English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-06-07 07:51:16 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Immigration

19 answers

Depends on where you live, NYC where folks are on top of each other (yuck) or TWP12 Maine. (Township 12) pop 6 moose, 1600.

2006-06-07 09:10:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7 8

Two answers. One is Yes, there are too many people in areas that most jobs are located. This problem is made worse by illegal people coming here without really being needed to do jobs that the local population can and will do. Not talking about picking fruit or making beds etc. When you jam a bunch of folks into an area that need goods and services, things stop working smoothly. Crime appears and if you put enough rats in a cage together, they start fighting with each other. It's the concept of putting 20 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound can. Can't do it withou breaking the can and getting stuff all over. That's the US right now.
We need to make a bigger can. That takes time and resources.

The good news (number 2) is that there is room for growth that is monitored and thought out. Over years of time, monitored immigration from all over the world, will ensure that a balanced mix of many different races and cultures come to poplulate the US. NOT just uneducated, lettuce picker who frequently are ignorant of birth control and reproduce well beyond the norm for most Americans. You get enough lettuce pickers or whatever here and very quickly, there is a population problem and frequently a sideboard to that is you have health and welfare problems as well and Society ends up picking up the bill. In thelong run, the Society is hurt and cippled, the populace suffers and that includes the newbee lettuce pickers and their families as well. Growth must be modulated and monitored to some degree over expanses of time.
I my opion and I"ve been aroun dor 60 years or so ...we have poplation problem developing. At least here in California but I have seen the same problems in many states and cities around the US recently.

2006-06-07 08:20:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

John Hanson (March a million, 1781-80 2)...then Alias Boudinought (1782-80 3), Thomas Mifflin (1783-80 4), RIchard Henry Lee (1784-80 5), John Hancock (1785-86), Nathan Gorman (1786-87), Arthur St. CLair (1787-88) and Cyrus Griffin (1788-89). They were all president earlier Washington who's called our authentic first president.

2016-12-06 11:33:42 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Yes-no more Northern Woods. Few land left for conservation. We have used up our resources and slums are growing due to overpopulation. What land there is -is not much-if we overbuild our environment will suffer. A good example would be the building near our rain forest-it too has many issues as land is grabbed near it(-a whole different story). Many want to stop the building so close to it -as it has an effect on the forest environment --and many hundreds of hundreds feet away cause harm. We now have fewer farms-as commercial has put them out-if we had to we could not feed all the people now on this land. We are depended on others.

If your looking to compare-Mexico has much more growth potential and untapped resources.

2006-06-07 08:51:11 · answer #4 · answered by *** The Earth has Hadenough*** 7 · 0 0

We already have too many people. I know what you're thinking: We have plenty of "space." Empty land is not a deciding factor for how many people we should allow in.

In China there are huge areas that are barely populated. However the Chinese gov't is taking extreme measures to reduce their overpopulation problem. No one in China would think very much of the argument that there's no population problem in China just because there is plenty of room in the Xinjiang province.

As with any question of public policy, immigration included, the deciding factor should be: Is it good for the country?

Over-immigration has taken its toll in almost every major city in the U.S. Increased traffic and pollution, higher crime rates, over-crowded schools, financially exhausted hospitals and medical centers shutting down, etc. Every environmental group worth mentioning is fighting the idea of urban sprawl. Does it sound like we need more people?

Despite the amount of physical land space we appear to have, it cannot ultimately be good for our country to continue our present reckless immigration policies.

2006-06-07 10:34:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

With Illegals, YES!!!

But by actual numbers of people, NO. As a matter of fact here are some interesting numbers: In the state of Texas alone there are 261,797 square miles of dry land. In a mile there are 5280 feet. 5280 x 5280 = 27,878,400 square feet in a square mile. Multiply that times 261,797 square miles = 7,298,481,484,800 square feet of dry land in Texas. Divide that by Six Billion people (approx.) on the whole Earth = 1216.4 square feet per person JUST in Texas. That is about the size of an average two bedroom apartment. That would be a little crowded but you can at least see the point. The planet is not overcrowded it is just not being properly managed by it's governments.

2006-06-07 08:29:42 · answer #6 · answered by bigrob 5 · 0 0

yes overpopulated with a little bit of every race creed religion and sexual orientation. And i would not have it any other way. And to tose that do have a problem with different races well don't you think they should move? too bad they will not listen huh gurl!

2006-06-08 05:31:44 · answer #7 · answered by guerisky 2 · 0 0

I think USA should cut down on immigrants, or be pickier about who we let in our country. America is getting overpopulated

2006-06-07 09:29:56 · answer #8 · answered by xm_wow 2 · 0 0

yes. by at least 20 million illegal mexicans. start with them, and wittle down.
i have 80 acres, my land is not overpopulated, how about yours? how many houses are crammed onto one acre where you live?

2006-06-07 08:02:24 · answer #9 · answered by hippieguitarist420 3 · 0 0

Not even close.

There is plenty of space and plenty of opportunity still. For many years to come.

2006-06-07 08:05:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Not even close. Most of the Western USA isn't even inhabited.

2006-06-07 07:55:50 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers