D.J. Waldie writes of something which many of us have
tried to warn of, that “smart growth” isn’t necessarily smart
(HCN, 8/8/05: In the suburbs of Los Angeles, your future awaits).
Portland, hailed as the icon of smart growth, will in a generation
or so be as high-density as Los Angeles. It will have, in
Waldie’s words, “the same traffic congestion, unaffordable
housing. … ” I also worry about the thousands of other towns that
will be impacted every bit as much.
But Waldie’s
statement “Welcome to the future, Westerners. It’s L.A.,”
implies we lack alternatives. We do not.
Why is it that
— while every other developed nation has stopped growing or
is losing population (Italy, Spain, Ireland) — we have one of
the highest growth rates and will not allow the possibility that we
should stop growing onto the radar? Have we all bought into the
boom booster’s self-serving pipe dream: “We must have growth,
but it’s got to be good growth”? Do we prefer this myth to
confronting social choices that must be confronted eventually:
Immigration at upwards of three times the frontier-era great wave
and driving a population explosion that will mean a China-like one
billion Americans later this century?
We would serve our
nation’s future, and the environment’s — both
domestic and international — by demanding immigration
reduction combined with adequate funding for international family
planning.
Kathleene Parker
Rio Rancho, New Mexico
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Immigration fuels Western growth.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
