Employment to population ratios of 20- to 24-year-olds, by sex and educational attainment: 2015
Millennial College Graduates: Young, Educated, Jobless
I expressly ask you to show credibly how and that the 11 undocumented immigrants are material to ruining the environment. Even Al Gore hasn't come up with that one.
More people/higher population===>>>more trash created, water consumed, houses built/land cleared, more cars/more pollution = more resources used.
Not really that hard to grasp.
Millennial College Graduates: Young, Educated, Jobless
What is the point of the article you've referenced? Are you trying to quibble over:
- the difference between one's having recently graduated vs having (presumably) graduated for some time?
- the difference between the figures in the chart to which I linked and that show an 11% unemployment rate for 20-24 year olds having degrees rather than those from your Newsweek article which asserts a 13.8% unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds? (both yours and my cited metrics pertain to 2015)
If so, I'm not exactly sure why or what you think is served by doing so.
Moreover, had you clicked on the chart I provided and then read the content found at the site, you'd have learned the following:
For young adults, the employment rate was lower in 2008, when the recession began, than it was in 2000 (73 vs. 77 percent). The employment rate was even lower in 2010 (65 percent), after the end of the recession, than it was in 2008. While the employment rate for young adults was higher in 2015 (71 percent) than in 2010, the 2015 rate was still lower than the rates in 2008 and 2000. Similar patterns in the employment rate were found for young adults with some college and young adults who had completed high school, as well as for older adults. For young adults who had not completed high school, the employment rate was higher in 2015 (51 percent) than it had been in 2010 (44 percent), but was not measurably different than it had been in 2008 (55 percent).
In addition to finding the above, you'd have found links to the BLS' raw data, the data to which both yours and my cited sources refer.
More people/higher population===>>>more trash created, water consumed, houses built/land cleared, more cars/more pollution = more resources used.
Not really that hard to grasp.
Yes, I figured you might reply by presenting the most manifestly pellucid approaches to quantifying the matter. (not that there's anything wrong with that) Of course, one more person results in "one more person's worth" of impact, thus 11 million people have 11 million persons' impact. Neither I nor anyone else need you to explain merely that 11M more people have more impact than 11M fewer people.
I entreated you offer a qualitative analysis of environmental impact of the 11M immigrants, one that shows "credibly
how and that the 11 undocumented immigrants
are material to ruining the environment." You see, in a nation of some 318M people, it's hardly clear that the incremental difference between the environmental impact of 307M people is materially less than that of 318M people, or, if you prefer, that the impact of 318M people is materially less than that of 329M people.
The question at hand and that I asked goes to what be the impact of those 11M more people, just how relevant is the difference? To illustrate, if your net worth is $318M and that of two of your neighbors is $307M and $329M, just how relevant is it the difference in your net worths? By contrast, when one is lifting weights at the gym, the difference between 307 lbs, 318 lbs and 329 lbs of weight on a barbell can make all the difference in the world for one may be able to press, say, 318 lbs and not 329 lbs, or one may be able to do just two reps at 318 lbs yet still eke out four more reps at 307 lbs. Scale matters, as any
Rhodes Scholar would know, when one considers the qualitative impact of "more" or "less" of something.
