WOA!! World Ovepopulation Awareness. The need to limit immigration follows when we combine a clear statement of our main environmental goals — living sustainably and sharing the landscape generously with other species. At the current level of 1. America's population of 3. Recent proposals would increase immigration to over two million annually, which has the potential to nearly triple our population to over 8. Scaling back immigration to 2.

America's population growth. Environmentalists are losing the battle to create a sustainable society and protect wild nature. Sprawl development destroys 2. U. S. carbon emissions continue to rise.

Amanda Schank is a freelance artist based in NYC.

There is, of course, a legitimate argument for some limitation upon immigration. We no longer need settlers for virgin lands, and our economy is expanding more slowly. Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political. Full text of Netanyahu’s speech at 2016 UN General Assembly In New York address, PM calls on Abbas to speak at Knesset and restart peace talks, urges world to unite. Daily paper. Local, state, and wire news and commentary. Photo galleries, business and obituaries. Aberration Full Movie here.

There are arguments against reducing U. S. immigration that deserve consideration. In what follows, we analyze the arguments for the mass immigration status quo, or for even more expansive immigration policies. In the end, we find them unconvincing. Immigration is now the main driver of U. S. population growth.

Population growth contributes to a host of environmental problems. A growing population increases America's environmental footprint beyond our borders and our disproportionate role in stressing global environmental systems. In order to seriously address environmental problems we must stop U. S. population growth.

We are morally obligated to address our environmental problems. In 2. 00. 6, the United States passed the 3. Earth Day in 1. 97. In 2. 00. 7, Congress debated the overhaul of immigration policy, now it looks likely to be set with no regard for its environmental consequences. We would like to see an immigration policy within the context of a commitment to sustainability. We don't believe that clean air and water; livable, uncrowded cities; sharing the land with the full complement of its native flora and fauna — are compatible with continued population growth.

From 1. 88. 0 to the mid- 1. America experienced an immigration boom, during which immigration averaged 6. From 1. 92. 5 to 1. US had an immigration policy, which allowed 2. The U. S. population grew during this time, from 1. By the 1. 97. 0s, American women were averaging fewer babies and the US was well- positioned to transition from a growing to a stable population. Without post- 1. 97.

U. S. population would have leveled off below 2. It didn't happen, because Congress greatly increased immigration levels. Between 1. 96. 5 and 1. Since 1. 99. 0, immigration has increased to approximately 1. Between 1. 98. 2 and 2.

US converted 3. 4 million acres of forest, cropland, and pasture to developed uses, an area the size of Illinois. The number one cause of sprawl, by far: population growth. Watch Blood River Full Movie. Between 1. 98. 2 and 1. Poor land use planning and bad transportation, zoning, and tax policies are important in generating sprawl.

Cities with growing populations sprawled even more. Several states that managed to decrease their per capita land use during this period also sprawled, due to high rates of population growth. If we want to stop sprawl we must change the transportation, tax, zoning, and population policies that encourage it.

As the world's largest economy and historically largest greenhouse gas emitter, the US has a moral obligation to lead the world in meeting this challenge. A good start would be striving to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions.

Meeting even a modest objective will prove difficult, if our population continues to grow. The US CO2 emissions increased 2.

We would have to decrease our emissions by 2. But if we double our population, we will have to decrease per capita emissions 5. CO2 emissions to 1. Watch Infinity Chamber HD 1080P.

They are thus less likely to happen. Re- engineering the world's largest economy and changing the consumption patterns of hundreds of millions of people are immense undertakings that will be difficult, expensive and only partly successful. Americans must reduce our per capita consumption of land and energy in order to meet these challenges. On the other hand, recent population growth has increased Americans' total land and energy consumption and made these problems even worse.

Americans must address both overconsumption and overpopulation if we hope to create a sustainable society. U. S. population growth contributes seriously to both domestic and global environmental problems. We propose. * Cut legal immigration to 2. Reduce illegal immigration by enforcing sanctions against employers who hire illegal workers. Rework trade agreements, to help people live better lives in their own countries.

Political theorist Chandran Kukathas maintains that citizens of rich countries have no special claims to the resources and opportunities into which they have been born and that the Earth's resources be distributed as equally as possible, including allowing freedom of movement. He says to wealthy Americans: "You don't have to give up anything yourself to help poor people overseas live better lives. You can fulfill any moral obligations you may have toward them by allowing them to come here and cut your grass, cook your food, and diaper your children."But with "open borders," the interests of nonhuman nature would be sacrificed completely to the interests of people.

Human appropriation of natural landscapes has progressed so far in America that any further appropriation is unjust. Accepting a general right to immigrate leaves no room to take nature's interests seriously, in the United States or elsewhere, since it undermines any possibility of limiting the human appropriation of nature. For this reason alone, it must be rejected by anyone committed to generous sustainability. People around the globe who live in poverty, insecurity, and injustice. Even the most generous immigration policies will not help most of them, since only a small percentage can conceivably emigrate from their home countries, and the worst off rarely have the resources to do so. The wealthy people of the world — including not just citizens of "the West," but hundreds of millions of people in the developing world — owe the world's poor people something. Not the lucky few millions who manage to immigrate to the West, but the billions who will have to sink or swim where they are.

The United States government should be much more generous and intelligent with development aid to poor countries It should fully fund international family planning efforts, which help both nature and the poor. It should set trade policies to benefit poor workers and protect nature, rather than to maximize trade. The United States should pressure foreign governments to respect their citizens' rights, as mandated by international law.

Individual Americans should support charities with effective international aid programs, such as Oxfam and the United Nations Children's Fund. We should cultivate personal and professional friendships across borders, in an effort to understand and appreciate our fellow human beings. One common argument says that we should focus on consumption, not population as the root cause of our environmental problems. Don't buy big suburban houses; don't buy gas guzzlers; don't put air conditioners in those houses and cars. Americans' high level of consumption is the problem — not our population."But as we have seen, it is Americans' overall consumption that determines our environment impact. Overall consumption equals per capita consumption multiplied by population. So if high consumption is a problem, population growth must be, too.

Others argue that immigrants consume less than the average American. Likely the immigrants increase their consumption the longer they live in the country.

Hollywood Reporter Entertainment News. Yep, the calendar has turned a page and awards season has begun. Whether you're rooting for big movies — 'Dunkirk'? Apes'? — or low- budget indies like 'The  Florida  Project' ($2 million), it's a wide- open field, as THR sets the stage for suspense and surprises.