Somebody recently suggested that America's problem with immigration isn't just that much of it is of the illegal variety, but that we already have way too many people crammed within our four borders. We have diversity coming out of our ears; what we haven't got are parking spaces and elbow room.
I realize this notion goes against the American grain, against the very idea of the Statue of Liberty and Emma Lazarus's little sonnet, the one beseeching the world's wretched refuse to set up housekeeping inside our golden door.
I'm not sure how I'd feel about it if I lived in Wyoming or North Dakota, but living in Los Angeles, as I do, I'd say we have quite enough people already. It wasn't all that long ago that there were 140 million Americans. Now we're up around 300 million. And at the rate some of the newcomers are reproducing, we should hit 400 million by a week from next Tuesday.
That was the insight that led to my latest brainstorm. It isn't enough, I've decided, that we have a moratorium on immigration. That's merely the tip of the population iceberg. If we're going to get serious about the problem, we have to stop having children!
I realize that, to some people, such an idea is as abhorrent as Jonathan Swift's suggestion in his "A Modest Proposal" that the poor should eat their children. That's just plain goofy. If the young taste even half as bad as they smell, even the poorest among us would sooner use their food stamps on Velveeta and saltines.
There is no reason for people to continue having kids except out of habit. It's not as if we're all living on farms and there are chores for them to do. In our modern society, they are totally useless. Their only role is as consumers. But, as the money they spend on bad movies, bad music and over-priced clothing, is provided by their parents, the kids are merely capitalistic parasites. The only things they produce are noise, strange odors and attitude.
The truth is, nobody likes them. They're loud, rude and filthy. If you feel the need to have a small, dumb creature around the house, puppies are cuter, kittens are cleaner, and fish are quieter and better-behaved. The only adults who can stand to be around the young are those nannies, babysitters and teachers, who are paid to do so.
Those parents who can afford round-the-clock help often avoid even laying eyes on their offspring until their son or daughter is walking up the aisle to get married.
Just the other day, I read that there is a plan afoot to make kindergarten an all-day affair. It's a natural next step in a system that sees tots being trucked off to pre-school when they're barely able to stand erect.
The reasons parents give for all this early schooling is that the world is becoming more and more competitive, and that the tyke who's not thrown into the academic pit straight out of the crib will never catch up. To which I say, bull hockey!
Isn't it odd that in spite of this alleged emphasis on academics, college students today can barely add, subtract or write a coherent sentence? The actual reason that parents are sentencing their little sprouts to school at the age of two is because they won't want to be saddled with them. But because they get to pretend that their motives are altruistic, they not only aren't guilt-ridden, they get to feel pretty darn good about themselves.
Well, once my revolutionary scheme is in place, adults will sleep better, worry less, and have a whole lot more discretionary income at their disposal. But, even more importantly, we'll stop raising one generation of latchkey kids after another -- kids who couldn't pick their parents out of a police lineup.
If you liked this article, perhaps you'll also
like Burt's collection from Scorched Earth Press, "Conservatives
Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco." Order your
autographed copy now from BurtPrelutsky.com.
©2004 Burt Prelutsky
DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE FORUM!
