Does immigration equal slavery? Expert thinks so

Posted by Staff on June 3, 2008 |

Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, compares the economic effects of immigration to growth in the south due to slavery. Krikorian says that the expansion of slavery improved the quality of life for native born Americans in the south, and parallels can be drawn to current immigration issues. (0:41)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:41m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

June 3, 2008

2 Responses to “Does immigration equal slavery? Expert thinks so”

1. Susan Robbins Says:
   June 4th, 2008 at 7:26 pm

   If you are talking about ilegal immigration, the only thing we get from it is shoody workmanship, increased school taxes and crime. Some us are even forced to learn Spanish to work.
   Please tell me how an uneducate illegal can do construction? Can they read rulers? Do they know how to compute in fractions?.

2. Pete Murphy Says:
   June 5th, 2008 at 8:01 am

   Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth.

   I’m not talking just about the obvious problems that we see in the news – growing dependence on foreign oil, carbon emissions, soaring commodity prices, environmental degradation, etc. I’m talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.

   I should introduce myself. I am the author of “Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America.” To make a long story short, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.

   This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.

   But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.

   The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight other countries – India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China – as accounting for fully half of the world’s population growth by 2050. The U.S. is the only developed country still experiencing third world-like population growth, most of which is due to immigration. It’s absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that’s impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.

   If you’re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It’s also available at Amazon.com.)

   Please forgive the somewhat “spammish” nature of the previous paragraph. I just don’t know how else to inject this new perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

   Pete Murphy
   Author, Five Short Blasts