Zionofascism Crippled

Just a Deleted WordPress.com weblog

The Huge Costs of Immigration-Driven Growth

Posted by Anarchore on March 14, 2007

Let us not forget that the pro mass immigration Liberal and Conservative parties are infested with Zionofascists. Coincidence?


by Toad-Beneath-the-Harrow

found on newsgroups can.politics, ca.politics

Today the latest census data is all over the news.
Here’s a bit from Statistics Canada’s Daily for
Mar 13/07:

Between 2001 and 2006, Canada’s population
increased 5.4%, the first time since 1991
that the census-to-census growth rate has
accelerated. This acceleration during the
past five years was due to higher levels
of immigration.

Those of you worried about urban sprawl, energy
conservation, running out of landfill space, and
meeting the emission limits dictated by Kyoto might
take a moment to contemplate how immigration-driven
growth has made it 5.4% harder to meet your goals.

Canada had a faster rate of growth than any
other member of the G8 group of industrialized
nations between 2001 and 2006. The United States
was in second place with a population growth of
5.0% during the same period.

Those of you who view Canada’s character as “moderate”
and “cautious” should ask themselves why Canada’s
politicians have inflicted on us the most extreme
population growth rate of all the G8 nations, a rate
even higher than the USA’s thanks to the highest
immigration rate, in proportion to our population,
in the entire industrialized world.

Before you fall into the trap of imagining “growth”
is always good, let me remind you that cancer is
a perfect example of unrestrained “growth”. The body
slowly dies as the burgeoning cancer diverts the body’s
resources to fuel the cancer’s growth.

Thanks mainly to immigration, Canada’s water and energy
resources, developable land, jobs, allowed greenhouse
gas emissions and all other limited resources must
now be shared out among 5.4% more people than five
years ago — with no end to similar reductions in sight.


Following Toronto CTV’s highly enthusiastic report on
Canada’s population growth, they carried — in their view —
an unrelated story about the crumbling transportation
infrastructure of Toronto where they have a 350 MILLION
DOLLAR backlog of needed road repairs and where even minor
repairs may take 3 years or more to be done.

How wrong they are at CTV! Crumbling, overburdened urban
infrastructures and declining city services are utterly
predictable consequences of excessive population growth.

Here’s why.

Roads, bridges, subways, schools, hospitals, sewers, as well
as water and electrical systems — all the urban infrastructure
needed to support a city’s population — are capital spending.
They involve large initial costs when built but with proper
maintenance provide services for many decades.

Let’s say for the moment that with proper maintenance, a
typical item of infrastructure will last 50 years before
it must be torn down and replaced. So, if a city has a
stable population, it will on average have to completely
replace about 2% of its infrastructure each year.

That 2% will require a lot of money but at least their
population is stable and they don’t need to add entirely
new infrastructure to support additions to their population.

Suppose our city had to deal with a population increase
of 1% per year. Now the city’s taxpayers must pay to
replace 2% of its existing infrastructure each year
PLUS add an additional 1% each year to it’s infrastructure
simply to provide the new arrivals with the same level
of services enjoyed by the current population.

Now the city must rebuild or build the equivalent of 3%
of its current infrastructure each year. The annual
capital spending needs of the city has been increased
by about 50% thanks to the seemingly small population
increase of 1% per year.

Of course, the city will try to get by with spending
less. They won’t build enough entirely new infrastructure
to support the population increase and they will skimp
on replacement of existing infrastructure.

The utterly predictable result of all this will be the
overcrowded roads, subways, hospitals, and schools and
the declining public services we have become all too
familiar with in Canada’s major urban areas.

If you object to my numbers, try assuming a different
average lifetime for infrastructure items. Assume an
average lifetime of 40 years and you’ll find the city
needs to replace 2.5% of it’s existing infrastructure each
year. Assume an average lifetime of 30 years, and the city
needs to replace 3.3% of its existing infrastructure.

Any reasonable number will force you to the same
conclusion: even a small population increase will have
a very large impact on amount of capital spending needed
to maintain the current level of city services.


A few days ago, mayors from the Halton Region, just to
the west of Toronto and of Peel Region, told the Ontario
government they would need at least 8 BILLION DOLLARS
to build the infrastructure required for the expected
population growth in Halton Region.

Even Burlington, the city farthest away from Toronto
in the Halton Region, had to endure 9% growth in the
last five years. That’s 1.8% per year, not the mere
1% discussed in our capital spending example.

But Burlington with it’s 9% increase over five years
is far from the hardest hit community in Ontario. Halton
Region as a whole had to deal with a 17.1% increase.

Oshawa got hit with an 11% increase. Barrie had to
deal with a 21.2% increase. Milton was hit with a
stunning 101% increase over five years.

(Note: CTV reports Milton growth as 71.4% but the table on
Statscan web site and population figures there give 101%.)


Whatever happened to the zero population growth crowd?
Have they all died out and been replaced with people who
imagine Bangladesh or Hong Kong in the 1950s is the ideal
we should strive for?

Where are the “greens”? Don’t they see how much harder
Canada’s insane immigration policy is making it to achieve
all the things they say they want?

Have ALL the environmental organizations been paid off
by big money, as the Sierra Club was, to stifle criticism
of immigration within their ranks?

How does the so-called “Green Party” reconcile their
supposed concern for the environment with their demands
for even higher immigration? How does the NDP?

How can the Liberals and Tories deny the incredible
damage their insane immigration policies have done to
this non-immigrant Canadians? Do they feel no shame?

Net Migration Canada’s Rate as Multiple
Rate/1000 pop. Country of Other Country’s Rate
————– ——- ————————-
5.85 Canada N/A
4.87 Ireland 1.20
3.85 Australia 1.52
3.63 New Zealand 1.61
3.40 Portugal 1.72
3.18 USA 1.84
3.12 Switzerland 1.85
2.72 Netherlands 2.15
2.52 Denmark 2.32
2.18 UK 2.68
2.18 Germany 2.68
2.06 Italy 2.84
1.94 Austria 3.02
1.73 Norway 3.38
1.66 Sweden 3.52
1.50 European Union 3.90
1.03 Russia 5.68
0.99 Spain 5.90
0.97 Czech Republic 6.03
0.84 Finland 6.96
0.66 France 8.87
0.00 Japan Infinite
-0.46 Poland -12.72
-4.32 Mexico -1.35
Source: CIA World Factbook 2006
(Immigration – Emigration = Net Migration)


One Response to “The Huge Costs of Immigration-Driven Growth”

  1. […] The Huge Costs of Immigration-Driven Growth […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: