🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3ajdag$lf1@news.arc.nasa.gov> watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson - FSC) writes:
>
>In article <1994Nov18.164701.4519@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) write:
>
>> While some people like to isolate environmental issues from other issues
>> many environmentalists believe that there is a hard connection between
>> environment and other issues like social justice, etc.  
>
>There may be a connection, and the connection I believe is overpopulation
>causes social injustice (some of it at least).  If Mexico didn't
>have an over population problem, social justice problems would be much
>tractable.  Cure the overpopulation and you cure the social juctice problems,
>not the other way around.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?  I think that social injustice
feeds population growth.  With the continuing fall in the income levels
of Mexicans the problem is getting worse and things like NAFTA feed
into that also.  Uh oh, another related issue.  The Mexican Asst Sec
of Agri has said that NAFTA will results in 1 million people leaving
agriculture every year for 10 years.  What will that do to the pressure
to emigrate?  We're just making the problem worse and the result is
xenophobic policies like 187.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying that
people that voted for 187 are racist.  I think they are motivated by
honest and valid concerns.  But I think the result will be racist in an
institutional way and the passage of NAFTA (which will not create enough
new jobs to absorb those 1 million farmers a year) will contribute.
>
>> Can we really ever
>> solve problems relating to illegal immigration with a country that is
>> significantly poorer next to us?  Current policies in Mexico are  
>> increasing the disparity of income between the rich and poor so the
>> growing economy in Mexico is not helping most people (its hurting them)
>> so they will continue to come.  
>
>And with Mexico population still growing and growing,
>and there is little we can do little about it (well we could if
>they'd listen, but they don't listen to environmentalist in the USA).

The fact is that having lots of children is a very rational choice
for an _individual_ in many poor countries.  If they would listen,
what would you tell them?

>I'm afraid that the 1.6 million illegal aliens here are just a drop 
>in the bucket, so to speak.  If we can't save Mexico, shouldn't we 
>at least try and save ourselves?

I don't think 187 will do any good.  Whether or not people came for
health care and school, they will come for jobs anyway.  It will be
interesting to see what the affect of uneducated and untreated kids
is on California.  Also, I have
heard that they do pay taxes.  Don't know how much, though.

>And Mexico is not the only population hot spot in the world, 
>just the closest and with the easist access.   There are probably
>more than a billion people that would like to move to the US 
>(or even California) if allowed.   Some people think we've got 
>the room, but I'd hate to have to live in that room.

By their standards, you (or we) do have the room.

-- 
 -- Dean Myerson     	
(dean@vexcel.com)