"Let's get off the blame game and come up with ideas." -Ultima That's what this forum is all about! Thanks Ultima!

One of the problems of demand is that some if not most of the demand is generated by vulnerable young people whose brains are not fully developed or already addled by drugs. The suppliers prey on these vulnerable young people making many into hardcore addicts and prostitutes in the process. That is inexcusable. There is one place in the world where there is no drug problem -- Singapore. I believe drug dealers are summarily executed there. Is this a solution to part of the problem? Education beginning early in the elementary schools with graphic photos of druggies and their anonymous life histories should be available in all health or social studies classes as well as libraries. Bob Schmidt suggests we focus our efforts on the miscreants rather than the run of the mill illegal aliens. No one would find that objectionable if there was a convenient way to do so. Reducing cross border traffic of all kinds is essential. There is no reason I can think of why crowds of pedestrians should be allowed to cross the bridges on a daily basis. Who are these people? Are they the drug dealers, the welfare parasites showing up for their dose of food stamps and other welfare, workers who have displaced Americans by accepting substandard wages? It would be an interesting study to determine what percent of the unemployed are former prison inmates, druggies and other miscreants. Perhaps Schmidt is right but on the other hand we really don't know, do we? We probably don't know either the extent to which labor needs are generated by the illegals themselves. No one can say that 12-20 million illegals do not generate some of the jobs they perform. The problem is we are not willing to face up to an economy that is not dependent on an ever increasing population. No one has an answer to the axiom that the limit of finite natural resources per capita as the population grows without bounds is zero. Moreover, any distance we travel down that road reduces the amount of natural resources available to each of us and hence ultimately reduces our quality of life and standard of living. Has it peaked already? How much of the crime and drug use is attributable to the decline in natural resources available per capital? Do drug users seek drug nirvana to assuage their worries about how they will make their way in this world of declining expectations?

Schmidt suggests that our demand for drugs is "the problem". He conveniently overlooks the supply side of the equation. We have to focus on both the supply and the demand, not neglect one or the other. Perhaps some have concluded that one part of the problem, demand, is more intractable than the other but both require substantial attention. It's amazing to consider that "...their all too wasted to work." I have never seen any evidence of this. Perhaps I have led a sheltered life. Is Schmidt suggesting that if he posted a job application for his department, he would get no applicants from drug free qualified American workers?

It is true that our immigration policies need to be focused. More importantly we need to identify our goals or objectives before we consider policy. We need a national objective of a stable population for more reasons than I can list here. Let me just mention one that I have mentioned on other occasions: American produce 20 metric tons of carbon pollutants per capital per year according to the UN. This is a very conservative estimate. It is not comprehensive in any sense of the words. Now if you add 300 million more people by the end of this century, at the present rate of pollution, that increase in population will produce 6 billion more metric tons of carbon pollutants every year. Everyone who thinks it is possible to reduce green house gases and climate change via technical means in the face of that population growth, raise your hand. The Administration is already quibbling about the Kyoto protocol or its replacement. What are the chances we can accomplish anything in this area given a doubling of our population by the end of this century? I suppose there are some who couldn't care less about the magnificent polar bear but for most of us the loss of this animal outside of zoos would be a tragedy of the first order that all mankind should be held accountable for.

I think Schmidt is right about the slackers. Dig a one way tunnel and send them all to Mexico. Mexico didn't ask us whether or not we wanted all of its impoverished masses, why should we ask them about our miscreants inserted into the one way tunnel?