March 24, 2013

Barone v. Sailer / Kaus

Michael Barone writes:
As blogger Steve Sailer notes, a Pew Hispanic Center survey in 2005, near the peak of the housing bubble, reported that 22 million Mexicans would immigrate to the United States as legal guest workers if that was possible. The Pew and Gallup numbers are not commensurate, since Pew asked a hypothetical question and Gallup asked about general desire to immigrate, but there’s a huge difference between 22 million and 5 million. In the debate on immigration policy Sailer and Mickey Kaus have argued that large-scale illegal immigration from Mexico will likely resume when the U.S. economy revives and if a comprehensive immigration law provides legal status for many or most current illegal immigrants. I have predicted that we will never see the kind of large-scale Mexican immigration to the United States that we saw in 1982-2007. I think the Gallup numbers tend to support my prediction. Desire to immigrate does not usually yield a decision to immigrate. People take the plunge of immigration not just to make money but to pursue dreams or escape nightmares. For Mexicans these days the United States is less of a dream and Mexico is less of a nightmare than in the years from 1982 to 2007. 

It's called convergence: Mexico becomes more like America (good in theory, although the obesity data raises a disturbing counter-example), while America becomes more like Mexico.

But, here's a suggestion. The construction industry is just starting to pick up again, and contractors are starting to make houses-rotting-in-the-fields noises about how there are "shortages" of construction workers and they need to get their workers back from Mexico. So, why don't we wait five years and see what happens with immigration before passing some massive immigration "reform" law based on suppositions about how Fortunately, It Can't Happen Again?
Test case: Puerto Rico. The huge influx of Puerto Ricans to New York City that started in the late 1940s abruptly ended in 1961, when incomes in Puerto Rico reached one-third the U.S. mainland income level. There were and are no legal barriers for Puerto Ricans, who are U.S. citizens under an act of Congress passed in 1917. They just stopped coming. Recent years have seen some movement of Puerto Ricans to the Mainland (probably more to metro Orlando than metro New York), but it’s nothing like the magnitude of the 1949-61 migration. The data suggested that Mexicans just stopped coming to the United States in 2007, when the housing bubble burst and the recession began. I’m betting—aware of the nontrivial possibility that I could be wrong—that we won’t see another massive wave of immigration from Mexico.

Perhaps, although the tax breaks given to American corporations to prop up the economy of Puerto Rico, to stop the Puerto Ricans from coming, are lavish. Bribing Puerto Ricans to not be nationalists is enormously expensive on a per capita basis.

Moreover the Puerto Rican population in the U.S. is growing steadily, despite mostly living in low birthrate East Coast cities. According to a new study, the Census Bureau found 2.7 million Puerto Ricans in 1990, 3.7 million in 2000, and 4.6 million in 2010. Over the same period, the population of Puerto Rico itself grew slightly from 3.5 to 3.7 million (but the population of Puerto Rico is down compared to 2000.)

So, that's 74% growth over two decades.

Puerto Ricans, both in P.R. and in America, have low fertility, although the population can keep growing due to "demographic momentum"? (E.g., somebody with four children can have eight grandchildren a lot more easily than somebody with two children can have eight grandchildren.)

But, it's also true that Puerto Rican immigration has been substantial for the last seven years, despite the recession here.

Here's a good 2012 article by John Marino on Puerto Ricans immigrating to the U.S.:
Puerto Rico residents continued their exodus from the island over the past year during tough economic times, with the local population shrinking by 19,099 residents, or 0.51 percent, the biggest percentage loss by far of any U.S. jurisdiction, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. 
The population loss was due to migration to the U.S., with a net 35,469 residents lost to out-migration [that a net of almost 1% of the population leaving in 1 year], while island births outpaced deaths by 16,370 during the 15-month period covered by the new Census data, which runs April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011. 
The drop-more than double the average annual population loss reflected in the 2010 Census for the previous decade- is part of the first new U.S. population estimate released by the bureau since the 2010 Census, which showed the island's population had declined by 82,821 people, or 2.2 percent, over the past decade. ...
Back in October, an Ipsos poll commissioned by WAPA-TV found 45 percent of islanders have considered leaving Puerto Rico in search of a better quality of life, with the majority of those setting their sights on the States. One-quarter (25 percent) of those who have considered a move from the island have taken concrete steps to do so, the poll found. 
Projected over the entire population, the poll results indicate some 1.5 million people would consider leaving the island, while 419,000 of those have at least started a plan to move. ...
Puerto Rico's population was pegged at 3,725,789 in the 2010 Census, down from the 3,808,610 registered in the 2000 Census. It marked the first time the local population had declined between census counts. 
The 2010 Census also showed there were 4.7 million Puerto Ricans living in the States, which was the first time more Puerto Ricans lived stateside than on the island. 

Puerto Rico is richer than Mexico in terms of per capita GDP, although Puerto Rico has been declining and Mexico improving.

In contrast, the Census found the number of individuals in the U.S. self-identifying as of Mexico origin growing from 13.4 to 31.8 million from 1990 to 2010, a growth of 137% or a little less than twice as fast as the growth in the Puerto Rican population.

It's crucial to note that a huge number of births to Mexican women in the U.S. are within a decade or so of arriving in this country. That's why the Mexican Total Fertility Rate has dropped sharply since the Sand State housing bubble popped -- fewer immigrants means fewer women arriving to have the 3 or 4 kids they can't afford to have in their own country. The last amnesty caused a big baby boom among the amnestied, and there is no reason to imagine the next one wouldn't do the same.

66 comments:

Anonymous said...

hong kong ruling on immigration:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-25/hong-kong-court-rejects-residency-appeal-by-domestic-helper.html

Anonymous said...

Are you sure Mexican fertility rates will rebound? A Mexican immigrant of 2012 is coming from a Mexico that's most of the way through its demographic transition. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Mexico's fertility drop even lower, to Mediterranean Catholic levels (Greek-Spanish-Italian) of 1.3-1.4 ish.

Anonymous said...

Personally I think Sailer's position is more correct than Barone's. But for Barone and others holding his view, do they really want to take a chance on being wrong? Look at what has happened in the past 25 years. It has completely changed this nation forever, adding another large, permanent underclass that takes more in government services than it pays in taxes, has a 50% illegitimacy rate and 50% high school drop out rate.

If they turn out to be wrong, it will end up turning more and more of the US, the whitopias, into California Central Valleys. Is Barone willing to take this chance? After all Mexico, which has sent us more immigrants the Germany, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Greece and Poland combined, has had more than its fair share of the US honey pot. There is really no more reason to continue to allow them continued access whether it is at record levels or not.

Steve Sailer said...

"Are you sure Mexican fertility rates will rebound?"

What concerns me are not the fertility rates of Mexicans in Mexico (that's their business) but of Mexicans in America. For a long time, the fertility rates of Mexican nationals in America has been significantly higher than of Mexican nationals in Mexico. From at least to the mid-1980s through 2007, there was been zero correlation between the falling fertility rates in Mexico and the stable to rising fertility rates of Mexican-women in America.

The simplest explanation for this hugely important but ignored phenomenon was that they were coming to my country illegally to have the children they can't afford to have in their own country.

Anonymous said...

Barone and his ilk do not understand asymmetrical risk, that is to say weighted difference in outcomes. This is the "yes, but what it you're wrong?" argument.

If Sailer is wrong, then no harm, no foul. The immigration and ethnicization of America will continue, albeit at a slower and perhaps more manageable pace.

If Barone is wrong, well, there goes western culture and it's benefits.

irishman said...

Yes Mexican immigration to America will continue.

Look and Poland and Britain. Poland has a sub replacment fertility rate and is nicer than Britain which is less nice than America, even the minority bits. Yet the Poles keep coming.

Mexico's biggest oil field is almost tapped out and it's the kind of country that blows up every once in a while, when it does Mexican immigration will recommence.

A more interesting question is from where will be the source of America's next big immigration wave.

I'm guessing General Butt Naked's country.

http://www.amren.com/features/2013/03/into-the-heart-of-darkness/

Anonymous said...

"For Mexicans these days the United States is less of a dream and Mexico is less of a nightmare than in the years from 1982 to 2007. "

Since about 2008 Mexico has been having a horrible drug war. More than 60,000 killed so far.

" I’m betting—aware of the nontrivial possibility that I could be wrong..."

Barone predicted that Romney would win by 100 electoral votes. I think that was a day or two before the election.

Anonymous said...

the vote was unanimous.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/24/top-hong-kong-court-rules-unanimously-to-deny-permanent-residency-bid-by/

Mr. Anon said...

"For Mexicans these days the United States is less of a dream and Mexico is less of a nightmare than in the years from 1982 to 2007."

Really? How about this story from today's news - seven men executed, and signs stuck to their chests with ice-picks, and sat up in lawn chairs on a public street:

Seven Men Executed and Left in Public

One did not hear about that sort of thing in 1982. Yet, hardly a week goes by nowadays without some new atrocity being reported out of our vibrant, sleepy neighbor to the South - a bag full of severed heads left on a school playground, a pile of murder victims deposited in a city intersection by dump truck, a half-dozen people found hanging from a bridge, etc. Contemporary Mexico does indeed sound like a nightmare, straight out of a Heironymus Bosch painting. And, per force, as Mexicans come to this country, those now-commonplace atrocities will follow with them.

Perhaps Michael Barone should spend a little more time contemplating the downside of this transaction, if he should prove to be wrong.

Anonymous said...

If I ever run for office, I'm going try to hire sailer, half-sigma/lionoftheblogosphere, and jayman as consultants. They can be my axelrod, plouffe, and messina.

CZ said...

As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Anonymous said...

"Mexico less of a nightmare."

I laughed out loud when I read that.
- If you think that piles of severed human heads dropped along the way as casually as sign-posts aren't a nightmare straight from Hades, then I'd hate to see what Barone's vision of a civil state is.
Definitely not a tea-party with the vicar at 3.00PM, with the blue-rinse brigade, battenberg cake and bone china cups.

Anonymous said...

CZ said - As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Well, thats alright then. We can go right ahead and erase western civilization. I mean, as long as someone is hungrier thats OK.

Also CZ I guess you (and your entire family) work in fields that dont and wont face competition from hungrier immigrants. You wont ever find yourself unemployed or underpaid because an immigrant undercut you. Not that you would complain, you would applaud it.

Bob Arctor said...

"As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?"

I suppose when you can't argue the facts of the case and you know you can't win fairly smear your opponent by accusing him of racism/bigotry/antisemitism/whatever; turn it into a debate about him rather than a debate about the issue.

This issue is substantially more complex, involving natural resource carrying capacity, the budget, ethnic tensions, foreign relations, etc. than your simplistic morally tale lets on.

Anonymous said...

This issue is substantially more complex, involving natural resource carrying capacity, the budget, ethnic tensions, foreign relations, etc. than your simplistic morality tale lets on.

Absolutely. CZ probably thinks the entire history of our civilization is merely a saga of price and wage competition. As if nothing else had ever happened.

Hunsdon said...

CZ said: How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Hunsdon said: Hate, hate, hate. You are buying into (and perhaps, selling) the left's frame. I don't hate Mexicans. I like Mexicans. I just don't want them moving, en masse, to America and radically changing our culture.

There is no hate.

I wouldn't want my two or three best friends in the entire world to move into my home because it suited them, either, and almost definitionally I don't hate my two or three best friends in the entire world.

Anonymous said...

Barone is right. Immigration waves always end. The Quebecois flooded new england from 1880 to 1940, and some had dreams of reconquering it as a catholic new France, but the wave ended and the long term cultural impact was nil. Kelly ayotte is not the tip of the jesuit spear.

Anonymous said...

It won't ever happen, but I believe the US should really dump all our territories.

Guam and Puerto Rico get their Independence.

Ditto for the Northern Marianas Islands.

All the uninhabited islands in the North Pacific with historical significance get (Wake, Midway, etc.) get incorporated in to Hawaii.

Give the Virgin Islands the option of becoming a county of Florida. No more special island tax breaks.

If either Florida of the USVI object to the plan, then they get their independence as well.



Icepick said...

I'm not sure how the demographics get reported, but I can think of another way for the Puerto Rican population to surge in this country even with lower fertility rates. i've got a PRican neighbor. He's got four children, who are all naturally going to identify as PRican, even though their mothers are white.

zeno said...

"How can you hate someone who's hungrier?"

It's not about "hate." It's about looking out for your own interests, and those of your descendants and those with whom you share the highest ratio of common interests.
In any case, they're not here because they're "hungry." This isn't the Irish Potato Famine era. Mexicans have among the highest rates of obesity in the entire world. Which will put yet another drain on our health system that we (mostly middle class whites) will be paying for.

Truth said...

I've been to P.R multiple times; most of San Juan, outside of the Old Town - Condado - Isla Verde sector looks much worse, and is much more dangerous than Detroit (statistically speaking, that is) Those white folks there are dangerous!

Anonymous said...

Well, Mexicans decided to have that extra kids in Orange County while Vietnamise didn't to have two or less kids. Vietnamise are advancing more. I don't know if Mexicans really can afford to have more kids in the states since they are in Los Angeles about 5 million or more of the population or Orange County about a million. Housing in both places for a little one bedroom apartment is a 1000, so they have a third kid and live with another family and complain that they have 10 or more people in a 2 bedrrom or 3 bedroom apartment. As mention Asians that are low income usually have less kids are their social advantgement in the 2nd and 3rd generations is better. Also, La and Orange involved whites to have less babies but Hispanics don't have common sense.

Anonymous said...

Are you sure Mexican fertility rates will rebound? A Mexican immigrant of 2012 is coming from a Mexico that's most of the way through its demographic transition. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Mexico's fertility drop even lower, to Mediterranean Catholic levels (Greek-Spanish-Italian) of 1.3-1.4 ish. That's possible in 2020 LA County will have most of the babies made by 2nd and 3rd generation Americans than immirgants since immirgation to LA among Mexicans is slowing and increasing in metro areas like Houston. The 2nd and 3rd have birthrates closer to the us average.

Anonymous said...

Studies are La show that La with all the Mexicans is losing kids compared to 2000 versus 2010. A lot of Mexicans moved to San Bernadino to have kids 58 percent from La and minor children under 18 versus the Mexicans that moved to Orange County 30 percent from La but overall people with kids under 18 only 19 percent. Orange County Mexican or white or Asians that moved from La were less likely to have minor kids than to San Berandino. Mexicans whether illegal or not are moving from expensive La to cheaper places. I predict a Mexican population boom in Texas and a bust in California except for the Inland Counties.

Anonymous said...

One thing that Barone is right immirgation has shfited to Asians since the New York metro area could twice the number of immirgants going to the LA-Orange area. New York metro area was over the 100,000 mark around 120,000 versus I think only 51,000 for La-Orange which is low for it. In fact, the US Census shown San Diego the passed 5 years outdoing Orange for immirgants. San Diego has a smaller illegal immirgnat population than Orange because most illegals wanted to be further away from the border to avoid deporation. La-Orange foreign born was more Hispanic than New York metro or Orange versus San Diego.

Anonymous said...

i think its a myth they work harder. I know of people that hired illegal immirgants to do the lawn and it took the illegal immirgants longer. I think we sterotype because the illegal immirgants do things cheaper they do pay the costs that a white person would do who is bonded and liscense to do the work and they don't pay taxes. They don't work harder they work cheaper. And the same people that hire them complain about their kids being on the free and reduce lunch programs and into gangs.

Anonymous said...

Since most illegals live in La County over 900,000, they usually bitch about how expensive la is and so forth. Maybe, they should have stayed home but they whine they are not pay enough.

ben tillman said...

If they turn out to be wrong, it will end up turning more and more of the US, the whitopias, into California Central Valleys. Is Barone willing to take this chance?

And:

Barone and his ilk do not understand asymmetrical risk, that is to say weighted difference in outcomes. This is the "yes, but what it you're wrong?" argument.

If Sailer is wrong, then no harm, no foul. The immigration and ethnicization of America will continue, albeit at a slower and perhaps more manageable pace.

If Barone is wrong, well, there goes western culture and it's benefits.


You need to disabuse yourself of the notion that people like Barone are well-intentioned in the sense of sharing your goals and values. To him, the destruction of this nation is a feature, not a bug.

Anonymous said...

Well, Steve right about the population momentium. A lot of illegals who were 5 years ago moving out of Orange County to the Inland Empire stay recently because of the job market. Their birth rate was higher than whites during the past 20 yeras. So Mexicans since OC has few Central Americans are near 50 percent of grade school while Whites are 28 percent a gain of 1 since the past 1 or 2. And Asians about the same percentage at 17. i predict if the Inland Empire starts to pick up jobs that the children of the illegals will moved from expensive OC to the Inland empire when they have babies since its cheaper for rent or to own a house.

Anonymous said...

Well, construcation is still in big metro areas about 30,000 less jobs than 5 years ago. It probably will not make the comeback it had in 2005. Many illegals are doing janiorial and short order cook jobs, home care aids if they know Engligh good enough, the day labor work, and processing food manufactoring. A lot of foreign asian companies are making their good int he states and Mexicans have done this for some time.

Anonymous said...

Personally I think Sailer's position is more correct than Barone's. But for Barone and others holding his view, do they really want to take a chance on being wrong? Look at what has happened in the past 25 years. It has completely changed this nation forever, adding another large, permanent underclass that takes more in government services than it pays in taxes, has a 50% illegitimacy rate and 50% high school drop out rate.What I find interesting is that Mexicans can get away with bad stats with whites more than blacks can.

Anonymous said...

"The simplest explanation for this hugely important but ignored phenomenon was that they were coming to my country illegally to have the children they can't afford to have in their own country."


Also, the US govt. incentivizes more children - Section 8 has standards that require a recipient get a certain size apt. and a certain number of bedrooms depending on the number of children. The Hassidic Jews and Mexicans take huge advantage of this.

Anonymous said...

Joel Konklin wrote that La_Orange lost a lot of the kiddie population as the housing went skyhigh. So a lot of Southern California which has the biggest numbers of illegal immigants even if they get anmesty their birthrates will be lower in La, or San Diego or Orange instead of the older pattern. In Texas on the other hand, housing is cheaper so if they are legalized their birthrates will probably go up. Texas increase a lot in births and most have been Mexican even with whites coming from states like California or so forth.

Svigor said...

And, per force, as Mexicans come to this country, those now-commonplace atrocities will follow with them.

Libs will just dangle this right in front of you, unselfconsciously. Yesterday I saw an episode of Monk about immigrants from some fictional war-torn SE European country, where the natives have been killing each other for 60 years. There was the usual chest-thumping about how having these people here is a great idea. I thought to myself, "gee, I guess we're too stupid to object to these poor refugee souls bringing their endless war to our shores, even though that's precisely what the story's about." It wasn't the first time I've seen TV episodes like this.

As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

I know what you mean. That's why I cheat at every game I play and still respect myself: I'm just hungrier.

Anonymous said...

Barone has the relaxed air of a man puffing a cigar while making a gentleman's bet. He knows that losing will cost him nothing but a "Crumbs! Sorry, old chap."

jody said...

1) i don't think mexico's economy is doing all that good. this seems to be a theme around here, but if you look at the numbers, i'd say it's not accurate. i'm not an expert on mexico's economy but i do pay attention to a few facts and figures here and there.

per capita GDP is still $10,000 in 2013, the same place it's been for 5 years. mexico did not avoid the crash of 2008. it crashed. and has barely recovered to 2008 levels. then in 2012 mexico seems to have faced the same slowdown many other nations faced. mexico's economy grew maybe 1% in 2012.

oil production is down, from a peak of 3.5 million barrels a day in 2004, to 2.4 million barrels per day in 2012. the trend is steadily down year over year. it may come back up of course, depending on what happens in the industry, if PEMEX de-nationalized, et cetera

again i'm no expert but by a few quick and dirty measures, i don't see the evidence that mexico is booming. the drug war may be somewhat less violent now than during it's peak but it's still going too. dead bodies still show up all the time.

jody said...

2) after puerto rico kinda sorta voted in 2012 to become a state, i saw a few guys on another site do some quick, back of the envelope math, and the numbers weren't good.

turn everybody in puerto rico into an american citizen, apply IRS rules to them, and you'll quickly see that few puerto ricans even make enough money to pay taxes. but at the same time, most puerto ricans make so little, that they qualify for tax credits and refunds.

the net result is that the IRS would be SENDING puerto rico billions of dollars a year. i don't remember the exact numbers. but if puerto rico becomes a state, it will be sucking billions out of the US treasury every federal income tax cycle.

in 2011 puerto rico had the most murders in it's history, 1136. the number of murders went down in 2012 somewhat, but i can't find exact figures. it may be down to "only" 1000 murders or so.

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't America just get rid of Puerto Rico? Just give the island its independence (whether they want it or not) and be done with the place? It is a poor country and still speaks Spanish almost twelve decades after America took it over. America didn't even get the place to switch to English. At least they managed that with the Hawaiians. Economically the island has always been a dead loss to the USA. I can't think of one single gain that has ever accrued to America from holding the place.

Whiskey said...

The question is moot, the latest LA Times poll shows a vast majority of Californians want amnesty and open borders. Heck the WWE of all places has been positioning anti-Amnesty, anti-Open Borders as the villain (Jack Swagger) and the pro-Mexican guy who enters to Mariachi Music and has a GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL! style personal ring announcer as the face.

Most Whites are whole-heartedly in favor of open borders and amnesty, because it only hits working/middle class Whites and helps middle class women (cheap nannies, gardeners, housekeepers) and definitely upper class White women.

It would be different if the Mexodus were a zillion ultra hot Salma Hayeks snapping up all the Alpha males, you'd see the border patrolled and two mile high concrete walls built and minefields installed, within six months. But that's not how the West and America work.

NOTA said...

One factor here: For the really shitty jobs that pay squat and are unpleasant, the quality of Salvadorans or Mexicans fresh across the river who are willing to do those jobs is *way* higher than the quality of Americans willing to do those jobs.

Suppose you have a 40 year old white American man applying to work in a McDonalds. What do you figure his history looks like? I'm guessing drug or drinking problems, maybe a stay or two in prison, and a general sequence of fuckups that led him to be a 40 year old looking for a minimum wage job flipping burgers.

By contrast, a 40 year old Salvadoran man applying for the same job? Probably his personal history isn't nearly so much to blame for his being at the bottom as the fact that he comes from a completely fucked up, dysfunctional, impoverished, misgoverned country.

My guess is that the Salvadoran will do the job bettter 9 times out of 10, and that hiring him is the rational choice for the employer. There are social costs to that on a large scale, which is why we need immigration enforcement that makes hiring a lot of illegals a bad business decision. Not least of the social costs is that it would be nice if even utter lifelong fuckups had some kind of jobs they could get in the aboveground markets, since that's better than having them work underground or vegetate in subsidized housing eating the food we buy for them.

Anonymous said...

"contractors are starting to make houses-rotting-in-the-fields noises" - Worse, empty lots are rotting in the fields.

" I’m betting—aware of the nontrivial possibility that I could be wrong—that we won’t see another massive wave of immigration from Mexico." - Absolutely, demographically mexico is played out. The next wave of cheap labor for DC's cheap labor habit will come from africa or asia, if there is the energy to support it at all.

Anonymous said...

"i think its a myth they work harder. " - It is an outright spurious argument. The hard work meme comes from them overwhelming youth employment, as though Adults wouldn't be able to outright clobber children in the jobs market.

Anonymous said...

"Barone is right. Immigration waves always end. The Quebecois flooded new england from 1880 to 1940, and some had dreams of reconquering it as a catholic new France,"

Would you like a Pakistani or Somali wave? There is always somebody out there who wants to move here, at least for the near future until there is only a 20% white population and this place is just like their home.

Wasn't a 10% black population enough in 1965 for the idiots who ran this country?

Anonymous said...

Most Whites are whole-heartedly in favor of open borders and amnesty, because it only hits working/middle class Whites and helps middle class women (cheap nannies, gardeners, housekeepers) and definitely upper class White women.

No they don't. Most whites, like most people around the world, are too afraid to go against the grain of what is considered acceptable. That's why the trailblazers are always the ones that have to have the courage to face public scorn before their views become accepted. Most people especially women do not have that ability.

That is why it is important to control the narrative. And since the people who control the narrative favor open borders, that is the ideology they push and most people go with the flow. Even guys like you who appear to disagree with the narrative won't even disagree in public without using some fake name like Whiskey.

Just think what most whites' views would be if the media chose to run stories daily from around the country of illegals killing people in drunk driving accidents. What if they ran stories of hospitals' ERs shutting down due to the influx of nonpaying illegals. In a few weeks you'd have enough public outrage to get the politicians clamoring to send the Army to seal the border. But they don't run these stories, and so you won't see this happening.

It would be different if the Mexodus were a zillion ultra hot Salma Hayeks snapping up all the Alpha males, you'd see the border patrolled and two mile high concrete walls built and minefields installed, within six months.

Maybe. But I bet it would be different if a zillion anti-semites were coming across the border.

24AheadDotCom said...

Anonymous says "But for Barone and others holding his view, do they really want to take a chance on being wrong?"

While Barone isn't as bad as others who hold similar views, I doubt if he cares that much. They'd push things even worse for less.

Unlike ben tillman I don't think Barone etc. want to destroy the U.S., just that they could care less as long as the money is good.

Since I've been doing this for over a decade, maybe one day before next decade people will start talking about my position: discredit those like Barone, with the goal of making "self-deport" national policy.

I oppose any form of mass legalization, and I could make that work if I got a relatively small amount of help.

Svigor said...

The question is moot, the latest LA Times poll shows a vast majority of Californians want amnesty and open borders. Heck the WWE of all places has been positioning anti-Amnesty, anti-Open Borders as the villain (Jack Swagger) and the pro-Mexican guy who enters to Mariachi Music and has a GOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL! style personal ring announcer as the face.

Most Whites are whole-heartedly in favor of open borders and amnesty, because it only hits working/middle class Whites and helps middle class women (cheap nannies, gardeners, housekeepers) and definitely upper class White women.


Haha, yeah, all those white collar kids watching WWE. Who even watches that crap any more, besides you and the prole-iest of proles, like blacks (too parasitic to oppose the coalition on immigration) and browns (in favor)?

My guess is that the Salvadoran will do the job bettter 9 times out of 10, and that hiring him is the rational choice for the employer. There are social costs to that on a large scale, which is why we need immigration enforcement that makes hiring a lot of illegals a bad business decision. Not least of the social costs is that it would be nice if even utter lifelong fuckups had some kind of jobs they could get in the aboveground markets, since that's better than having them work underground or vegetate in subsidized housing eating the food we buy for them.

My guess is that MacDonalds would have to go back to hiring teenagers if all the brown midgets went home. They'd pay better, too.

Even guys like you who appear to disagree with the narrative won't even disagree in public without using some fake name like Whiskey.

Whiskey's whole raison d'etre is to deflect blame away from his tribe, onto white chicks.

Anonymous said...

Why do people think the US is just going to continue along and that giving 20 million plus Central American peasants a full ride (welfare wise) will have zero consequences? You guys talk like it'll be like America, but with more llanteras and shitty cars.

We've killed the dollar, the Colorado River is hitting max water capacity, and our "elites" seclude themselves in ivory towers in the Imperial Cities while pandering to other countries.

What's coming is going to make the Glorious Revolution look like a slap fight.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Illegals are known to do construcation work less as good as whites. People complain abut the bad construcation of a lot of new housing, so the guy form El Salvador does it worst than the white guy did 10 or 20 years ago.

Anonymous said...

In the Chicago era there was a black that did two fastfood jobs, so why do you think the El Salvadorian would do a better job. Most Latins that want in Fastfood are under 40, most are in their 20's. Basically they take the jobs away from retarded people or high school or people just out of college. They don't take jobs away from whites that much. And a lot of illegals looked much older than they are. They can be 30 and looked 40.

Mr. Anon said...

"CZ said...

As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?"

And if some guy came along who made more money than you, and was a better lover, would you object to him tapping your wife? After all.......he's hungrier. Who can hate that?

Dr Van Nostrand said...

"Its called convergence"
I think a more accurate word is osmosis.

Cail Corishev said...

As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier? -- CZ

Here, let me fix that for you:

As someone who recently manufactured a billion razor blades, I have to say that I appreciate child factory labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Cail Corishev said...

As someone who recently remodeled his apartment, I have to say that I appreciate immigrant construction labor. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Fixed it for you again:

As someone who recently bought a new entertainment system, I have to say that I appreciate the labor of burglars who sell stolen goods. They charge a lot less and they work harder. I have to say that I respect and appreciate that. How can you hate someone who's hungrier?

Anonymous said...

I always found the idea of Puerto Ricans voting on statehood laughable. The rest of the country should be able to vote on whether to let them in or turn them loose.

Of course, if they were given the option to come to the mainland or stay on the island upon nationhood, who'd be left on the island?

Steve Sailer said...

As someone who recently had his chimney swept, I have to say that I appreciate five-year-old chimneysweeps. They charge a lot less and they can wriggle through dangerously narrow passages more often than ten-year-old chimneysweeps can.

Why do you anti-child labor maniacs hate five-year-old children?

Anonymous said...

I appreaciate the thousands of ilegal immirgants that worked on assembly lines in La doing sewing since white women don't do that work.

David Davenport said...

Mr. Barone the wise man -- didn't he predict that Mittens Romney would win by a landslide last year?

Anonymous said...

Well, its like Steve mention that Phoenix area-maricopia was the politcal heir to Orange County. I think more people from the OC moved to there until you had the recession. Maricopia did e-verify more than some of the other places around it, not that there still are not illegal immirgants. Also, Maricopia is white, then Mexican then black and Asian. Blacks and Asians are a small populatoin. Only 5 percent black and 4 percent Asian, so So Californias could go to a place not perfect still high in the Hisapnic population but lower in the other minority groups and they were fighting the illegal immirgant inspite of their two bad senators more so than Texas. Housing a little higher than Texas but cheaper than California.

Anonymous said...

Well, the interesting fact is the Asians that have less babies are holding their own against Hispanics. As mention Asians have not went down in the percentage in the younger population and they sually increase in the older population. Asians will pushed that immirgation favors them over the Hispanics in the long term. Flipinos want to come in to do home health care over Mexicans and so forth. There are even Asians in Long Beach that work inthe hotel industry. outside of farmwork or fastfood places hispanics do habe competition from other groups eben meatpacking from Africans.

Anonymous said...

hiring [illegals] is the rational choice for the employer.

Just so he can have yet one more big screen TV in his gated-community McMansion. He'll destroy Western civilization and the nation, sponsor crime including murder and rape against the natives ultimately sponsor their dispossession and disappearance, just so he can have one more gewgaw, that's what it comes down to. A rational community would hang the rational businessman, and this one probably would, too, if the guns of the government weren't protecting this colonization.

I mistyped gated above as gatred, gatred would be a good word to describe the phenomenon of SWPLs and Babbitt conservatives retreating to fortified communities while sponsoring the destruction of those communities outside the gates. On second thought the good old-fashioned word treason is better.

Anonymous said...

Well, lots of people can see Steve's 19th century illustration of using kid labor which was used before that as being bad. The reason that people don't see illegals is that make more money in the states at least 7.25 per hr unless they are in the slave labor schemes that are going on that can pay 5.00 in the garment industry or so forth. Steve's has a point unlike libertarians like Rand and Tea party members some government regulation is necessary from importing a lot of folks that will moved and have moved the US more to the left. Probably Obama would not have beocme President since Reagan's anmesty didn't passed. One thing that help Obama with white liberals and Hispanics is the health care issue.

Anonymous said...

According to new reports, the pending bill would allow companies to bring in roughly 600,000 guest workers each year, and also provide work permits and citizenship to 11 million Democratic-leaning immigrants.

Companies are lobbying for the workers to fill jobs in the professional and service sectors, even though 20 million Americans are unemployed, underemployed or given up looking for work.

Currently, opposition from unions that represent skilled workers — such as construction workers — have stalled a closed-door deal between the U.S Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO.

Roughly 90 percent of union members say the reduction of illegal immigration is important to them, according to a Jan. 29-30 poll of 1,000 likely voters by Rasmussen. Only 9 percent of union members said they thought it was not important. (RELATED: Union members split on immigration

Cail Corishev said...

Wow, could the private-sector unions finally be waking up to the fact that immigrants who work cheaper and for less benefits will have less money to pay their union bosses? Imagine that.

Next maybe it'll occur to them that the Democrats they spend billions to elect and reelect would love to see every one of their members fired and replaced with a non-union Mexican, Indian, or Elsewhereite. (So would the Republicans, but the unions don't give them money, so there's no betrayal there.)

TGGP said...

Whiskey claims, on the basis of no data, that most whites support more immigration & amnesty as a way to stick it to whites (huh?). Earlier he claimed that most women support immigration, which I used the GSS to falsify. He then retreated to making a claim about women in a particular income range, and I followed up showing him to be wrong again. Will he ever claim that most Jews support more immigration? That would have the advantage of already being falsified in an earlier Sailer post.

Anonymous said...

Fair also stated that the Unions want higher wages for guestworkers. let's say you pay a maid currently in Anahiem 9 per hr but the union wants for the new guestworker program 11 or 12 per hr and companies lose their motivation to hire illegals and turn back to low skilled natives even with some drug problems.

Anonymous said...

Hillman came with a corporate administrative background, having worked for the now-defunct Washington Mutual. She had no startup experience but knew she wanted a job that would give her a flexible schedule to spend time with her children.

DeSantis-Cummings brought startup experience to the table, with a marketing business and an online newsletter under her belt.

Gigi Hill’s products are designed in Yorba Linda and manufactured in China. An Arizona warehouse fills the orders.

The direct-selling model has in part helped the company see 900% sales growth in 2009 and a doubling of sales every year since.

“Our women start their own business and are based nationwide and go into people’s homes and then demonstrate the products in their home,” DeSantis-Cummings said. “It allowed us to create and to multiply the entrepreneurial model.”

Sales Strength Critical
It seems in So Calif a lot of small business are started by white women, only one was a young 2nd generation Mexican. SOme well be mad the manufactoring is in China but at least the designed and werehousing is in the US.