The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Don't Mention the I-Word!
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

From The Guardian:

The real villains in Harvey flood: urban sprawl and the politicians who allowed it
Billy Fleming

There’s never been a more important time to understand the political machinations that led to Harvey’s destructiveness – and dismantle them

‘The swamps and wetlands that once characterized Houston’s hinterland have been replaced with strip malls and suburban tract homes.’

Thursday 31 August 2017 10.13 EDT

Houston’s catastrophic flood will be framed by leaders in Texas as an unforeseeable act of God. It isn’t. Houston’s unfettered sprawl into the marshland of southeast Texas was a conscious choice by policymakers. So was building a global city on a slowly submerging swamp. Both were decisions that led to disaster.

Houston has quietly become our fourth largest and fastest-growing city, due in large part to cheap housing. But the latter has come at an exorbitant cost to its safety. The swamps and wetlands that once characterized Houston’s hinterland have been replaced with strip malls and suburban tract homes.

Those landscapes once served as a natural flood protection system for the city. Research shows that, if they hadn’t been filled and developed, Harvey’s impact would have been lessened.

Okay, but where did all this population growth in Houston come from? As usual, a text search for “migra” yields no hits. But until last week I was constantly reading about how immigration was powering Houston’s population growth.

For example, from the Center for Public Policy Priorities:

Fact Sheet: Immigrants in Houston

Houston is now more diverse than New York City

27.7 percent (596,000) of Houston’s population of 2.2 million are immigrants, a dramatic growth from just 18 percent in 1980.

In fact, the immigrant population of Houston grew at twice the national rate between 2000 and 2013.

22.2 percent of all immigrants in Texas live in Houston.

As of the 2010 Census, Houston has no majority racial or ethnic group. Non-Hispanic Whites represent 40 percent of the total population, Latinos 36 percent, Blacks 17 percent, and Asians 6 percent.

Ann Coulter tweeted on this topic today:

WaPo: How Houston’s ‘Wild West’ Growth Contributed to Flooding. @Steve_Sailer asks where all that growth came from:

Houston Chronicle: “Houston immigrant growth ‘in a class by itself’”

It’s interesting to skim the bulk of the protesting replies to her, which were shocked that anyone could possibly imagine that immigration had anything to do with overpopulation in Houston. Note that the replies weren’t shocked, shocked like Captain Renault discovering gambling is going on in Casablanca, they were simply shocked at anyone being so vile as to mentally notice the connection between Bad Things (overpopulation, sprawl, paving the prairie, flooding) and The Good Thing: immigration.

That’s how people have been trained to think in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    I made these very points last year on a forum dedicated to Austin real estate and relocation. Everyone in Austin likes to complain about how so many people from California, Illinois and New York are moving in. I pointed out repeatedly that the reason Austin is exploding is both 1) because of immigration directly to Austin from outside of the country and 2) internal migration from places inside the country that are being overrun by immigrants. I was told, “hey racist, there’s plenty of room in this country. People can move here from all over the world and we’d still have plenty of space for them.” Unfortunately, people from all over the world don’t want to live in Central Kansas. They want to live amongst each other in the major cities. You know, where the jobs are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Rural Kansas is increasingly overrun with invaders (both legal and illegal) brought in to work in agriculture and meatpacking. Gov. Sam Brownback has a long history of notorious support for this, and its no surprise he has turned a blind eye. Should Kobach be elected Governor next year, it will be the 21st Century repeat of 19th Century "Bleeding Kansas". The left is desperate to flip a Middle American red state.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/dont-mention-the-i-word/#comment-1990348
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Houston and its suburbs were not double-paved over because of Third-World immigration. The fault lies solely with the Keebler Elves – – – and they were legal and they spoke the language!

    Read More
  3. I spoke to both Jebby Bush and Ted Cruz about the connection between mass immigration and the Republican Party being wiped out in California. Both Jebby Bush and Ted Cruz avoided the topic of California being lost to the Republican Party because of mass immigration.

    Politicians have learned that donors don’t want to hear anything negative connected to mass immigration, so they just give happy talk speeches about how great mass immigration is. President Trump didn’t care that much about donors, he cared about getting more votes than his competitors, that is why candidate Trump could speak the way he did about mass immigration and illegal immigration.

    Houston has been destroyed by mass immigration and illegal immigration and REFUGEE OVERLOAD. The Republican Party in Texas allowed Houston to be flooded with foreigners.

    Ann Coulter has been doing her best to keep President Trump’s feet to the fire on immigration.

    Read More
  4. Tiny Duck says:

    Last I heard urban sprawl planning was a practice of white makes

    Is there anything we can get right? Thank goodness for demographic change

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mokiki
    Yes, we can look forward to ending up like this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Nigeria
  5. vinny says:

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AM

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.
     
    LOL! We just don't live in a world of happy mediums.

    Vermont has practically no immigration and high housing prices and basically no young people. Yes, you can't throttle housing builds for "environmental" reasons and expect good things. We need people and young families.

    Meanwhile, yes, immigration, legal or no, increases demand for housing, driving prices up. I was unaware until the flood that Houston was one of the globalist capitals of the world in terms of that ever sought after explosion of diversity. Immigration of any form also decreases wages, which would also hinder family formation.

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it's borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing. While I'm not thrilled with the morality of contraception (an understatement), the contraction of the West maybe just a period of pain into stability/balance given the technological advances.

    However, the American Association of Homebuilders in no way benefits from any of that and liberals with no other values risk being "racist" (somehow) so let's pave Texas. sigh

    , @Wilkey
    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Decent zoning laws do raising housing costs, but they would be more than offset by reductions in immigration rates. I don't recall much comment here objecting to reasonable zoning laws. Most readers here would prefer to achieve AFF by reducing immigration.
    , @AnotherDad

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.
     
    If you're going to come to this country and read Steve and comment, be smarter. There is absolutely no contradiction.

    Houston (area) directly has a couple million extra people because of mass immigration.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston#Demographics

    This is the direct cause of the extra--and sprawling--population.

    And Steve is pointing out the--quite typical--MSM refusal to even mention the "i-word" in relation to anything negative even as it blathers on tediously about directly related phenomena--in this case sprawl.

    ~~~

    Yes, there is a perfectly legitimate debate about how much suburban development may be appropriate in particular areas based on any number of values/considerations--wildlife, traffic, fire, aesthetics, farmland preservation, economics, and yes, flood control and affordable family formation.

    But those debates--and tradeoffs--are lessened toward almost being moot without mass immigration because we simply wouldn't even have the need to more development. We'd be living comfortably with 60 or 70 million fewer people and could have affordable family formation out the wazoo--including even nicer places like California--without sprawling over every hillside, valley or plain.

    Mass immigration is making everything worse. Sprawl is just one of those--rather more obvious--items.
  6. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Unfortunately, this seems to be a two way street. Places that are not being overrun by immigrants are rotting away. Does anyone want U.S. to become a sea of West Virginias, Kentuckys and Maines? All low immigration whitopias whose only trajectory seems to be suicide. We seem to have painful choice -diversification or opioidization – pick your poison.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH

    Places that are not being overrun by immigrants are rotting away
     
    You're confusing correlation with casuation.
  7. AM says:
    @vinny
    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    LOL! We just don’t live in a world of happy mediums.

    Vermont has practically no immigration and high housing prices and basically no young people. Yes, you can’t throttle housing builds for “environmental” reasons and expect good things. We need people and young families.

    Meanwhile, yes, immigration, legal or no, increases demand for housing, driving prices up. I was unaware until the flood that Houston was one of the globalist capitals of the world in terms of that ever sought after explosion of diversity. Immigration of any form also decreases wages, which would also hinder family formation.

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it’s borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing. While I’m not thrilled with the morality of contraception (an understatement), the contraction of the West maybe just a period of pain into stability/balance given the technological advances.

    However, the American Association of Homebuilders in no way benefits from any of that and liberals with no other values risk being “racist” (somehow) so let’s pave Texas. sigh

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it’s borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing.
     
    This.

    Contra to the "not enough people open the borders!" nonsense from the globoscum, it is directly the reverse. Have a border and whatever the current fertility situation given population density, resources, employment, etc. the future one will eventually come into balance.

    Let people stream in and you will suppress wages and drive up costs and *never* have affordable family formation again. Basically, you're conducting genocide against the nation's people.
    , @Takashi
    Maybe we could be like Japan...
  8. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer


    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation.

    Nope. Not everywhere. Sailer specifically bangs on about coastal real estate not being affordable family formation friendly because you can’t build on top of the ocean.

    Plus there are other dynamics (hurricanes, floods etc) also that make living in a coastal region expensive.

    Read More
  9. KM32 says:

    We’re kind of lucky, in a way. With tons of Latin American and SE Asian immigration our future is likely more like Brazil or Chile. We’ll sink slowly into irrelevance. And once we’re stuffed with 500 or 600 million middling sorts, our populist governments of mixed-race people will close the borders against the ME and African immigration waves.

    Better than what faces Europe, that’s for sure.

    Read More
    • Agree: Peter Johnson
    • Replies: @jim jones
    America or Europe? I choose Europe thanks:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KnAzpi4avo
  10. Abe says: • Website

    That’s how people have been trained to think in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

    And we have how many megatons of thermonuclear destruction ready to launch at a moment’s notice? God help the rest of the human race.

    Read More
  11. “Research shows that, if they hadn’t been filled and developed, Harvey’s impact would have been lessened.”

    Admittedly I’m not a scientist. So this is just an honest question. If you fill in swamps etc, I’m trying to understand how that’s necessarily a bad thing in the case of a natural disaster. Like, whenever hurricanes, tons of excessive flooding, etc. (e.g. Acts of God) occur, you used to see people putting heavy sandbags like 10-15 feet high to prevent the waters from rising any further and hopefully, over time the water would go down. How exactly does development exacerbate flooding? Unless its like, the swamps, now overfilled to capacity due to the Acts of God, will, over time drain down and lead to runoff into the Gulf or something? Is that along the lines of what they’re saying?

    But ultimately, if Houston weren’t as overpopulated as it is, then should be fairly obvious to anyone noticing that those strip malls and additional developments wouldn’t have been built and the swamps would still be there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ic1000
    Well planned cities (or those that developed organically in a good way) discourage development in flood-prone areas. They are used instead for green space, playing fields, nature preserves, and the like. When the TV news shows helicopter shots of a floodplain and that's what you see submerged, that's something that's gone right.

    For usual types of floods, paving over Paradise leads to heavy rain running right into the storm drain and then the stream, causing it to rise faster. Instead of soaking into the ground and some heading to the underground aquifer. Lots of paving and roofs in the watershed means much faster.

    When you start talking 10, 20, 30 inches of rain, it's hard to see how it makes much of a difference, as percolation would only be a tiny fraction. That's a lot of water.

    As you say in the last paragraph of your comment -- If this flood had hit the Houston of 2000, the damage would have been much less, mainly because so much less had been built in (what turned out to be) flood-prone areas.

  12. Wilkey says:
    @vinny
    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Decent zoning laws do raising housing costs, but they would be more than offset by reductions in immigration rates. I don’t recall much comment here objecting to reasonable zoning laws. Most readers here would prefer to achieve AFF by reducing immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    I have heard some refer to this as a "1 in 1000 year flood", so a substantial infrastructure investment would have been needed to heed this off. It was not too long ago that the fear in Texas was droughts.

    I don't think most of us are anti-zoning. Steve loves to praise the strict zoning of Malibu and many places in Northern California. It isn't even the lack of zoning that explains AFF, its a function of geography. Texas cities, El Paso excepted, can expand suburbs in 360 degrees. Most wealthy costal cities, such as San Francisco, can only expand in 180 degrees or less, and are for all intents and purposes built out.


    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FU3znwklx3M/TvtQ-Ccbq4I/AAAAAAAAC7U/fqPFvEmEGdc/s1600/el-paso-map.gif

    Map of El Paso, TX

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/chicanos-like-living-on-their-tragic-dirt/?highlight=suburbia#comment-1910194

    One of my previous comments on AFF.
  13. The MSM seems to think that an overcrowded city due to massive immigration is a good thing, but that ordinary people who were in the city first for generations aren’t supposed to do anything about it. They’re not supposed to leave, cause that would be White Flight which in turn leads to Urban Sprawl, both of which seem to be bad things. They’re also not supposed to “overdevelop” the areas in the city that already exist, cause that could lead to worsened conditions for natural disasters when they do strike. Basically, city residents are supposed to passively stay where they are and enjoy the onslaught of vibrant diversity. To do otherwise is intolerable racism.

    I think this goes to the heart of the matter. National MSM is largely based in NY, home of Ellis Island sentiment. During 1880′s-1920′s, tons of immigrants arrived, and though Manhattan’s population increased several fold and urban sprawl occurred (tons of apartment houses were built within the city to accommodate the teeming hordes), that sprawl is recalled as a good thing. But then NY doesn’t have as many regularly occurring floods or hurricanes compared to those on the coast.

    It seems, however, that most didn’t leave NY during that time period. Unless moving uptown counts. But they stayed more or less within NY and didn’t go too far from vibrant diversity.

    Maybe that’s the model the MSM is working off of. No one should ever leave the city when all the diversity comes swarming in. They should simply stay and do nothing. Ever since early ’60′s book Revolutionary Road, the MSM have always blamed the suburbs, the people leaving for the suburbs, etc. Leads one to think these are largely urbanites who just don’t like suburbs, especially when there’s little in the way of diversity there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wjl
    That "vibrant diversity" was shut down by the National Origins Act which allowed for assimilation which was working until overturned by the anti-American immigration reform of 1965. That change discriminated against Europeans in favor of the 3d world, the importation of which was to keep the Democratic Party in power and punish whitey for racism. Subsequently, old established neighborhoods and villages have been destroyed by obnoxious primitives with filthy habits who think Americans owe them something.

    Mass immigration in the 19th and early 20th Century overwhelmed the cities increasing crime, disease, exploitation, and lowering wages and turning municipal governments into corrupt Democratic Party political machines.
  14. Alden says:

    Swamps and wetlands are swamps and wetlands exactly and precisely because the earth is so saturated, (overly saturated?) with water ALL the time that it cannot absorb more water when it rains.

    Do journalists ever read even Wikepedia articles before they pompously pontificate on subjects of which they know nothing?

    Read More
  15. george says:

    “bulk of the protesting replies to her,”

    Skimming the replies many seem to think lack of zoning and land use laws are the culprit. For example: “You know the issue is actually the lack of zoning laws, not population…right?”. Of course, those laws are mostly attempting to make it harder to populate an area, like immigration laws.

    Read More
  16. ic1000 says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "Research shows that, if they hadn’t been filled and developed, Harvey’s impact would have been lessened."

    Admittedly I'm not a scientist. So this is just an honest question. If you fill in swamps etc, I'm trying to understand how that's necessarily a bad thing in the case of a natural disaster. Like, whenever hurricanes, tons of excessive flooding, etc. (e.g. Acts of God) occur, you used to see people putting heavy sandbags like 10-15 feet high to prevent the waters from rising any further and hopefully, over time the water would go down. How exactly does development exacerbate flooding? Unless its like, the swamps, now overfilled to capacity due to the Acts of God, will, over time drain down and lead to runoff into the Gulf or something? Is that along the lines of what they're saying?

    But ultimately, if Houston weren't as overpopulated as it is, then should be fairly obvious to anyone noticing that those strip malls and additional developments wouldn't have been built and the swamps would still be there.

    Well planned cities (or those that developed organically in a good way) discourage development in flood-prone areas. They are used instead for green space, playing fields, nature preserves, and the like. When the TV news shows helicopter shots of a floodplain and that’s what you see submerged, that’s something that’s gone right.

    For usual types of floods, paving over Paradise leads to heavy rain running right into the storm drain and then the stream, causing it to rise faster. Instead of soaking into the ground and some heading to the underground aquifer. Lots of paving and roofs in the watershed means much faster.

    When you start talking 10, 20, 30 inches of rain, it’s hard to see how it makes much of a difference, as percolation would only be a tiny fraction. That’s a lot of water.

    As you say in the last paragraph of your comment — If this flood had hit the Houston of 2000, the damage would have been much less, mainly because so much less had been built in (what turned out to be) flood-prone areas.

    Read More
  17. jim jones says:
    @KM32
    We're kind of lucky, in a way. With tons of Latin American and SE Asian immigration our future is likely more like Brazil or Chile. We'll sink slowly into irrelevance. And once we're stuffed with 500 or 600 million middling sorts, our populist governments of mixed-race people will close the borders against the ME and African immigration waves.

    Better than what faces Europe, that's for sure.

    America or Europe? I choose Europe thanks:

    Read More
  18. @jim jones
    America or Europe? I choose Europe thanks:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KnAzpi4avo

    That’s quite a video. Loved the possum, though.

    Read More
  19. DFH says:
    @anon
    Unfortunately, this seems to be a two way street. Places that are not being overrun by immigrants are rotting away. Does anyone want U.S. to become a sea of West Virginias, Kentuckys and Maines? All low immigration whitopias whose only trajectory seems to be suicide. We seem to have painful choice -diversification or opioidization - pick your poison.

    Places that are not being overrun by immigrants are rotting away

    You’re confusing correlation with casuation.

    Read More
  20. How much of the flooding, one wonders, is due to trash in the stormwater drains? Modern cities can only function (from a simple engineering point of view) with a population that acts with civic responsibility.

    Read More
  21. Maj. Kong says:
    @Anon
    I made these very points last year on a forum dedicated to Austin real estate and relocation. Everyone in Austin likes to complain about how so many people from California, Illinois and New York are moving in. I pointed out repeatedly that the reason Austin is exploding is both 1) because of immigration directly to Austin from outside of the country and 2) internal migration from places inside the country that are being overrun by immigrants. I was told, "hey racist, there's plenty of room in this country. People can move here from all over the world and we'd still have plenty of space for them." Unfortunately, people from all over the world don't want to live in Central Kansas. They want to live amongst each other in the major cities. You know, where the jobs are.

    Rural Kansas is increasingly overrun with invaders (both legal and illegal) brought in to work in agriculture and meatpacking. Gov. Sam Brownback has a long history of notorious support for this, and its no surprise he has turned a blind eye. Should Kobach be elected Governor next year, it will be the 21st Century repeat of 19th Century “Bleeding Kansas”. The left is desperate to flip a Middle American red state.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Rural Kansas is increasingly overrun with .....
     
    One thing the world has plenty of is desolate, semi-arid steppe.

    Anybody you know pining to live out there?

    Sounds like a place to escape from.

    Why is this some big loss to some hypothetical white hegemony?
  22. wjl says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    The MSM seems to think that an overcrowded city due to massive immigration is a good thing, but that ordinary people who were in the city first for generations aren't supposed to do anything about it. They're not supposed to leave, cause that would be White Flight which in turn leads to Urban Sprawl, both of which seem to be bad things. They're also not supposed to "overdevelop" the areas in the city that already exist, cause that could lead to worsened conditions for natural disasters when they do strike. Basically, city residents are supposed to passively stay where they are and enjoy the onslaught of vibrant diversity. To do otherwise is intolerable racism.

    I think this goes to the heart of the matter. National MSM is largely based in NY, home of Ellis Island sentiment. During 1880's-1920's, tons of immigrants arrived, and though Manhattan's population increased several fold and urban sprawl occurred (tons of apartment houses were built within the city to accommodate the teeming hordes), that sprawl is recalled as a good thing. But then NY doesn't have as many regularly occurring floods or hurricanes compared to those on the coast.

    It seems, however, that most didn't leave NY during that time period. Unless moving uptown counts. But they stayed more or less within NY and didn't go too far from vibrant diversity.

    Maybe that's the model the MSM is working off of. No one should ever leave the city when all the diversity comes swarming in. They should simply stay and do nothing. Ever since early '60's book Revolutionary Road, the MSM have always blamed the suburbs, the people leaving for the suburbs, etc. Leads one to think these are largely urbanites who just don't like suburbs, especially when there's little in the way of diversity there.

    That “vibrant diversity” was shut down by the National Origins Act which allowed for assimilation which was working until overturned by the anti-American immigration reform of 1965. That change discriminated against Europeans in favor of the 3d world, the importation of which was to keep the Democratic Party in power and punish whitey for racism. Subsequently, old established neighborhoods and villages have been destroyed by obnoxious primitives with filthy habits who think Americans owe them something.

    Mass immigration in the 19th and early 20th Century overwhelmed the cities increasing crime, disease, exploitation, and lowering wages and turning municipal governments into corrupt Democratic Party political machines.

    Read More
  23. Maj. Kong says:
    @Wilkey
    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Decent zoning laws do raising housing costs, but they would be more than offset by reductions in immigration rates. I don't recall much comment here objecting to reasonable zoning laws. Most readers here would prefer to achieve AFF by reducing immigration.

    I have heard some refer to this as a “1 in 1000 year flood”, so a substantial infrastructure investment would have been needed to heed this off. It was not too long ago that the fear in Texas was droughts.

    I don’t think most of us are anti-zoning. Steve loves to praise the strict zoning of Malibu and many places in Northern California. It isn’t even the lack of zoning that explains AFF, its a function of geography. Texas cities, El Paso excepted, can expand suburbs in 360 degrees. Most wealthy costal cities, such as San Francisco, can only expand in 180 degrees or less, and are for all intents and purposes built out.

    Map of El Paso, TX

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/chicanos-like-living-on-their-tragic-dirt/?highlight=suburbia#comment-1910194

    One of my previous comments on AFF.

    Read More
  24. CCZ says:

    Mark Zuckerberg decries reported end of DACA in heartfelt Facebook post.

    “I stand with the Dreamers — the young people brought to our country by their parents. Many have lived here as long as they can remember. Dreamers have a special love for this country because they can’t take living here for granted. They understand all the opportunities they have and want nothing more than the chance to serve their country and their community. And Dreamers deserve that chance.

    These young people represent the future of our country and our economy. They are our friends and family, students and young leaders in our communities.”

    “These young people represent the future of our country and our economy.”

    If Bill Kristol, Bret Stephens, AND Mark Zuckerberg say so, it must be true.

    Read More
  25. Anon7 says:

    It’s not like drought followed by flood is part of Texas folklore or anything:

    (Skip to 1 minute 45 seconds if you’re in a rush)

    Read More
  26. What was that line of Elizabeth Warren and Barak Obama? “You didn’t build that!”

    OK, let’s stipulate to that nonsense.

    Isn’t the fact of this tragedy that cities and countries built by immigrants, legal or illegal, are generally crappy? Hell, they can’t even take a little rain, which is something you see often in the third world, but they can’t get it right even there, so why are we surprised when American cities ‘built’ by immigrants have major failings like these?

    There’s a reason the third world is what it is, and it isn’t the lack of magic dirt.

    Read More
  27. poolside says:

    Most leftists are showing their biases on the flood issue.

    It wasn’t Houston’s lack of zoning that caused the flooding from Harvey. We simply have a lot more people than we did 20-30-40 years ago, and so more people were impacted.

    With half the population, we still would have had overwhelming flooding here in a 50-inch rainfall. But there would have been fewer people impacted … because fewer people would live here. Many of the flooded areas, like the massive community near me that is home to many Indian and Chinese immigrants — would still be farms or ranches.

    Leftists also show their lack of knowledge about the city. The Houston area has lots of green space and plenty of levees, retention ponds, bayous, etc. When they say “it’s all paved over” I know its just something they read in Salon or The Atlantic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    "Zoning" doesn't do much good when you are inundated with millions of third worlders. More people means more housing, roads, shopping malls, pavement, and subsidence. What exactly do the lefties envision with more restrictive 'zoning'? 100-story high-rise low-rent apartment complexes with the immigrants staying inside and not driving, not shopping, not working?

    The left never misses a chance to rip on Texas on regulatory issues, and just not enough big intrusive government trying to control every decision. These control freaks believe that nearly every problem in Texas owes to not enough regulations, red tape, and restrictions.

    Lefties want open borders and the entire world to move here, but they hate "sprawl." It must require incredibly powerful dogma to be unable to connect these two dots that are 1/100" from one another.
  28. Mokiki says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Last I heard urban sprawl planning was a practice of white makes

    Is there anything we can get right? Thank goodness for demographic change

    Yes, we can look forward to ending up like this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Nigeria

    Read More
  29. anonguy says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Rural Kansas is increasingly overrun with invaders (both legal and illegal) brought in to work in agriculture and meatpacking. Gov. Sam Brownback has a long history of notorious support for this, and its no surprise he has turned a blind eye. Should Kobach be elected Governor next year, it will be the 21st Century repeat of 19th Century "Bleeding Kansas". The left is desperate to flip a Middle American red state.

    Rural Kansas is increasingly overrun with …..

    One thing the world has plenty of is desolate, semi-arid steppe.

    Anybody you know pining to live out there?

    Sounds like a place to escape from.

    Why is this some big loss to some hypothetical white hegemony?

    Read More
  30. @vinny
    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.

    If you’re going to come to this country and read Steve and comment, be smarter. There is absolutely no contradiction.

    Houston (area) directly has a couple million extra people because of mass immigration.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston#Demographics

    This is the direct cause of the extra–and sprawling–population.

    And Steve is pointing out the–quite typical–MSM refusal to even mention the “i-word” in relation to anything negative even as it blathers on tediously about directly related phenomena–in this case sprawl.

    ~~~

    Yes, there is a perfectly legitimate debate about how much suburban development may be appropriate in particular areas based on any number of values/considerations–wildlife, traffic, fire, aesthetics, farmland preservation, economics, and yes, flood control and affordable family formation.

    But those debates–and tradeoffs–are lessened toward almost being moot without mass immigration because we simply wouldn’t even have the need to more development. We’d be living comfortably with 60 or 70 million fewer people and could have affordable family formation out the wazoo–including even nicer places like California–without sprawling over every hillside, valley or plain.

    Mass immigration is making everything worse. Sprawl is just one of those–rather more obvious–items.

    Read More
  31. @poolside
    Most leftists are showing their biases on the flood issue.

    It wasn't Houston's lack of zoning that caused the flooding from Harvey. We simply have a lot more people than we did 20-30-40 years ago, and so more people were impacted.

    With half the population, we still would have had overwhelming flooding here in a 50-inch rainfall. But there would have been fewer people impacted ... because fewer people would live here. Many of the flooded areas, like the massive community near me that is home to many Indian and Chinese immigrants -- would still be farms or ranches.

    Leftists also show their lack of knowledge about the city. The Houston area has lots of green space and plenty of levees, retention ponds, bayous, etc. When they say "it's all paved over" I know its just something they read in Salon or The Atlantic.

    “Zoning” doesn’t do much good when you are inundated with millions of third worlders. More people means more housing, roads, shopping malls, pavement, and subsidence. What exactly do the lefties envision with more restrictive ‘zoning’? 100-story high-rise low-rent apartment complexes with the immigrants staying inside and not driving, not shopping, not working?

    The left never misses a chance to rip on Texas on regulatory issues, and just not enough big intrusive government trying to control every decision. These control freaks believe that nearly every problem in Texas owes to not enough regulations, red tape, and restrictions.

    Lefties want open borders and the entire world to move here, but they hate “sprawl.” It must require incredibly powerful dogma to be unable to connect these two dots that are 1/100″ from one another.

    Read More
  32. @AM

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.
     
    LOL! We just don't live in a world of happy mediums.

    Vermont has practically no immigration and high housing prices and basically no young people. Yes, you can't throttle housing builds for "environmental" reasons and expect good things. We need people and young families.

    Meanwhile, yes, immigration, legal or no, increases demand for housing, driving prices up. I was unaware until the flood that Houston was one of the globalist capitals of the world in terms of that ever sought after explosion of diversity. Immigration of any form also decreases wages, which would also hinder family formation.

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it's borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing. While I'm not thrilled with the morality of contraception (an understatement), the contraction of the West maybe just a period of pain into stability/balance given the technological advances.

    However, the American Association of Homebuilders in no way benefits from any of that and liberals with no other values risk being "racist" (somehow) so let's pave Texas. sigh

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it’s borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing.

    This.

    Contra to the “not enough people open the borders!” nonsense from the globoscum, it is directly the reverse. Have a border and whatever the current fertility situation given population density, resources, employment, etc. the future one will eventually come into balance.

    Let people stream in and you will suppress wages and drive up costs and *never* have affordable family formation again. Basically, you’re conducting genocide against the nation’s people.

    Read More
  33. Takashi says:
    @AM

    Until three days ago building any and everywhere was a manifestation of affordable family formation. Anyone who tried to mitigate the downsides was accused of diminishing white fertility and GOP votes.
     
    LOL! We just don't live in a world of happy mediums.

    Vermont has practically no immigration and high housing prices and basically no young people. Yes, you can't throttle housing builds for "environmental" reasons and expect good things. We need people and young families.

    Meanwhile, yes, immigration, legal or no, increases demand for housing, driving prices up. I was unaware until the flood that Houston was one of the globalist capitals of the world in terms of that ever sought after explosion of diversity. Immigration of any form also decreases wages, which would also hinder family formation.

    In other words, an aging society if it enforced it's borders would naturally sow the seeds of increased family formation through increased wages and cheaper housing. While I'm not thrilled with the morality of contraception (an understatement), the contraction of the West maybe just a period of pain into stability/balance given the technological advances.

    However, the American Association of Homebuilders in no way benefits from any of that and liberals with no other values risk being "racist" (somehow) so let's pave Texas. sigh

    Maybe we could be like Japan…

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored