Teachers Toolbox
Follow
Find tag "NorthAmerica"
272 views | +0 today
Teachers Toolbox
History and American Government Resources
Curated by Ms. Harrington
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Ms. Harrington from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

From Germany to Mexico: How America’s source of immigrants has changed over a century

From Germany to Mexico: How America’s source of immigrants has changed over a century | Teachers Toolbox | Scoop.it
Today's volume of immigrants, in some ways, is a return to America’s past.

Via Seth Dixon
more...
Samuel D'Amore's curator insight, December 14, 2014 6:24 PM

The reason this article and maps are so important is because it shows that immigration isn't a new aspect of the American way of life. Historically people from across the globe flocked to America from Europe and Asia and today we're seeing increasing immigration from Central and South Americans as well as those fleeing unstable areas in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

Lena Minassian's curator insight, February 4, 6:56 PM

This article was very interesting to look at. I had knowledge that the majority of the immigrant population came from Mexico but it gave a different perspective to see it on a map. The one aspect that caught my attention was how the map of the United States looked like in 1910. The majority of the immigrants back then came from Europe, mainly Germany. Germany was the top country birth among U.S. immigrants because it was very dominating. 

Felix Ramos Jr.'s curator insight, February 5, 2:12 PM

Many people in 2015 feel that immigration-reform is an absolute must for America.  They usually use words like, "illegal", "terrorists", or "welfare-recipients" to try and scare the rest of the country into thinking immigration has spiraled out of control.  Immigration definitely has a different make-up from a hundred years ago, but that doesn't equate to it being a problem.

 

An article like this puts much into perspective.  What most naive and ignorant immigration-reformers might not now before reading this article is that the proportion of our current population has a fewer percentage of immigrants than back in 1910.  This fact is totally opposite from the picture that some critics try to draw, essentially, comparing immigration to millions of fire-ants invading our country.

 

Most immigrants now come from Latin America, whereas, in 1910 they came from Germany.  By reading the article, common sense will tell you that there might be more of a "racism" problem than an "immigration" problem in America.

Rescooped by Ms. Harrington from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

9 Reasons the U.S. Ended Up So Much More Car-Dependent Than Europe

9 Reasons the U.S. Ended Up So Much More Car-Dependent Than Europe | Teachers Toolbox | Scoop.it
Understanding mistakes of the past can help guide U.S. transportation policy in the future.

 

In 2010, Americans drove for 85 percent of their daily trips, compared to car trip shares of 50 to 65 percent in Europe. Longer trip distances only partially explain the difference. Roughly 30 percent of daily trips are shorter than a mile on either side of the Atlantic. But of those under one-mile trips, Americans drove almost 70 percent of the time, while Europeans made 70 percent of their short trips by bicycle, foot, or public transportation.  The statistics don't reveal the sources of this disparity, but there are nine main reasons American metro areas have ended up so much more car-dependent than cities in Western Europe.


Via Seth Dixon
more...
Kendra King's curator insight, January 28, 12:18 PM

According to this article, “U.S. (transportation) planners” look to Europe for inspiration as the planners try to decrease Americans’ “car dependency.” Instead of giving answers about how to solve the “car dependency” issue, the author provided nine reasons for why Europeans walk and bike more. Ideas like how the European infrastructure was built (i.e their zoning laws, highways, and biking/pedestrian lanes) were discussed. I found the implication that European’s were able to walk more because residential areas and businesses were intermixed the most interesting of all these reasons. It could never really matter because most of America’s land is already developed, but it did make me remember an earlier study mentioned in the article in which 70% of Americans wouldn’t walk a mile when they could. Triggering this just made me think that intermixing our buildings wouldn’t matter because we are too lazy to walk. Some may come back with the idea that a lack of relaxed pedestrian and bike lanes prohibit this option. However, with the amount of sidewalks around, I just keep thinking it all goes back to how much we exercise (which isn’t much). So honestly, it is an unhealthy attitude that planners need to change. Meaning some drastic action would need to occur in order to actually change people’s habits.


 More drastic ideas like decreasing government subsidies on oil, taxing cars, and implementing policies that “shifted behavior” (i.e. no parking zones) were also explained. However with oil companies and car industries around, I don’t actually see lobbyist letting that happening in the short term. Ironically, the article mentioned that the reason U.S. planners were thinking about how to change transportation was because the model the county uses is “unstainable.” This means the transportation system cannot be maintained for either “environmental, social, or economic reasons” (see included link for definition). Thinking about these factors, I just kept coming back to oil. Environmentally it is a fixed resource, socially people want less of it due to climate change, and economically it is typically more costly. What this all means is that an alternative energy source is needed. When that eventually happens, America will probably believe the transportation system is sustainable again regardless of “urban sprawl” and lack of “public transportation.” I say this because the author pointed out how America thought itself stable during the 80’s and 90’s when energy prices were low thereby implying the bigger issue is the oil needed to change people’s behavior. 


Overall, the author did provide an in-depth list that made me pay attention to the cultural and government differences between America and Europe a bit more.


*http://environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/sustainability/#bookmarksubSustainableTransportation

Kendra King's curator insight, January 28, 7:51 PM

According to this article, “U.S. (transportation) planners” look to Europe for inspiration as the planners try to decrease Americans’ “car dependency.” Instead of giving answers about how to solve the “car dependency” issue, the author provided nine reasons for why Europeans walk and bike more. Ideas like how the European infrastructure was built (i.e their zoning laws, highways, and biking/pedestrian lanes) were discussed. I found the implication that European’s were able to walk more because residential areas and businesses were intermixed the most interesting of all these reasons. It could never really matter because most of America’s land is already developed, but it did make me remember an earlier study mentioned in the article in which 70% of Americans wouldn’t walk a mile when they could. Triggering this just made me think that intermixing our buildings wouldn’t matter because we are too lazy to walk. Some may come back with the idea that a lack of relaxed pedestrian and bike lanes prohibit this option. However, with the amount of sidewalks around, I just keep thinking it all goes back to how much we exercise (which isn’t much). So honestly, it is an unhealthy attitude that planners need to change. Meaning some drastic action would need to occur in order to actually change people’s habits.

 

 More drastic ideas like decreasing government subsidies on oil, taxing cars, and implementing policies that “shifted behavior” (i.e. no parking zones) were also explained. However with oil companies and car industries around, I don’t actually see lobbyist letting that happening in the short term. Ironically, the article mentioned that the reason U.S. planners were thinking about how to change transportation was because the model the county uses is “unstainable.” This means the transportation system cannot be maintained for either “environmental, social, or economic reasons” (see included link for definition). Thinking about these factors, I just kept coming back to oil. Environmentally it is a fixed resource, socially people want less of it due to climate change, and economically it is typically more costly. What this all means is that an alternative energy source is needed. When that eventually happens, America will probably believe the transportation system is sustainable again regardless of “urban sprawl” and lack of “public transportation.” I say this because the author pointed out how America thought itself stable during the 80’s and 90’s when energy prices were low thereby implying the bigger issue is the oil needed to change people’s behavior. 

 

Overall, the author did provide an in-depth list that made me pay attention to the cultural and government differences between America and Europe from the way space interacts with these regions.

 

*http://environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/sustainability/#bookmarksubSustainableTransportation

Jared Medeiros's curator insight, February 4, 6:41 PM

 A big reason why people are more car dependant in America is because we are a lazy nation.  Americans are always looking for the easy way to accomplish things, so if you can drive a mile to work in 2 minutes or walk in 15, its almost guarenteed that the American is walking! This is obviously a general term and does not apply to all Americans but a vast majority would opt for the vehicle.  As someone who has taken several trips to Europe, people there are in far better shape than in America and i'm sure that fitness along with better eating habits attribute to that.  

Another reason I believe America is more dependant than Europe on cars is because it is far easier and cheaper to travel via train or subway in Europe.  Train stations and public transport in America are expensive and only take you to highly populated areas while the trains in Europe will take you all over the continent.

 

Rescooped by Ms. Harrington from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

The Next America

The Next America | Teachers Toolbox | Scoop.it
Demographic transformations are dramas in slow motion. America is in the midst of two right now. Our population is becoming majority non-white at the same time a record share is going gray.

Via Seth Dixon
more...
CB New Hire Onboarding's curator insight, April 25, 2014 9:35 AM

"The demographic shifts in the United States are transforming the cultural fabric of the country and this interactive feature from the Pew Research Center explores some of these changes.  Interracial marriage, declining fertility rates, migration, economic opportunities and politics are just some of the issues that can be seen in these excellent populations pyramids, charts, videos and graphs." - Seth Dixon 

Amanda Morgan's comment, September 18, 2014 10:46 AM
The demographic shifts will most definitely have an impact on politics and economic opportunities. With as many 85 year olds as 5 year olds, we will see an increase in the need for health care and general overall care for the elderly. There will be more need for social security and retirement plans. While it is a good thing overall that life expectancy is increasing, it may create other issues.
Amanda Morgan's curator insight, September 18, 2014 10:48 AM

The demographic shifts will most definitely have an impact on politics and economic opportunities. With as many 85 year olds as 5 year olds, we will see an increase in the need for health care and general overall care for the elderly. There will be more need for social security and retirement plans. While it is a good thing overall that life expectancy is increasing, it may create other issues.

Rescooped by Ms. Harrington from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Bizarre Borders


Via Seth Dixon
more...
Alec Castagno's curator insight, October 5, 2014 8:45 PM

This video shows how political geography does not always match up perfectly with physical geography, showing how the "no-touching zone" between the US and Canada has led to several border irregularities. It's very interesting to see how a seemingly straight border on a map is actually an odd and irregular jagged line that defines the political boundary. 

Kristin Mandsager San Bento's curator insight, January 29, 6:31 PM

Craziest thing I've ever seen!  The poor kids on Robert's Island that has to cross through Canada to go to school.  I think it's crazy that the borders were defined when they didn't even have a complete map.  Taking a guess obviously didn't work out.  It seems very difficult to define a border.  

WILBERT DE JESUS's curator insight, February 12, 6:39 PM

Sometimes borders between frendly neighbours like Canada and USA are less protected than borders between countries with conflicts.