Best demography books according to redditors
We found 109 Reddit comments discussing the best demography books. We ranked the 33 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 109 Reddit comments discussing the best demography books. We ranked the 33 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
No.
First, there is still essentially no space between the most conservative Democrats and the most liberal Republicans. In other words: Joe Manchin is a Democrat, Susan Collins is a Republican, and there is no space between the two. Most aspects of our system (partisan primaries, first past the post voting and congressional mechanics) mean that you are far better off being an outlier in your party than forming your own party.
Sources:
Neutral Rating
[Conservative Rating](http://acuratings.conservative.org/acu-federal-legislative-ratings/?year1=2016&chamber=11&state1=0&sortable=4]
Liberal Rating
Second, the center is smaller than it's ever been. The general public really is divided, with people becoming increasingly polarized. Not only that, but people who vote, volunteer or donate are even more politically partisan than the general public. Finally, those partisan differences are increasingly geographically concentrated which, combined with gerrymandering, means that the median voter for most house districts is well within the bounds of the existing parties.
Sources:
Pew 2014
Pew 2017
The Big Sort (2009)
Finally, both America and Britain had very clearly centrist parties in control in the 90's and early 2000's. Clinton's Democrats/Blair's Labour and Bush's Republican/Cameron's Tories were both much more centrist. All 4 coalitions have essentially been destroyed in the wake of Iraq and the 2008 financial crisis - none were able to prevent the revolt of their partisan base by attracting moderate voters from the other party.
In conclusion, you generally can't create a new party in a two party system, and this is a uniquely bad time to try and do so.
Eric Kaufmann is a mixed-race Jew and university professor who specializes in understanding ethnicity and demography. He published a book earlier this year called Whiteshift which largely focused on examining the White Genocide/Great Replacement agenda via mass immigration, miscegenation, the liberal "anti-racist" (i.e., anti-White) ideology that ultimately underpins it all, and the rise of far-right, reactionary, and populist movements like Trump, Brexit, and the Alt-Right in response to the left's anti-White agenda.
According to his demographic estimates, most White Western nations like the UK are going to become majority non-White in this century and about 75% mixed race by 2150. And that figure didn't even include non-White immigrants that will still remain genetically/racially pure - which means that Whites are going to be reduced to a tiny percentage of the population in their own countries and blended out of existence almost entirely in the next century.
And so if ethnonationalist movements like the Alt-Right aren't successful, then not only will the White race be completely destroyed, but so will every other race as well as humanity becomes one giant monoracial and monocultural beige blob - which is the exact opposite of diversity.
Here's what you're referring to: the book The Myth of Millionaire Tax Flight: How Place Still Matters for the Rich by Christobal Young. Here's a short version of the book. Millionaires and billionaires in the US and Worldwide don't actually leave their homes that much and stay where they have jobs or businesses, in general where they live.
The thing is, that the US and other developed nations should pursue not simply taxing the richest of the rich, but also the crackdown on tax havens.
Yes. Progressives, particularly progressive POC. To learn a lot more about why this is a smart strategy, check out Brown is the New White.
Another really smart strategy more Democrats need to get on board with is funding POC-lead community organizing groups. Find some here! These are the groups that put in the tough, long-term work to organize and turn out the black and brown communities that form the Democratic base. In the run-up to Doug Jones' win, Movement Vote and other groups gave $500,000 to stipend local women of color to organize at Alabama HBCUs and within their own communities. This is one of the major reasons that black voter turnout was higher than white voter turnout, why we squeaked out a victory, and why the Senate is in play now.
Donate to one of these fantastic groups today!
Or don't, your call. But at least check out the website.
An insightful read. It is a short abstract, it seems, from the recent book The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart by Bill Bishop, presumably also the author of the article.
A two-party system is really bad. Proportional representation leads to a richer exchange of ideas, and more emphasis on consensus. Election reform could undo the political segregation.
I don't understand why telling elaborate lies and engaging in such absurd deception helps their bottom line. It's not any more expensive to tell the truth... And, I think a lot of people are sympathetic to the truth right now and are waking up to the fact that they've been lied to for decades.
How about discussion what Muslims really believe and what their holy texts say, and how their beliefs can lead to hostility against other ethnic and religious groups. Why is it that we are constantly being told "Islam is a religion of peace", even though one of the central beliefs of Muslims is that "non-believers should be killed" - and why is it that when Muslims act upon those beliefs and commit violent Jihad for the sake of Allah, the media is so slow to use the word terrorism? They like to say "this has nothing to do with Islam", even though many of these guys are very open about the fact that what they do is entirely motivated by Islam.
How about discussing some of the issues regarding Muslim communities in Europe (terrorism, sex abuse and trafficking of infidel minors, widespread prison radicalization, etc). How about discussion of the racial component of interracial crimes, especially when they involve recent refugees. The media always tells us when a white person does something racist, or hateful, or when a white cop shoots an "unarmed" black, but we never hear the racial component of crimes when the races are reversed. Why is that? If we are going to make rational choices about migration, we need to be given good information, and we need to be able to discussion issues without fear of censorship. Why can't we do that? Why won't the CBC do that?
A good youtube channel that shows some of the dark sides of immigration - most of this stuff is conspicuously hidden from us:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwJo0lXjjk482VdpsGP37yQ/videos
Here are some pirated ebooks that I've read recently about the situation in Europe that I recommend - if other people have books they recommend, let me know! None of these are books that I consider inflammatory.
http://libgen.io/search.php?req=myth+of+nordic+socialism&lg_topic=libgen&open=0&view=simple&res=25&phrase=1&column=def
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=5B37BE123DE2E9D58EA19D154F69C7D8
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=921D3F2BFB16DE275BF2F8409EA07575
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=AFE82DA7C58E6DCBE598461288DDA71D
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=31F4C8F617B81A38F94C454211C8D902
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=BF441F583F18BE776236C16B25020DD1
Also, if anyone has a Kindleunlimited account, please upload a pirated copy of this one:
https://www.amazon.ca/Fistfights-Muslims-Europe-Journey-Modernity-ebook/dp/B01B2FNUI0
Lastly, a good book about Islam that I recommend:
http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=E1CBD406713397EBD92BEC396AE3AB67
There's an interesting book about this, The Big Sort by Bill Bishop. It looks at how people have moved to areas that align more with their politics, consciously or unconsciously, over the past 50 years. Worth a read if you like this sort of thing.
This assumes America is or was one culture. Different historians classify people differently, but in the broadest sense there are at least:
Embedded in these groups is the idea of a founding culture (going back centuries) that informs attitudes and ideals. To your point regarding skepticism toward education, I think that's a feature primarily of the Appalachian group who were founded by one of the last waves of British immigrants. Glossing over a lot of history: they were poor, desperate, war-torn, and generally uneducated. Late to the party and culturally incompatible with many of the existing colonists, they headed for the hills and subsisted in a romantic but precarious manner. This is where we get the frontiersman and the rugged individualist myth. While tied to "southern" culture (for a number of interesting reasons that we will ignore for simplicity of this comment), they're really pretty distinct. For whatever reasons, this group has asserted itself and suggested their version of "American culture" is the correct one--and we've been living through this friction for a while.
For a layperson, I suggest the following for further reading:
If you're up for a more academic and thorough examination:
Not /u suicidedreamer but this segmentation of society is not just online you also have multiple books written on it http://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457777624&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+sort
Even before that you had the removal of urban centers which were focus points/meeting grounds for exposure to people from different walks of life.
JVL wrote a book on the topic FYI
Med sådan en trang til at italesætte rigtigt og forkert, så kan du vel næppe være liberal.
Det racisme mod den danske befolkning, at reklamer fremstiller forhold der ikke gælder i virkeligheden, men snarer en virkelighed globalister gerne vil have i fremtiden.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev1Wyk5EsGY
https://www.amazon.com/Whiteshift-Populism-Immigration-Future-Majorities/dp/1468316974
For nogle er det bare accepteret at vi udskifter os selv og ødelægger vores fremragende genpøl. Men så man også hjernevasket.
> The Dobe Juǀ'hoan
The book you are referring to is a case study of a particular people group, themselves a subset of the San, perhaps you've heard of them from the movie The Gods Must Be Crazy. Unsurprisingly, they haven't been treated well and in the past 30 years their traditional marriage customs have certainly changed. And while I won't debate the merits of those past or current customs, bridge kidnapping isn't occurring in egalitarian societies.
> As our economy changes it follows that people with skills that are no longer in demand will naturally desire to relocate to wherever their skills are still needed, since it is often easier to do that than learn new skills.
See this is one of those in a vacuum statements that sound great but are completely outside the purview of life.
Lets say you are a node.js developer at the top of your game in your 40's with stagnant wages or even expecting a pay cut. You aren't walking into the home you own and telling your wife and kids, 'hey i know you guys love the schools you fought so hard to get into and i know you will miss all your friends and social circles we have accrued over a lifetime here and honey i know your charity work is really important to you but we must relocate to {mainland Europe} because we'd take an effective 4% paycut'
This kind of stuff just doesn't happen, ever. We have multiple books on the subject, because the same argument is made over and over again about capital flight. The truth is that the decision making process is very complex and its a mixture of many qualitative factors and people have a large preferential bias for what they know.
If you want further reading material and a comprehensive study, check out The Myth of Millionaire Tax Flight: How Place Still Matters for the Rich
> I think there's going to be coups soon in western countries within 20 years if the people don't get their heads straight. I think the military knows what they need to do, and might step in.
France didn't care about this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3435772/Former-commander-French-Foreign-Legion-75-arrested-Pegida-protest-Calais.html
Why would the French military men start growing a pair in the future? Don't you guys get it? It's over. http://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Populations-Immigrant-Civilization/dp/0312302592/
We are witnessing the SPOILS (women, welfare, housing, education, medicine) being divvied up between the VICTORS (various third-world tribes under the banner of Islamofascism).
In Eastern Europe there may be military coups to get out of the EU and setup strong borders against Western European third-worlders (who will soon be on the move for fresher economies and women to exploit). These coups will be quickly squashed by a militarized EU and NATO.
Western Europe is lost. You guys need to get that into your heads. Even if all third-worlders left today, suicidal degeneracy will destroy what's left because the CORE of the West is ROTTEN.
Ask yourselves, what's left to protect? Gay rights? Feminism? Self-hate? Transgenderism? Crony-capitalism? Soulless consumerism? No wonder European men don't bother lifting a finger for the women anymore. http://russia-insider.com/en/rts-anissa-naouai-interviews-iben-thranholm/ri12471
Europeans have checked out.
A demographic shift taking place nationwide. This book puts it in a good context.
Think about how unbridled immigration from third-world countries and open-arms refugee policies affects a nation's law, culture, traditions, and political philosophy. Just go take a peek at Europe's cultural suicide.
And I challenge you to think critically about the related issues independent of ethnicity! Resist the leftist impulse to view everything through the lens of race, and you'll gain some harrowing insights about what is happening in the world.
***
Read one of these books:
Observe the destruction of the family and the increasing infidelity, glorification of casual sex, and out-of-wedlock child births (which is one of the major predictors of criminality). The media normalizes so much of this.
Consider the growth of the government and the ever-increasing dependence on government by citizens.
***
I could go on.
It's an old theory.
https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Genocide-Files-Harry-Scott-Gibbons/dp/0951446428
I am gonna report your post just to see how hypocritical /u/ModeratorsOfEurope/ are. Will they ban you or not?
Well, I'd personally say that it's not likely to be an issue.
Historically, the United States has a pretty long history of people already in the United States worrying about new groups entering the US.
This involves rolling out a remarkably-constant-across-the-centuries list of concerns with each group. That they will force cultural change on the existing inhabitants. That they come from poorer places than the US, and will make the US poorer once they arrive. That they suffer from sexual immorality. That they will force their religion on others. That they suffer from radical political ideas and will destroy American political institutions. That they will refuse to learn English.
You can go all the way back to Benjamin Franklin, back in 1751, prior to the American Revolution, and Franklin was already complaining how non-white (yes, the term has been remarkably malleable over the years) Germans, Swedes, and all sorts of other bilge of humanity were going to ruin America in "Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind":
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0080
> And since Detachments of English from Britain sent to America, will have their Places at Home so soon supply’d and increase so largely here; why should the Palatine Boors be suffered to swarm into our Settlements, and by herding together establish their Language and Manners to the Exclusion of ours? Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion.
>
> Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? why increase the Sons of Africa, by Planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely White and Red? But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country, for such Kind of Partiality is natural to Mankind.
And for centuries, those alarming people rolled on in, and instead of collapsing, the US became wildly wealthy and powerful.
Happened with Catholics, the Italians, the Irish, Jews, the Polish, and on and on and on. Somehow, the imminent catastrophe that the other was going to cause never quite materialized.
Here's a cute political cartoon I like to drag up: “Who is to Blame”, from Judge magazine 1891
It was not frictionless, no. But it has persistently worked out.
You can find similar worried authors all through US history. It'd be fun to line up some modern-day equivalent -- I dunno, maybe Pat Buchanan's The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization alongside other screeds -- take one about the Irish, say, and one about the Poles -- and put the texts side by side and actually do a Venn diagram showing how many of the concerns actually overlap versus how many differ from each era.
The especially good bit is that historically, a number of people who originally came to the American colonies were considered as something of flotsam. The American colonies were the destination for British penal transportation for longer than Australia was, not to mention all those religious radicals, or the piratical types operating out of Rhode Island. If there was one good, solid piece of evidence that societies weren't particularly good at identifying people whose progeny would surely lead to failure, the US has got to be it.
Certains avancent que ce triage social nourri la polarisation politique excessive que beaucoup de pays développés connaissent à divers degrés. Et la France n'est pas nécessairement la pire élève de ce coté là, mais n'est pas non plus indemne de cette situation.
>It didn't really change anybody's mind, and one's view on it was 99% shaped by what they were already thinking.
These books are about why they think that way. Hillbilly Elegy is about communities (mainly the non-urban communities that gave Trump huge support) that feel left behind and the recent history and thinking of those groups. The Big Sort is about the homogenization of social groups and thinking in the US, leading to why people feel comfortable throwing "grenades". The Righteous Mind is a book on the psychology of morality and politics in the US and why the ideologies are so different.
Trump may have won big with white voters of all stripes, but he also did better among Latinos than Romney, so it's obvious that it isn't just "poor uneducated whites", but if people don't try to figure out why the division is so strong and where the other side is coming from, what chance do we have for uniting and restoration?
I live in the most liberal district in one of the most liberal cities in the US. I have no difficulty in understanding that perspective and its driving forces. The other view is not so well illuminated
Edit: though I shouldn't have said anything in the first place. This is the one place I can go to avoid all the cross-talk about politics and ideologies. I like all of you guys and our light conversations about shoes. I'd rather not ruin that for myself.
There's a book titled The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart by Bill Bishop. I haven't read it myself and only came across it yesterday, but it seems relevant to what we're discussing here.
I've been reading Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction by Adam Jones, which from what I gather is the definitive textbook for any undergraduate Genocide Studies course. The introductory chapters in particular examine different scholars' definitions of "genocide," as well as case studies examining multiple examples of events over which scholars debate whether they constitute "genocide." I also cannot recommend it enough, because Jones also caters toward those who want to read further into the literature on the subject in multiple disciplines.
https://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Populations-Immigrant-Civilization/dp/0312302592
These two ethnographies are easy/pleasant reads, frequently used in undergraduate courses:
Ethnographies written almost solely for the purpose of introducing hunter-gatherer societies to college freshmen/sophomores include ...
These teaching ethnographies have been around for decades, so while they don't reflect current scholarship, it should be possible to pick them all up for a couple of bucks each, and I think you'd get a lot out of browsing them that's lost in comparative work.
This is really great. This is the first time I have heard an analysis of what really is going on.
He only goes so far here. To carry his ideas further, leaving more money in the hands of two-income families where the two incomes are similar, more money for their parenting, is still making the woman work. A woman who has to work is going to have fewer children than one who is home, and she may divorce from sheer exasperation and exhaustion.
But his ideas are right, about the parental wage concept, and about the valuing of parenting specifically and visibly. A very exciting speaker and writer, this guy Lyman Stone.
"Hi. I'm Suzie. I want to bankrupt you by marrying you and having children" is not a nice pick-up line. That's how you get "men going their own way."
Or, "Hi. I'm John. I want to make you work and raise kids too. I'll help when I can, but money will be tight, and you will be tired, and miss the kids all day. Sorry, but that's the best I've got, under the present tax system." Not much better.
I wish Lyman Stone would write a book. I tried to find his name on Amazon but it's not there. He could just self-publish on Amazon, simply bundling the articles he has already written. I also want to hear from his wife. Let her contribute a piece to this book.
This is another book: I haven't read it.
https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Planet-Global-Population-Decline/dp/1984823213/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=empty+planet&qid=1570079917&sr=8-1
For those of you that want to have your blood boil, or have a good laugh (or cry) at what the religious right is thinking about this topic have a look at this "documentary", this book, and this book as well.
I am not promoting these books (I vehemently disagree with this thinking), but this is actually a serious movement within social conservatism and social conservatives who are kind of freaking out about the low birth rates and extremely widespread use of contraception.
If conservatives had their way, the federal budget would be smaller. Certain large federal bureaucracies would be shut down and dismantled. There would be no Obamacare and no Dodd Frank.
What we have right now is not conservative rule, it's a stalemate. Given the polarization in society at large, the stalemate is a product of politicians on both sides of the aisle representing their constituents as best they can.
The problem isn't Congress; it's the constituents. A radical polarization has occurred in American society over the past few decades. This book offers one possible explanation. Unless we citizens can bridge the gaps in society, we should not expect Congress to do it for us.
Edit: I shouldn't say the budget would be smaller under conservatives. They certainly didn't do much to shrink it in the Bush years.
I kind of doubt it, as the higher rates of abortion were definitely driven by a massive campaign, per this book, which is absolutely excellently researched and well sourced / cited.
Let's just say that racism rears its ugly head again, and that the west is certainly not blameless when it comes to this.
Yeah it's not nearly 5-1, but in certain parts of China the ratios are more skewed than in others. I think the highest was around 1.7. You might be interested in the book Unnatural Selection by Mara Hvistendahl. Goes into a lot of detail about why the ratios are so skewed and why it's a self perpetuating issue.
The comments on the book mentioned in that article are incredibly depressing.
> forcing people into echo chambers of conformity
Nah man they do that on their own really really well. For an investigation of this phenomenon at scale in the real world, check out Bill Bishop's The Big Sort.
> excessive moderation
Funny, the least echo-chamber-ey subs I know of are some of the most heavily moderated. See /r/NeutralPolitics or /r/PoliticalDiscussion.
Well, racist people (or nationalists who see racism as tied to nationalism), see it as a race or nation dying off & dread that.
In the US, the birth rate of white people is low, in Germany I believe it's below replacement rate. Here in the US, we white folk will be outnumbered next generation, as Hispanics and others are having larger families then we are.
If you see cultural change as dangerous or scary, you're terrified by this.
Seriously, Pat wrote a whole book on this subject.
https://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Populations-Immigrant-Civilization/dp/0312302592
He's not entirely wrong in his basic thesis, this demographic shift is causing real issues... but mostly because of fear causing the outgoing top demographic's reactionary response... i.e. Brexit or Trump.
Given the nationalist & racist undertones going on in society within that movie, coupled with the exaggeration of low birth rate to zero birth rate, I very much saw the basic idea of this movie as highlighting these demographic fears.
In the movie, the only hope for humanity, was a scorned & imperiled 'other' in the form of a miraculously pregnant imegrent woman.
I think both, really.
Large immigrant population = higher fertility rate, because those recent immigrants have more kids as immigrants usually do.
But a lot of pro-natalist writers cite France as one example where the pro-natalist policies have done at least something. Jonathan Last discusses France starting on page 148 of "What to Expect When No One's Expecting".
Some quick googling gives articles like:
Historically in broad strokes no.
https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/vox/the-ezra-klein-show/e/55554701
There's arguably good reason for the ideological homogeneous formations around identity, coalitional, and party politics.
This can only happen within political systems which prop up binary choices.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law
Edit: additional polarization reading
https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723
Keyword: The Big Sort
It depends on who is controlling the party and what they are listening to. I discussed this at great length in my book, GOP GPS. https://www.amazon.com/GOP-GPS-Millennials-Republican-Survive/dp/1510717323/
A fairly popular book was written on this very subject back in 2009. The Big Sort
You are an idiot. There are no "low-IQ areas" or-"high-IQ areas" and all of humanity's modern economic, scientific, and cultural achievements are not driven by my people from low birth rate countries. It is correct that most Western, industrialized countries do not have birthrates at or greater than replacement fertility. For better discussion of this I recommend the book Empty Planet. India's fertility rate is above replacement rate and yet immigrants from India seem to do fine Western industrialized countries. Actually, there are too many nutty things in your post for me to address so I'm going to stop here. Go back to your gaming.
honestly, just get into anthropology and you'll get plenty of stuff. graeber is just a well known anthropologist who is openly anarchist, but he talks about a lot of the same stuff that many other anthropologists talk about. i once randomly dumpstered this book (crappy pdf of it here ) only to find that it happened to be an anthropological study of a non-hierarchical society.
Death of the West is a fascinating read, if you haven't checked it out yet.
> You're fooling yourself if you think that's the primary issue.
And yet, report after report shows that geographical self-sorting is the number one driver. ^123
> No one is debating compactness as the main problem that creates gerrymandering. The issue is political lines drawn to minimize Democratic voters.
And yet, here you are doing exactly that.
I don't think that we're overpopulated at all. And human population has already entered the beginning stages of global decline. John Ibbitson wrote a good book on it called Empty Planet. I find it a convincing argument as to why the major issue now is population stagnation and decline.
I stumbled upon this book a few years ago. https://www.amazon.com/Genocide-Files-Harry-Scott-Gibbons/dp/0951446428
https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723
Du gider jo ikke et dansk værdiset, du ønsker at vores værdier skal udvandes og vi skal blive en del af en globalverden, der ødelægger fælleskaber og højtudviklet etniskehomoegene samfund overalt.
En verden hvor diversitet er en merit det handler om racer og kønsroller, men ikke personlige individuelle kvaliteter. Et sted hvor drømmen om en "mixed raced majority" og "demographic revolution" kan herske. Det sygt som du vil ødelægge udgangspunktet for min stamme, dybt sygt.
https://www.amazon.com/Whiteshift-Populism-Immigration-Future-Majorities/dp/1468316974
https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-anderson-cooper-exciting-white-people-minority-america
Skal Israel være en homogen stat eller skal de også være globohomo?
Trollaat nyt jäämällä kiinni hyvin epäoleelliseen asiaan, mutta okei. Ihan hauska aihehan tämä on.
Olemassaoleva tiede tuntuu tukevan väitteitäni, vaikkakin en usko että sitä voi suoraan soveltaa Suomen monipuoluejärjestelmään.
https://academic.oup.com/joc/article-abstract/64/2/317/4085994 Tässä tutkimuksessa havainnoitiin erittäin merkittävää homofiliaa republikaanien ja demokraattien twitterin sosiaalisissa graafeissa.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137276773_2 Lisää poliittista homofiliaa graafien avulla
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0093650218813655 Vähän erilainen tutkimus poliittisesta homofiliasta redditissä
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25953820 Todettiin aika selkeää poliittista homofiliaa facebookin sosiaalisissa graafeissa.
https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2008/06/19/the-big-sort En saanut kirjasta helposti kopiota, mutta economistin artikkelissa on mielenkiintoista juttua poliittisesta homofiliasta liittyen asumiseen.
Voisin jatkaa mutta eiköhän noilla pääse hyvin alkuun.
Oletan että olemme tässä vaiheessa samaa mieltä vahvan poliittisen homofilian läsnäolosta sosiaalisessa mediassa. Jos näin on, graafianalyysi vaikuttaa äärimmäisen tehokkaalta työkalulta äänestyskäyttäytymisen ennustamiseen ainakin kaksipuoluejärjestelmässä. Koska pystymme luotettavasti ennustamaan ihmisten äänestyskäyttäytymistä, pystymme myös havaitsemaan mahdollisia poikkeamia sosiaalisen piirin sekä äänestyskoppikuvien välillä.
Toki voitaisiin myös yksinkertaistaa ja lähettää poliittisia kyselyitä äänestyskoppikuvien postaajille, merkittävät poikkeamat kyselyvastausten ja todellisen äänestyskäytöksen välillä kertoisi jo aika paljon.
Uskoisin että näitä kahta tekniikkaa yhdistämällä voitaisiin jo päästä aika selkeisiin tuloksiin.
>Eli tämä vaalivilppikuvaaminen erotetaan normikuvaamisesta "työkalujen" ja "graafin analyysin" avulla. Mites toimitaan jos kuvaaja on vaihtanut kameran polaarisuuden tai jos salamavalon vaiheinen on ollut tainnutus -asennossa?
Ehkä puhuit tässä jonkinlaisesta teknisestä keinosta tunnistaa äänestyskoppikuvia? Jos näin oli, en koe teknisiä keinoja tässä kovin tarpeelliseksi. Suomen populaatio on niin pieni että tämä olisi triviaalinen ongelma ratkaista vaikkapa mechanical turkilla.
The issues are more complex than this one thing.
I was reading a great book on demographics called Empty Planet which suggests that developed nations like Canada do not have a birth rate to required to replace those who die. Our national rate is 1.5 births / woman, and 2.1 is needed to keep the population we have. In fact,
>1971 was the last year our birth rate matched where it needed to be to renew the population without immigration. source
Because of our ageing population, most women are past prime childbearing years, and if you look at the population pyramid on this site it looks like more than 1/2 our population is over 40 years old.
From this source it looks like only NL has a lower fertility rate than QUE.
In general, entry level jobs need younger people, and with immigration and the children they bring, there will be many entry level jobs with few workers to fill them, and few top end jobs, with a surplus of people over 40 looking for them.
You could look at:
Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction
or
Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur
​
first as much I would like Andrew Yang will not get the democratic nomination the best thing that could happen is his ideas get incorporated into someone else campaign.
The worse part is that while we can use the VAT and decrease social services to give everyone 1000 dollars a month here is the fundamental problem the American mindset conditioned to see this as "increase my taxes', "welfare" and "pull yourself up by your bootstraps bs".
Who would turn out for this would be more urban, younger and minority voters. This argument is baseless and pointless...
Whatever this moderate weird libertarian story is we don't need it:
https://www.thenation.com/article/david-brooks-never-trump/
**screw brooks btw**
Also you can read this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Brown-New-White-Demographic-Revolution/dp/1620971151
It has been like this before- it's just that in the post-WWII era, there were two things which no longer hold true:
A fundamental agreement about the social contract- even Eisenhower and Nixon were, by today's standards, New-Deal liberals. Look back at the Nixon-Kennedy debates, and you see that they agreed on much more than they disagreed on.
Second, the party dividing lines and the social dividing lines were much more mis-matched than today. Democrats had to appeal to Northern intellectuals, Texans, Chicago machine politicians while Republicans had to get both Wall Street and rural Blacks. This led to much less doctrinaire policys and more compromise and horse-trading.
More about this here.
> I've heard the argument that people are actually more isolated on the internet - so atheists will only read r/atheism, Christians will only read Christian blogs, both will only have friends on Facebook of the same religious orientation as themselves, etc.
There's a well-regarded book (that I haven't read) about this sort of demographic self-segregation called The Big Sort.
> I don't think the internet will bring down the Ultra-Orthodox (I think that economic pressures will force the Ultra-Orthodox to evolve or revolt, especially in Israel), but I do believe it does present a threat to their walled garden.
I was very intrigued by what you say about the haredim in Israel. My impression--which I have gleaned almost entirely by reading Haaretz in English, Ynet, Jpost, and longer form journalism--is that their vice-like grip on privileges extracted from the body-politic (e.g., no military service, no work) shows no sign of loosening. There used to be a party Shinui and a politician Tommy Lapid but when he was vanquished both Shas and United Torah Judaism metaphorically pissed on his metaphorical grave. (Isn't UTJ part of Bibi's coalition?)
We're going a bit off topic, but a strong theory is that the world will have a population decline or stagnation. Hopefully at that point we can live better, and maintain cultural ties to eating meat.
This has been in the news for decades on a regular basis and is common knowledge at this point. This can't be the first time you have heard about changing demographics in Europe? If you're serious about learning more, then read Death of the West, it's heavily researched and full of citations to back them up.
I've said it before but it definitely bears repeating; "The Big Sort; Why the clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing us Apart," by Bill Bishop should be required reading for all Americans. It is a book-length study of this subject and will convince all but the most determined skeptic. While the urban/rural divide is a huge component, it is not all of the story and the reality is a bit more complicated which is what you'd expect.
Wait do you post on /r/natalism ?
https://www.amazon.com/What-Expect-When-Ones-Expecting/dp/1594037310?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc
I think you're confusing cause and effect.
The big thing that's happened in the last 30-40 years in American politics has been sorting. Look up The Big Sort.
Essentially, before 1965, you had lots of Southern Democrats who were more ideologically conservative and a smaller, but still significant number of Rockefeller Republicans in the North who were more ideologically liberal. The largest reason for congressional dysfunction is that increasingly representatives are more responsive to their constituents than before. This causes more gridlock, not less.
Now, you can argue that those constituents are frequently not thinking of their own best interests, but it's hard to make the case that in the vast majority of instances, congress is more responsive, not less.
Wen das Thema interessiert, dem kann ich "The Big Sort" von Bill Bishop empfehlen. Ist zwar schon von 2008, aber auch in den USA aktueller denn je.
Well anyways, here's a NRx reading list I'm slowly making my way through...
​
Introduction
The Dark Enlightenment Defined*
The Dark Enlightenment Explained*
The Path to the Dark Enlightenment*
The Essence of the Dark Enlightenment*
An Introduction to Neoreaction*
Neoreaction for Dummies*
Reactionary Philosophy in a Nutshell*
The Dark Enlightenment – Nick Land*
The Neoreactionary Canon
The Cathedral Explained*
When Wish Replaces Thought Steven Goldberg *
Three Years of Hate – In Mala Fide***
****
The Decline
We are Doomed – John Derbyshire*
America Alone – Mark Steyn*
After America – Mark Steyn*
Death of the West – Pat Buchanan***
The Abolition of Britain – Peter Hitchens
****
Civil Society and Culture
Coming Apart – Charles Murray
Disuniting of America – Arthur Schlesinger
The Quest for Community – Robert Nisbet
Bowling Alone – Robert Putnam
Life at the Bottom – Theodore Dalrymple
Intellectuals and society – Thomas Sowell
****
Western Civilization
Civilization: The West and the Rest – Niall Ferguson
Culture Matters – Samuel Huntington
The Uniqueness of Western Civilization – Ricardo Duchesne
****
Moldbuggery
Mencius Moldbug is one of the more influential neoreactionaries. His blog, Unqualified Reservations, is required reading; if you have not read Moldbug, you do not understand modern politics or modern history. Start here for an overview of major concepts: Moldbuggery Condensed. Introduction to Moldbuggery has the Moldbug reading list. Start with Open Letter series, then simply go from the beginning.*
****
​
You are certainly welcome to believe anything you'd like, but if you insist on holding pejorative views of others, don't be shocked when they don't react positively.
In terms of you claiming that the Democratic party leadership not reflecting the values of the Democratic electorate - you are correct. Democratic leaders are considerably more liberal and progressive than the general public at large. Again, the whole thing that started this conversation we're having is me pointing out the election results, which clearly shows this issue.
I clearly understand how you get to that condition. Thanks to The Big Sort, lefties in big emerald blue cities almost can't help but fall into group-think. While suburban and rural Democratic activists are stuck trying to explain to you that America isn't all a bunch of frustrated socialists.
In terms of Donald Trump, please understand that there is a huge white temper tantrum going on, as the 1950s economy, where if you were American, white, and male, you could get a job more or less straight out of highschool, even if you learned nothing there. The US hasn't fallen behind in the market, so much as the rest of the world has caught up, and succeeding if you're the "right" kind of person, isn't so easy anymore. Hence the tantrum.
Most of this tantrum exhibits itself as blatant white racism and nativism, but there is the leftist version of this as well. Scratch the surface of a so-called "millennial" supposedly angry at "capitalism", you find they're no more in favor of raising taxes on the rich than others. Measure 97 in particular, lost in Oregon because the public got convinced by the "rich plutocrats give people jobs and low prices as a gift - not because that's what the market will bear - so tax increases on them will all be passed on to you" canard. It's depressing.
Quite literally, in 150 yeas, no non-incumbent Democratic party candidate has ever followed a Democratic President. This is not due to "incompetence", it's due to the fact that 25% of the public always just votes against the president's party no matter what. It is generally true for Republicans as well, with the exception of Reagan, who successfully convinced the public to shift dramatically to the right.
The voters, mind you. Not the leadership.
No. Democrats are not socialists. We worship neither at the altar of "free markets" nor "government everything". Both concentrate power in the hands of a few, which leads inevitably to authoritarianism. We happen to be pulling in the same direction as socialists - advocating for more government control of completely out of control crony-capitalism and plutocracy that the GOP espouses. But we also see the lessons of socialist corrupt fascism, and don't want that either.
> It feels like we're gerrymandered, but honestly it's just the nature of our population. The Blue is too clustered for it's own good.
Yep, the suspicion of gerrymandering is generally accurate but is not always correct. Some possibilities about population distribution need to be kept in mind.
It's the chief reason why I left the neo-con movement, minus the racism. More the cognitive dissonance by reducing BC and abortion services while cutting programs for poor children.
It's actually a GOOD THING the racist asshat is thinking this way. The neo-con anti-abortion stance had very little to do with religion, it had to do with racism.
See, in their minds the only people who use BC and abortion services are white college co-eds. "Darkies" don't use them to get more welfare babies.
So to keep the white population up, we need to ban BC and abortion.
This is seriously what they believe, Pat Buchanan wrote a book about it. http://www.amazon.com/The-Death-West-Populations-Civilization/dp/0312302592
Autogenerated.
Trump, GOP, Democrats and all things politics with political commentator Evan Siegfried. AMA!
My name is Evan Siegfried a GOP strategist and political commentator. I'm a regular on Fox News and MSNBC, as well as the occasional CNN appearance. My columns have appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Daily Beast. My book, GOP GPS, came out to great reviews last year. I live in New York City with my dog, Rowdy, who's even done some dog modeling on the side.
Yell at me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/evansiegfried
Check out my book here: https://www.amazon.com/GOP-GPS-Millennials-Republican-Survive/dp/1510717323/
Proof
-----------------------------------------------------------
thefuckmobile :
What is the chance Trump wins reelection? Today's Gallup poll has his approval
at 36/60. HuffPollster has the average at 39/56. Bush 41 was in the 30s in
November 1992. Is it more likely Trump becomes the next Jimmy Carter or the
next Bush 41?
: evansiegfried :
:
: A couple other people have asked similar questions, so I will say this: Trump
: does stand a chance, but the odds can't be quantified right now given how
: major factors that influence the vote are not known (who Trump is running
: against, the economy, etc.).
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Panoptes-IS :
Hi Evan, What is your thought on right-leaning personalities calling news
stations like CNN, WaPo, NYT etc. "fake news"? Would you agree the most most
vocal of these members accurately represent Republican voters, and if not, what
are your thoughts on Conservative rhetoric being as far right as it is today?
Thank you for taking the time to do this
: evansiegfried :
:
: Stop calling it fake news. It is not helpful in the long term. We need to win
: arguments using facts, not feelings or what we wish the facts to be. It
: upsets me each and every time that people call something they don't like fake
: news. This is not to deny that some news is inaccurate for one reason or
: other, but to label all things you do not like "fake news" is to deny
: reality.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
regal1989 :
Do you think it's possible the Senate could vote for impeachment if Democrats
took the house in 2018?
: evansiegfried :
:
: I am not sure that even House Democrats are there at this point. Only a few
: have called for impeachment. A move toward it could backfire and play to
: Trump's benefit in 2020 if they do not have a case that Republicans would
: also back. If they do not, Trump would paint it as a political move and use
: it to fire up his base/say the status quo is using every trick in the book to
: prevent change.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Eric-SD :
Hi Evan, A very libertarian/conservative friend of mine believes a universal
basic income is both unavoidable in the future, and supports it as being a
"small government" policy. His argument is that it is the opposite of the
government picking "winners and losers", and instead levels the playing field
so everyone is competing from a common starting line, eliminating a lot of
necessity for government intervention. What are your thoughts on this
viewpoint?
: evansiegfried :
:
: I am not a fan of Universal Basic Income. The cost of UBI would be
: astronomical and also have negative economic impacts. It would decrease
: productivity, increase cost of living through rapid inflation, as well as is
: the equivalent of a government-provided participation trophy.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
lovely_sombrero :
Will/should the DNC take away unanimous consent to prevent the vote on senate
healthcare bill?
: evansiegfried :
:
: No. There are moderate GOP senators who are already on the fence and some key
: details that are being rumored in the Senate version of the AHCA are ones
: that the House would never go for. If this bill passes the Senate, it likely
: will die in reconciliation.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Chodamaster :
Is there any disconnect between what we are seeing in the spotlight, Republican
senators and reps saying the investigation is a witch Hunt, and what the base
and rank and file Republican s believe? And what are your thoughts on Trump's
little to no reaction on the hacking of state voting rosters?
: evansiegfried :
:
: What is being said in public by elected Republicans is very different than
: what is said in private (same with Democrats). Among the base, it is viewed
: much more as a witch hunt.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kunundrum85 :
Why do some GOP senators, McCain comes to mind, seem to be acknowledging the
Russian interference but don't seem to want to pursue it? How much is Party
being placed above Country?
: evansiegfried :
:
: That is an inaccurate statement. We know that Russia interfered in the
: election and it is deadly serious. 17 intelligence agencies have confirmed
: this. Last night, the Senate reached a deal to keep Obama's Russia sanctions
: in place and that they would need to authorize Trump to remove them. We are
: still waiting on the full investigation by Director Mueller and will take
: appropriate action. The key now is preventing it from happening in the
: future.
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Qu1nlan :
Does Rowdy know any dog sports or cool tricks? Show us!
: evansiegfried :
:
: He knows how to ring for elevators, loves to play frisbee and does a fun
: trick where he puts his paw on his "best friend." Frisbee-
: https://www.instagram.com/p/BFjwUlUmvRn/?taken-by=evansiegfried&hl=en
: Attending a gin tasting- https://www.instagram.com/p/BVK8zZulCnZ/ Best
: friend trick- https://www.instagram.com/p/BTABQicj4NN/
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
IamAbot_v01. Alpha version. Under care of /u/oppon.
Comment 1 of 7
Updated at 2017-06-14 13:23:23.220259
This is the final update to this thread
> If you actually instituted tests for IQ and high-skills, you'd basically end Hispanic immigration right there.
Leaving aside the blatant offensive characterisation of Hispanics - IQ is a bell curve, not a straight line or half a bell curve....
Hispanic net migration has already ended of its own accord. The reason is simple - declining birth rates in the source countries, mirroring declining birth rates in America and in most other countries around the world. Involuntary unemployment may soon be a thing of the past. You're fighting yesterday's battles and you don't realise it.
>citation
In Empty Planet, John Ibbitson and Darrell Bricker find that a smaller global population will bring with it many benefits: fewer workers will command higher wages; the environment will improve; the risk of famine will wane; and falling birthrates in the developing world will bring greater affluence and autonomy for women.
But enormous disruption lies ahead, too. We can already see the effects in Europe and parts of Asia, as aging populations and worker shortages weaken the economy and impose crippling demands on healthcare and social security. The United States and Canada are well-positioned to successfully navigate these coming demographic shifts--that is, unless growing isolationism leads us to close ourselves off just as openness becomes more critical to our survival than ever.
How is it victim blaming when you are the one carrying out the action..... If a district is 50-50 in Kentucky and 10% of Democrats are continually moving to a more liberal area rather it is a city or a state to be surrounded by people with similar views then that district will probably never go blue again. There is even a good book on the topic called the big sort. https://smile.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723?sa-no-redirect=1 . Also regardless of your strong personal opinion on the topic that will result in losing the House and state legislatures in most of the south and west every year barring a financial collapse or impeachment that provokes a backlash.
A) No one said tax rich people enough to make them poor. This is a ridiculous strawman that people who hate taxes bring up all the time.
B) High taxes really don't make people leave, at least not most rich people. Sure you can find a few examples of the mega-rich leaving because they're mega-rich, but most people do not want to do this. Furthermore, America enjoys a considerable advantage in this respect, allowing them space to raise taxes because.... Every other OECD country (all the nice places to live, basically) has higher taxes. Rich people really don't like moving that much, for reasons.
C) If people got rich for only adding value, then all labourers would be rich because by modifying a commodity, they do in fact add value. Getting Rich is more a confluence of factors, only one of which (and arguably not even the largest) is labour. Luck, previous Capital, place and social position of birth, play a role, and especially in the case of starting Capital, a lot more.
D) This is true. Rich people do pay more, kind of because they have all the money in the first place. If this were to be rectified (Rich people paying less) the disappearance of government social services would probably inspire a violent revolution.
E) Not a big help to the people who are doing without now, but I guess its great that even Rich families, eventually, are leveled with everyone else. Broad social trends that stretch over generations might be useful for research and historical purposes but they are not very comforting to people who must suffer because of imbalances; no one wants to be told that their lot must be crap because, oh well, the system will balance out in time. Who knows, maybe your grandkid's kid will be a millionare.
The idea the rich are rich because they're amazing (variety of reasons) and the poor are poor for an inverse reflection is crap, and used to justify punishing the poor further and rewarding people who have already claimed the lion's share of the rewards.
read [http://www.amazon.com/Disuniting-America-Reflections-Multicultural-Enlarged/dp/0393318540]
read [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_M._Schlesinger,_Jr.]
read [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyphenated_American]
An interesting book on the subject of the overpopulation myth http://www.amazon.com/What-Expect-When-Ones-Expecting/dp/1594037310
I'm not sure your hypothesis is backed by the evidence. People are plenty different, not just due to cultural differences, but also due to basic differences in their personalities (which are largely determined by genes).
Moreover, to say that Ice-T's agreement with Rush on the issue of gun control is evidence that we're all simiilar s spurious. Let's see how they compare on other issues? These two are oil and water. That they agree on one issue at all is surprising.
Edit: This is a great read on the issue http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded/dp/0547237723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343416477&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+sort
> but I can't quite see what point you're making beyond that.
To beat your enemy, you must understand your enemy. The fact you continue to repeat this nonsense that the only thing white nationalists care about is skin pigmentation is ludicrous. That is factually not. That is why I brought up light skinned Asians and albino blacks. If skin pigmentation was truly all they cared about, then they wouldn't give a shit where someone was from, or what ethnicity they were, as long as they had white skin. Which is obviously absurd. their concern is having a homeland for exclusively those of European heritage, to the exclusion of other groups.
> You're right that white nationalism is inherently ridiculous,
It IS RIDICULOUS, but we disagree on why. You think it is ridiculous because you have a childs understanding of the world and it boils down to left wing mantras like "racism bad", which has a complete lack of though or understanding of anything. I find it ridiculous because there is no realistic way to accomplish the craft of making the US a European ethno-state, as there are already huge amounts of minorities. They will not go of their own choice. Because I do not want to be associated with genocide I think it is a silly ridiculous idea. HOWEVER, the idea of Europeans having a homeland where they can restrict immigration I do support, if it is in Europe. Most countries on Earth are an ethno-state to some extent. Japan is a fucking ethno-state, and more power to them. I agree with the white nationalists when they point out that every other ethnicity on the planet has an ethnos-state somewhere, EXCEPT Europeans.........You need to learn more about the world young pup.
​
i highly recommend reading the following book to help you get some understanding of the European situation.
https://www.amazon.com/Whiteshift-Populism-Immigration-Future-Majorities/dp/1468316974
Oh for fuck's sake. This crap predates the internet. Here, go nuts.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Population-Bomb-Paul-Ehrlich/dp/B000EI3XOS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1377706626&sr=8-2&keywords=the+population+bomb
http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Why.pdf
http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/4006_Newman_Reader___Chp_3_The_Crack_Attack_Final_Pdf.pdf
canadianharmreduction.com/node/1290
You can't synthesize it but you can recycle it.
Right now it's not worth it because it's cheaper to mine. Once it starts to get more expensive, we'll start recycling it.
The Chicken Littles would have you believe we're screwed but they're just not very creative or they want their "solution" imposed on everyone.
I'm old enough to remember when the "smart crowd" was preaching we wouldn't have enough food for everyone because there would be too many people by now. Instead, we have an obesity epidemic. At the time they were preaching mass sterilization. China riffed on it and imposed the one child policy which now has them saddled with a lot of young men who can't find wives because the girl babies were murdered.
Speaking as a general rule, it should be ignored based on the history of previous social crises that never happened.
To take just one example, in the 70s, the Population Bomb was widely believed to be a reality already here: If you haven't heard about this, the best known popular culture representation of it is 'Soylent Green'- which was completely serious about it's beliefs. Ehrlich was predicting that England would
have food riotscease to exist by 1990, and that the world population would crash. There was not just his book, but multiple other scientific models that supported his theory. He was hugely popular, and was giving advice on things like giving aid to Indian and African famines which basically said 'We should not give them food and let them die, to avoid the even worse consequences later'. He was completely, utterly wrong. His advice, if followed, would have lead to the deaths of millions.You can read about the fight against neo-Malthusianism here in a short popular article. Bottom line, though, people tend to obsess about the next doomsday scenario and not think too much about how many have fizzled out (few people remember how much people bought into the Y2K apocalypse, just as an example).
We have had any number of other apocalypse scenarios come out, acquire passionate adherents, then utterly flame out. The most recent one was the 'peak oil' theory. Try finding someone to defend that one now. Two years ago they were all over Reddit and popular culture.
TL;DR: If it happens, we'll deal with it then. But I see no reason to rush into it. History predicts that something will happen in the next 10 years that will make BI look like just another cultural obsession amongst a small subgroup. Extending a current trend to infinity assumes trends are straight lines rather than curves. Things will need to get a lot, lot worse before it becomes politically possible to cut people's Social Security benefits. And really, there's not much evidence that we're seeing massive job loss beyond the normal amount that happens during healthy economies.
Are you assuming that there haven't been large demographic shifts in the past 20-30 years where the American populace have sorted themselves along common areas of culture? Journalists and political science PhDs write books about this sort of thing (for example: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723).
The people of the Northern Rocky Mountain states are substantively different from Californians, with different value sets, economic ideas, etc. How do you guarantee that decisions that affect those states aren't afflicted with a California flavor that is distasteful to those non-Californians?
Yeah, that's total bullshit. http://www.amazon.com/What-Expect-When-Ones-Expecting/dp/1594037310 a good book on the subject. We need to procreate, its actually a necessity for society to work for any amount of time.