August 9, 2013, - 3:31 pm
Bad Amnesty Omen: UK Birthrate of Muslim Immigrant Women Nearly 20% Higher than Native Chicks; UK Pop to Surpass Germany as Largest b/c of Immigrant Births
Unduly respected idiots like plagiarist Mark Steyn have long applauded immigration because of high immigrant birthrates. But that’s something only a moron–or someone who wants Western countries to become Muslim nations in the long run–would do. Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that the United Kingdom’s birthrate hit a 40-year high in 2012 and that the UK will soon surpass Germany as Europe’s most populous country. Problem is that’s only because Great Britain’s immigrant women–translation: Muslim women–are having far more children than native born Brits. In fact, while the number of births for every thousand UK-born women was only 1.9%, the rate is nearly 20% higher at 2.3% for every thousand immigrant women who enter the UK. The article doesn’t mention Islam, but the religious demography of Great Britain’s immigrants is quite clear: Muslim. There’s a reason Mohammed is the most popular boy’s name among new births in England.
If the only way you replace your population is with births from the religion of terrorism, intolerance, and mass murder, you might as well just die off. It’s suicide either way, and the survival of Western civilization won’t happen. Members of Congress, now considering immigration amnesty for illegal aliens should take note. They want to not only give instant citizenship to those already here legally, but their chains of relatives and friends (whom they claim are relatives) whom they bring here will also get citizenship. They will give birth to more and more of their own and America will be less and less America and more and more Al-Amerika and Aztlan.
The WSJ quotes an expert who says higher fertility is generally a sign of confidence in the future. And, clearly, Muslim immigrants are rightly more confident in their future than the rest of us are in the future of our civilization. And that’s not counting the births to native or first-generation Muslim women there.
The number of births in the U.K. hit a 40-year high in 2012, official data showed Thursday, making it the European Union’s fastest-growing country and adding to forecasts that it will surpass Germany’s population as the bloc’s largest within decades. . . . The Office for National Statistics said there were 813,200 births in the U.K. in the year ended June 2012—the largest number since 1972. There were nearly that many births in the prior 12-month period.
Stuart Basten, research fellow in demography and social policy at Oxford University, who wasn’t involved in the study, attributed the boom most prominently to a shift in which women aged 25 to 29, among them an influx of migrants, are increasingly giving birth. . . .
Immigration also played a role. Mr. Basten said the fertility rate, or the number of births per 1,000 women, was 2.3% for foreign-born women versus 1.9% for U.K.-born women. He said that suggests that migrants are making a significant contribution to the increase. . . .
Francesco Billari, professor of sociology and demography at Oxford University who wasn’t involved in the survey, said data since 2000 have generally shown that fertility are higher in more affluent countries, though Germany is an exception.
“Higher fertility is generally a sign that people are confident in the future and the economy,” he said. “Having kids is the only investment you cannot get rid of—you can buy a house and sell it, but you become a parent and that’s forever. So it takes optimism and a good society.”
Mr. Billari said France, Nordic countries and Ireland are now seeing birthrates rise. Birthrates remain low in Germany and Southern and Eastern Europe.
Guess what the fastest growing religion and largest group of immigrants to France, Nordic countries, and Ireland is these days? If you guessed Islam and Muslims, you’re on the money (or the jizya).
The new British statistics show that in the year ended June 2012, the overall population in the U.K. was 63.7 million, making it the third-largest country in the EU behind Germany, with 80.4 million, and France, with 65.5 million. However, the U.K.’s population rose by 419,900 people in the period, a bigger increase than in any other EU country. By 2050, Eurostat expects the U.K. population to rise to 76.4 million, France’s to increase to 73.2 million and Germany’s to fall to 70.8 million.
Mr. Basten said that while an increasing population puts pressure on resources and infrastructure, it could also have economic benefits over the longer term.
“Economically speaking, having a relatively high fertility rate and a managed migration policy is better than having a low birthrate,” Mr. Basten said. “If you have a low birthrate then your population ages rapidly, your workforce—those aged between 18 and 65—will be shrinking, and you end up with many more old people relative to young people.”
Hilarious. This is the same crap that Steyn and Jeb Bush have been pimping us on.
Here’s a tip: there is NO such thing as a managed migration policy. Unless you are only letting in a few thousand people a year, there is no way you are reliably checking out who these people are, keeping your eye on them, and making sure they aren’t up to no good.
The hundreds of thousands we let in each year is not a managed migration policy. It’s a destruction of a country that once was.
Good luck with those immigrant birthrates. Say Good-bye, America.
Tags: amnesty, fertility rates, Francesco Billari, Great Britain, Illegal Aliens, immigrant birthrate, immigrants, Immigration, Jeb Bush, Mark Steyn, Mark Steyn immigration, Muslim immigrant birthrate, Muslim immigrants, Stuart Basten, United Kingdom
Every politician and media person who is involved one way or another in ‘defunding Obamacare’ is a willing conspirator in the open borders campaign. The defunding fiasco is meant to detract attention from the immigration legislation. Why else would Rubio be a leader in the defunding campaign, especially since the Republicans said virtually nothing about health care during the 2012 campaign, and their ‘defunding’ campaign is not accompanied by any real education about it. If they were serious, shouldn’t they be criticizing Republicans (as well as Democrats) on a local level who are implementing the exchanges?
Little Al on August 9, 2013 at 4:00 pm