.S. each year.  We might reach a billion people sooner than we think.  What lies behind the exorbitant U.S. immigration numbers is the mistaken belief that we need to grow in order to survive.  True, big business needs cheaper labor and more consumers in order to maximize their profits.  But is this in the best interest of America’s long-term needs.  In order to generate increased revenue developers will hire illegal workers and seek to build on every bit of open land.  They have politicians in their pocket, and have likewise bought off many environmental organizations.  Green, Inc, published in 2008, exposes how large corporations pay off large environmental organizations in order to win “green” endorsements.  Even Wal-Mart has gotten in on the ruse.   Surely, not all academics are paid off with corporate money.  So, why then do they remain mostly silent about immigration?  Perhaps is a larger political perspective that obstructs their view on this issue.  Or, maybe they find the topic too controversial or complex to approach.  Theoretical models are easier to deal with then the human implications of immigration policy.  Yet, “experts” should consider the human implications of failing to reduce the flow of immigrants to the U.S.Only by reducing immigration can the U.S. achieve population stability, and it is the only way to begin to achieve environmental sustainability.  That conversation has been ignored for over forty years, and any discussion of population growth or environmental policy that disregards immigration is inherently flawed and can lead to no genuine solution.  How can Americans advise others around the world to adopt sustainable population policies when our own situation is out of control?  The lesson we are teaching is that exponential growth is the key to economic prosperity, the way to the American Dream.  This is a catastrophic message to send to the rest of the world, and one that will result in catastrophe for us, as well. U.S. Overpopulation....Why Doesn't Anyone Talk About Immigration? Eric Ruark, Sr. Researcher, FAIR The size of the world’s population receives a lot of attention from scientists and academics.  The overwhelming consensus among them is that there are simply too many people already on the planet, and that earth’s burgeoning population growth is a recipe for disaster.  Most also believe that governments around the world are not taking this issue very seriously, ignoring what may become an intractable political crisis.  But what to do about it?That is the question that divides those who deal with population issues.  There are some who advocate direct government intervention in family planning, such as preventing couples from having more than one child.  Most, however, take a more moderate and humane approach, endorsing greater education on family planning, or eliminating tax incentives for couples who have multiple children.  There is a lot of room for discussion when it comes to the question of population policy.  Unfortunately, one thing that often gets left out of the discussion, but what is crucial to any public policy decision, is immigration.  Even those who work in population related fields many times choose to ignore how international migration fits into the picture.A good example of skirting the issue was the forum “Population Growth and Rising Consumption: What’s Sustainable?” sponsored by the Population Institute, the Population Media Center and the Wallace Global Fund and held on October 6, 2009.  The forum featured “five prominent experts on population, economics and sustainability” yet there was virtually no mention of immigration.  Only one speaker raised the issue, a Canadian economist and Professor of Environmental Studies at York University, who said “talking about immigration as a tool for population policy, it’s a very touchy and difficult area, but I don’t think we can shy away from it.”The problem is we are shying away from it, just as the speakers at the population forum did.  Immigration is driving population growth in the U.S., and we are on course to reach a population of one billion by the end of this century.  Isn’t that something that should be discussed by our political leaders, and shouldn’t so-called environmentalists be concerned about the ecological disaster that a billion people in the U.S. would cause?  Right now, politicians in D.C. want to pass legislation that markedly increases the number of people who come into the U.S. each year.  We might reach a billion people sooner than we think.  What lies behind the exorbitant U.S. immigration numbers is the mistaken belief that we need to grow in order to survive.  True, big business needs cheaper labor and more consumers in order to maximize their profits.  But is this in the best interest of America’s long-term needs.  In order to generate increased revenue developers will hire illegal workers and seek to build on every bit of open land.  They have politicians in their pocket, and have likewise bought off many environmental organizations.  Green, Inc, published in 2008, exposes how large corporations pay off large environmental organizations in order to win “green” endorsements.  Even Wal-Mart has gotten in on the ruse.   Surely, not all academics are paid off with corporate money.  So, why then do they remain mostly silent about immigration?  Perhaps is a larger political perspective that obstructs their view on this issue.  Or, maybe they find the topic too controversial or complex to approach.  Theoretical models are easier to deal with then the human implications of immigration policy.  Yet, “experts” should consider the human implications of failing to reduce the flow of immigrants to the U.S.Only by reducing immigration can the U.S. achieve population stability, and it is the only way to begin to achieve environmental sustainability.  That conversation has been ignored for over forty years, and any discussion of population growth or environmental policy that disregards immigration is inherently flawed and can lead to no genuine solution.  How can Americans advise others around the world to adopt sustainable population policies when our own situation is out of control?  The lesson we are teaching is that exponential growth is the key to economic prosperity, the way to the American Dream.  This is a catastrophic message to send to the rest of the world, and one that will result in catastrophe for us, as well. Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:50:08 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Why-Doesnt-Anyone-Talk-About-Immigration/BLOG/1481988/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-11-10T20:50:08Z FAIRDebate U.S. Overpopulation....Why Doesn't Anyone Talk About Immigration? Eric Ruark, Sr. Researcher, FAIR The size of the world’s population receives a lot of attention from scientists and academics.  The overwhelming consensus among them is that there are simply too many people already on the planet, and that earth’s burgeoning population growth is a recipe for disaster.  Most also believe that governments around the world are not taking this issue very seriously, ignoring what may become an intractable political crisis.  But what to do about it?That is the question that divides those who deal with population issues.  There are some who advocate direct government intervention in family planning, such as preventing couples from having more than one child.  Most, however, take a more moderate and humane approach, endorsing greater education on family planning, or eliminating tax incentives for couples who have multiple children.  There is a lot of room for discussion when it comes to the question of population policy.  Unfortunately, one thing that often gets left out of the discussion, but what is crucial to any public policy decision, is immigration.  Even those who work in population related fields many times choose to ignore how international migration fits into the picture.A good example of skirting the issue was the forum “Population Growth and Rising Consumption: What’s Sustainable?” sponsored by the Population Institute, the Population Media Center and the Wallace Global Fund and held on October 6, 2009.  The forum featured “five prominent experts on population, economics and sustainability” yet there was virtually no mention of immigration.  Only one speaker raised the issue, a Canadian economist and Professor of Environmental Studies at York University, who said “talking about immigration as a tool for population policy, it’s a very touchy and difficult area, but I don’t think we can shy away from it.”The problem is we are shying away from it, just as the speakers at the population forum did.  Immigration is driving population growth in the U.S., and we are on course to reach a population of one billion by the end of this century.  Isn’t that something that should be discussed by our political leaders, and shouldn’t so-called environmentalists be concerned about the ecological disaster that a billion people in the U.S. would cause?  Right now, politicians in D.C. want to pass legislation that markedly increases the number of people who come into the U.S. each year.  We might reach a billion people sooner than we think.  What lies behind the exorbitant U.S. immigration numbers is the mistaken belief that we need to grow in order to survive.  True, big business needs cheaper labor and more consumers in order to maximize their profits.  But is this in the best interest of America’s long-term needs.  In order to generate increased revenue developers will hire illegal workers and seek to build on every bit of open land.  They have politicians in their pocket, and have likewise bought off many environmental organizations.  Green, Inc, published in 2008, exposes how large corporations pay off large environmental organizations in order to win “green” endorsements.  Even Wal-Mart has gotten in on the ruse.   Surely, not all academics are paid off with corporate money.  So, why then do they remain mostly silent about immigration?  Perhaps is a larger political perspective that obstructs their view on this issue.  Or, maybe they find the topic too controversial or complex to approach.  Theoretical models are easier to deal with then the human implications of immigration policy.  Yet, “experts” should consider the human implications of failing to reduce the flow of immigrants to the U.S.Only by reducing immigration can the U.S. achieve population stability, and it is the only way to begin to achieve environmental sustainability.  That conversation has been ignored for over forty years, and any discussion of population growth or environmental policy that disregards immigration is inherently flawed and can lead to no genuine solution.  How can Americans advise others around the world to adopt sustainable population policies when our own situation is out of control?  The lesson we are teaching is that exponential growth is the key to economic prosperity, the way to the American Dream.  This is a catastrophic message to send to the rest of the world, and one that will result in catastrophe for us, as well. family planning, immigration, population nonadult false Why Doesn't Anyone Talk About Immigration? text blog family planning,immigration,population 747 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 3 0 1481988 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Could-water-scarcity-cause-international-conflict/BLOG/1446958/117906.html While history teaches us that international conflicts over water shortages have been few and far in between, this interesting article from Christian Science Monitor tells us that a more likely scenario is potential intra-national (within country) water conflicts. The Southeastern states of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida have longstanding disagreements over water — they are in federal court over water rights — and Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue has emphasized the state’s rights to use water that falls within its borders, despite claims by neighboring Florida and Alabama. While nowhere near what happened in China recently, we should start seriously looking for viable solutions to our shortage issues. Read the whole article here. While history teaches us that international conflicts over water shortages have been few and far in between, this interesting article from Christian Science Monitor tells us that a more likely scenario is potential intra-national (within country) water conflicts. The Southeastern states of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida have longstanding disagreements over water — they are in federal court over water rights — and Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue has emphasized the state’s rights to use water that falls within its borders, despite claims by neighboring Florida and Alabama. While nowhere near what happened in China recently, we should start seriously looking for viable solutions to our shortage issues. Read the whole article here. Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:35:37 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Could-water-scarcity-cause-international-conflict/BLOG/1446958/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-10-29T19:35:37Z FAIRDebate While history teaches us that international conflicts over water shortages have been few and far in between, this interesting article from Christian Science Monitor tells us that a more likely scenario is potential intra-national (within country) water conflicts. The Southeastern states of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida have longstanding disagreements over water — they are in federal court over water rights — and Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue has emphasized the state’s rights to use water that falls within its borders, despite claims by neighboring Florida and Alabama. While nowhere near what happened in China recently, we should start seriously looking for viable solutions to our shortage issues. Read the whole article here. water nonadult false Could water scarcity cause international conflict? text blog water 234 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1446958 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Water-Shortage-or-a-Water-Crisis/BLOG/1446580/117906.html Richard Carson, writing for Voice of San Diego, says that California has a water crisis because the historical allocation of water has been upset mainly by population growth in urban areas. Read his whole article here. Richard Carson, writing for Voice of San Diego, says that California has a water crisis because the historical allocation of water has been upset mainly by population growth in urban areas. Read his whole article here. Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:10:47 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Water-Shortage-or-a-Water-Crisis/BLOG/1446580/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-10-29T15:10:47Z FAIRDebate Richard Carson, writing for Voice of San Diego, says that California has a water crisis because the historical allocation of water has been upset mainly by population growth in urban areas. Read his whole article here. water nonadult false Water Shortage or a Water Crisis? text blog water 191 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 1446580 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Immigration-Policy-Likely-to-Boost-Population/BLOG/1164800/117906.html As the new US Administration and Congress begin to tackle immigration reform, they will again be faced with the weighty question of how large should America’s population be in the future. Should America’s population continue to grow indefinitely, perhaps doubling to 600 million by the end of the century? Clearly, any answer to this vital demographic question has serious and far-reaching economic, political, social and environmental consequences for America as well as for the international community of nations.  Read the full study at Yale Global Online. As the new US Administration and Congress begin to tackle immigration reform, they will again be faced with the weighty question of how large should America’s population be in the future. Should America’s population continue to grow indefinitely, perhaps doubling to 600 million by the end of the century? Clearly, any answer to this vital demographic question has serious and far-reaching economic, political, social and environmental consequences for America as well as for the international community of nations.  Read the full study at Yale Global Online. Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:02:25 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_US-Immigration-Policy-Likely-to-Boost-Population/BLOG/1164800/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-10-14T17:02:25Z FAIRDebate As the new US Administration and Congress begin to tackle immigration reform, they will again be faced with the weighty question of how large should America’s population be in the future. Should America’s population continue to grow indefinitely, perhaps doubling to 600 million by the end of the century? Clearly, any answer to this vital demographic question has serious and far-reaching economic, political, social and environmental consequences for America as well as for the international community of nations.  Read the full study at Yale Global Online. environment, immigration, population nonadult false US Immigration Policy Likely to Boost Population text blog environment,immigration,population 500 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 8 0 1164800 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Video-Immigration-and-the-Environment/BLOG/988073/117906.html Bonnie Erbe, contributing editor at US News & World Report and host of PBS's weekly news analysis program To the Contrary, looks at the impact of immigration on our nation’s environment. Watch the video below or check out our video section in the right sidebar of our home page for this eye-opening segment.   Bonnie Erbe, contributing editor at US News & World Report and host of PBS's weekly news analysis program To the Contrary, looks at the impact of immigration on our nation’s environment. Watch the video below or check out our video section in the right sidebar of our home page for this eye-opening segment.   Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:39:03 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Video-Immigration-and-the-Environment/BLOG/988073/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-10-05T17:39:03Z FAIRDebate Bonnie Erbe, contributing editor at US News & World Report and host of PBS's weekly news analysis program To the Contrary, looks at the impact of immigration on our nation’s environment. Watch the video below or check out our video section in the right sidebar of our home page for this eye-opening segment.   nonadult false Video: Immigration and the Environment text blog 548 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 988073 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_New-Study-Links-Georgia-Drought-to-Population-Growth/BLOG/988034/117906.html "The drought that gripped the Southeast from 2005 to 2007 was not unprecedented and resulted from random weather events, not global warming, Columbia University researchers have concluded. They say its severe water shortages resulted from population growth more than rainfall patterns," the New York Times reported October 1, 2009. "The drought that gripped the Southeast from 2005 to 2007 was not unprecedented and resulted from random weather events, not global warming, Columbia University researchers have concluded. They say its severe water shortages resulted from population growth more than rainfall patterns," the New York Times reported October 1, 2009. Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:33:29 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_New-Study-Links-Georgia-Drought-to-Population-Growth/BLOG/988034/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-10-05T17:33:29Z FAIRDebate "The drought that gripped the Southeast from 2005 to 2007 was not unprecedented and resulted from random weather events, not global warming, Columbia University researchers have concluded. They say its severe water shortages resulted from population growth more than rainfall patterns," the New York Times reported October 1, 2009. drought, georgia, global warming nonadult false New Study Links Georgia Drought to Population Growth text blog drought,georgia,global warming 311 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 1 0 988034 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_FAIR-Releases-Issue-Brief-about-US-Overpopulation/BLOG/816217/117906.html Because of the abundance of our nation, we have long been careless about out level of consumption, but it is the precipitous rise in the U.S. population over the last four decades that has resulted in our outstripping of our national resources. We are living beyond our means and are doing so increasingly as our population expands. This is a serious problem with major implications for future generations. This imbalance cannot be remedied without curbing both population growth and consumption as well as increasing productivity. We must become more sensitive to the issue of consumption of finite, non-renewable resources and to the limits of renewable resources. You can read the whole issue brief on FAIR’s Web site. Because of the abundance of our nation, we have long been careless about out level of consumption, but it is the precipitous rise in the U.S. population over the last four decades that has resulted in our outstripping of our national resources. We are living beyond our means and are doing so increasingly as our population expands. This is a serious problem with major implications for future generations. This imbalance cannot be remedied without curbing both population growth and consumption as well as increasing productivity. We must become more sensitive to the issue of consumption of finite, non-renewable resources and to the limits of renewable resources. You can read the whole issue brief on FAIR’s Web site. Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:25:26 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_FAIR-Releases-Issue-Brief-about-US-Overpopulation/BLOG/816217/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-24T19:25:26Z FAIRDebate Because of the abundance of our nation, we have long been careless about out level of consumption, but it is the precipitous rise in the U.S. population over the last four decades that has resulted in our outstripping of our national resources. We are living beyond our means and are doing so increasingly as our population expands. This is a serious problem with major implications for future generations. This imbalance cannot be remedied without curbing both population growth and consumption as well as increasing productivity. We must become more sensitive to the issue of consumption of finite, non-renewable resources and to the limits of renewable resources. You can read the whole issue brief on FAIR’s Web site. nonadult false FAIR Releases Issue Brief about U.S. Overpopulation text blog 206 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 816217 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Experts-Warn-about-Dangers-of-Population-Growth/BLOG/816182/117906.html A U.N. conference report released on Monday warned that unless birth rates are lowered sharply through voluntary family-planning programs and easy access to contraceptives, the tally of humans on Earth could swell to an unsustainable 11 billion by 2050. The researchers said that with one and a half million more humans climbing aboard the planet every week, a recipe is looming for ecological overload, famine and broken states. While the report was not readily available, you can read the whole story in this article at Breitbart.com. A U.N. conference report released on Monday warned that unless birth rates are lowered sharply through voluntary family-planning programs and easy access to contraceptives, the tally of humans on Earth could swell to an unsustainable 11 billion by 2050. The researchers said that with one and a half million more humans climbing aboard the planet every week, a recipe is looming for ecological overload, famine and broken states. While the report was not readily available, you can read the whole story in this article at Breitbart.com. Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:23:11 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Experts-Warn-about-Dangers-of-Population-Growth/BLOG/816182/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-24T19:23:11Z FAIRDebate A U.N. conference report released on Monday warned that unless birth rates are lowered sharply through voluntary family-planning programs and easy access to contraceptives, the tally of humans on Earth could swell to an unsustainable 11 billion by 2050. The researchers said that with one and a half million more humans climbing aboard the planet every week, a recipe is looming for ecological overload, famine and broken states. While the report was not readily available, you can read the whole story in this article at Breitbart.com. nonadult false Experts Warn about Dangers of Population Growth text blog 440 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 816182 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Water-Scarcity-Looms/BLOG/792798/117906.html Water scarcity grows in urgency in many regions as population growth, climate change, pollution, lack of investment, and management failures restrict the amount of water available relative to demand. The Stockholm International Water Institute calculated in 2008 that 1.4 billion people live in "closed basins"-regions where existing water cannot meet the agricultural, industrial, municipal, and environmental needs of all….Signs of scarcity are plentiful. Several major rivers, including the Indus, Rio Grande, Colorado, Murray-Darling, and Yellow, no longer reach the sea year-round as a growing share of their waters are claimed for various uses. Read the full story from Worldwatch Institute. Water scarcity grows in urgency in many regions as population growth, climate change, pollution, lack of investment, and management failures restrict the amount of water available relative to demand. The Stockholm International Water Institute calculated in 2008 that 1.4 billion people live in "closed basins"-regions where existing water cannot meet the agricultural, industrial, municipal, and environmental needs of all….Signs of scarcity are plentiful. Several major rivers, including the Indus, Rio Grande, Colorado, Murray-Darling, and Yellow, no longer reach the sea year-round as a growing share of their waters are claimed for various uses. Read the full story from Worldwatch Institute. Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:23:16 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Water-Scarcity-Looms/BLOG/792798/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-22T13:23:16Z FAIRDebate Water scarcity grows in urgency in many regions as population growth, climate change, pollution, lack of investment, and management failures restrict the amount of water available relative to demand. The Stockholm International Water Institute calculated in 2008 that 1.4 billion people live in "closed basins"-regions where existing water cannot meet the agricultural, industrial, municipal, and environmental needs of all….Signs of scarcity are plentiful. Several major rivers, including the Indus, Rio Grande, Colorado, Murray-Darling, and Yellow, no longer reach the sea year-round as a growing share of their waters are claimed for various uses. Read the full story from Worldwatch Institute. drought, water scarcity nonadult false Water Scarcity Looms text blog drought,water scarcity 224 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 792798 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Impact-of-American-Family-Size-Decisions-on-CO2-Emissions/BLOG/792692/117906.html On August 5, Lou Dobbs ran a story on how overpopulation is a major contributor to greenhouse gas production and the finding by researchers at Oregon State University (OSU) that having one less child in America produces a much bigger savings in CO2 emissions than things like changing light bulbs and driving more efficient automobiles.  See the Dobbs interview with Prof. Paul Murtaugh and Ben Zuckerman of UCLA and CAPS here. On August 5, Lou Dobbs ran a story on how overpopulation is a major contributor to greenhouse gas production and the finding by researchers at Oregon State University (OSU) that having one less child in America produces a much bigger savings in CO2 emissions than things like changing light bulbs and driving more efficient automobiles.  See the Dobbs interview with Prof. Paul Murtaugh and Ben Zuckerman of UCLA and CAPS here. Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:19:26 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Impact-of-American-Family-Size-Decisions-on-CO2-Emissions/BLOG/792692/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-22T13:19:26Z FAIRDebate On August 5, Lou Dobbs ran a story on how overpopulation is a major contributor to greenhouse gas production and the finding by researchers at Oregon State University (OSU) that having one less child in America produces a much bigger savings in CO2 emissions than things like changing light bulbs and driving more efficient automobiles.  See the Dobbs interview with Prof. Paul Murtaugh and Ben Zuckerman of UCLA and CAPS here. caps, climate change, population nonadult false The Impact of American Family Size Decisions on CO2 Emissions text blog caps,climate change,population 263 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 792692 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Is-Population-Growth-a-Ponzi-Scheme/BLOG/668646/117906.html Growth, whether through immigration or natural increase, is a plus for some groups. For business, it means a boost in the demand for products. It also means a surge in low- and high-skilled workers, which can keep a lid on wage pressures. Religious and ethnic groups want more immigrants of their own faith and ethnicity to raise their political and social clout. The military regards young immigrants as potential recruits. But the public pays a cost for a bigger population. Joseph Chamie, former director of the population division of the United Nations, speaks of more congestion on highways, more farmland turned into housing developments, more environmental damage, including the output of pollutants associated with climate change. Get the whole story in this article from The Christian Science Monitor.   Growth, whether through immigration or natural increase, is a plus for some groups. For business, it means a boost in the demand for products. It also means a surge in low- and high-skilled workers, which can keep a lid on wage pressures. Religious and ethnic groups want more immigrants of their own faith and ethnicity to raise their political and social clout. The military regards young immigrants as potential recruits. But the public pays a cost for a bigger population. Joseph Chamie, former director of the population division of the United Nations, speaks of more congestion on highways, more farmland turned into housing developments, more environmental damage, including the output of pollutants associated with climate change. Get the whole story in this article from The Christian Science Monitor.   Wed, 09 Sep 2009 16:29:59 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Is-Population-Growth-a-Ponzi-Scheme/BLOG/668646/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-09T16:29:59Z FAIRDebate Growth, whether through immigration or natural increase, is a plus for some groups. For business, it means a boost in the demand for products. It also means a surge in low- and high-skilled workers, which can keep a lid on wage pressures. Religious and ethnic groups want more immigrants of their own faith and ethnicity to raise their political and social clout. The military regards young immigrants as potential recruits. But the public pays a cost for a bigger population. Joseph Chamie, former director of the population division of the United Nations, speaks of more congestion on highways, more farmland turned into housing developments, more environmental damage, including the output of pollutants associated with climate change. Get the whole story in this article from The Christian Science Monitor.   climate change, farmland, population nonadult false Is Population Growth a Ponzi Scheme? text blog climate change,farmland,population 240 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 668646 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_Where-Immigration-Control-and-Environmentalism-Meet/BLOG/668643/117906.html Philip Cafaro, assistant professor of philosophy at Colorado State and author of a recent paper entitled “The Environmental Argument for Reducing Immigration to the U.S.” recently presented his controversial thesis (that a reduction in immigration to the United States is essential to maintaining a healthy planet), at a recent National Press Club (NPC) panel presentation on Tuesday, August 25.  The discussion, hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies and moderated by its Director of Research, Steven Camorata, provided insight into the diversity of opinion represented within the environmentalist movement and demonstrated the possibility for a future conservative/environmentalist partnership focused on immigration enforcement.  Read the recent story from Examiner.com here.   Philip Cafaro, assistant professor of philosophy at Colorado State and author of a recent paper entitled “The Environmental Argument for Reducing Immigration to the U.S.” recently presented his controversial thesis (that a reduction in immigration to the United States is essential to maintaining a healthy planet), at a recent National Press Club (NPC) panel presentation on Tuesday, August 25.  The discussion, hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies and moderated by its Director of Research, Steven Camorata, provided insight into the diversity of opinion represented within the environmentalist movement and demonstrated the possibility for a future conservative/environmentalist partnership focused on immigration enforcement.  Read the recent story from Examiner.com here.   Wed, 09 Sep 2009 16:26:39 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_Where-Immigration-Control-and-Environmentalism-Meet/BLOG/668643/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-09-09T16:26:39Z FAIRDebate Philip Cafaro, assistant professor of philosophy at Colorado State and author of a recent paper entitled “The Environmental Argument for Reducing Immigration to the U.S.” recently presented his controversial thesis (that a reduction in immigration to the United States is essential to maintaining a healthy planet), at a recent National Press Club (NPC) panel presentation on Tuesday, August 25.  The discussion, hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies and moderated by its Director of Research, Steven Camorata, provided insight into the diversity of opinion represented within the environmentalist movement and demonstrated the possibility for a future conservative/environmentalist partnership focused on immigration enforcement.  Read the recent story from Examiner.com here.   immigration enforcement, immigration reduction nonadult false Where Immigration Control and Environmentalism Meet text blog immigration enforcement,immigration reduction 268 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 0 0 668643 7918299 Silver 1784 http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Effects-of-Population-Growth-in-California/BLOG/593428/117906.html In his study “Rapid Population Growth in California: A Threat to Land and Food Production,” Cornell University professor Dr. David Pimentel writes that as the population continues to climb, food security and the ability to produce enough food so that Californians can lead healthy and productive lives will be significantly stressed.  The future status of agricultural production is especially critical, because resources of cropland, clean water, adequate fossil energy, and abundant biodiversity are rapidly depleted throughout California, and indeed worldwide. Click here to download Dr. Pimentel’s eye opening study. In his study “Rapid Population Growth in California: A Threat to Land and Food Production,” Cornell University professor Dr. David Pimentel writes that as the population continues to climb, food security and the ability to produce enough food so that Californians can lead healthy and productive lives will be significantly stressed.  The future status of agricultural production is especially critical, because resources of cropland, clean water, adequate fossil energy, and abundant biodiversity are rapidly depleted throughout California, and indeed worldwide. Click here to download Dr. Pimentel’s eye opening study. Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:15:42 GMT http://www.fairdebate.org/_The-Effects-of-Population-Growth-in-California/BLOG/593428/117906.html FAIR_HQ 2009-08-28T17:15:42Z FAIRDebate In his study “Rapid Population Growth in California: A Threat to Land and Food Production,” Cornell University professor Dr. David Pimentel writes that as the population continues to climb, food security and the ability to produce enough food so that Californians can lead healthy and productive lives will be significantly stressed.  The future status of agricultural production is especially critical, because resources of cropland, clean water, adequate fossil energy, and abundant biodiversity are rapidly depleted throughout California, and indeed worldwide. Click here to download Dr. Pimentel’s eye opening study. agriculture, california, food security, population growth nonadult false The Effects of Population Growth in California text blog agriculture,california,food security,population growth 486 0 0.0 http://www.fairdebate.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=7918299&as=117906 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/117906/photos/PHOTO_4841438_117906_7918299_ap_160X120.jpg false 1 0 593428 7918299 Silver 1784