Out today, from Robert Rector and Jason Richwine of the Heritage Foundation:
The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer
By Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, Ph.D.
May 6, 2013
... As noted, at the current time (before amnesty), the average unlawful immigrant household has a net deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $14,387 per household.
During the interim phase immediately after amnesty, tax payments would increase more than government benefits, and the average fiscal deficit for former unlawful immigrant households would fall to $11,455.
At the end of the interim period, unlawful immigrants would become eligible for means-tested welfare and medical subsidies under Obamacare. Average benefits would rise to $43,900 per household; tax payments would remain around $16,000; the average fiscal deficit (benefits minus taxes) would be about $28,000 per household.
Amnesty would also raise retirement costs by making unlawful immigrants eligible for Social Security and Medicare, resulting in a net fiscal deficit of around $22,700 per retired amnesty recipient per year.
In terms of public policy and government deficits, an important figure is the aggregate annual deficit for all unlawful immigrant households. This equals the total benefits and services received by all unlawful immigrant households minus the total taxes paid by those households.
Under current law, all unlawful immigrant households together have an aggregate annual deficit of around $54.5 billion.
In the interim phase (roughly the first 13 years after amnesty), the aggregate annual deficit would fall to $43.4 billion.
At the end of the interim phase, former unlawful immigrant households would become fully eligible for means-tested welfare and health care benefits under the Affordable Care Act. The aggregate annual deficit would soar to around $106 billion.
In the retirement phase, the annual aggregate deficit would be around $160 billion. It would slowly decline as former unlawful immigrants gradually expire.
These costs would have to be borne by already overburdened U.S. taxpayers. (All figures are in 2010 dollars.)
The typical unlawful immigrant is 34 years old. After amnesty, this individual will receive government benefits, on average, for 50 years. Restricting access to benefits for the first 13 years after amnesty therefore has only a marginal impact on long-term costs.
If amnesty is enacted, the average adult unlawful immigrant would receive $592,000 more in government benefits over the course of his remaining lifetime than he would pay in taxes.
Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits.
Posts
59 comments:
Well,I remember the actor Jay Robinson that starred in the movie the Robe, drugs destroy his career for a time but he wrote in the book about his career doing a short order cook job in Santa Ana and he and his wife lived in a flophouse apartment complex with a lot of white guys that had drinking problems that also did short order cook jobs. Jay got robbed walking home and lost the job. He also worked at Fariview State Hosptial cleaning very severaly retarded and deformed people. That job unforunately allowed the police to idenify him and he had to go back to prison to served his drug charged. This all took placed in the 1960's. Today only 1 percent of the white population does short order cook jobs in Orange County or about 3 percent cleaning jobs, most are illegal mexicans.
Socializing costs and privatizing profits.
Of course, you'll never see any of this plastered across the front of the NYT, or in the discussions of the Gang of Eight who are supposed to be making wise, informed decisions for the benefit of the (current) US citizens.
If I were slightly more paranoid, I might think that the elites were doing something sneaky for their own benefit at the expense of the rest of us. Nah, couldn't be that...
Just keep the current system and pushed e-verify which takes a long time. As mention the cost is great, the low number for pre-1990 is that many were legalized under the Reagan IRCA.
Always money, money, money.
Shouldn't an organization called the HERITAGE Foundation be more worried about the racial and cultural impact of current immigration?
But if we just used a system like Canada or Australia we would get educated, talented, hard working immigrants instead. Otherwise we will be victimized by adverse selection. Immigrants tend to vote Democrat either way, so why do the Dems want to ruin the country by filling our our nation with the world's misfits and rejects.
Send the bill to Emma Lazarus.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/174197/penny-pritzkers-commerce-part-two?rel=facebook
At less than half of current US GDP, $6 trillion strikes me as a huge underestimate of the costs over 50 or so years. A future third world America characterized by massive corruption, occasional coups d'etat and other Mexico-like features would not be producing a first-world GDP. So a better estimate would multiply 50 (years) by the difference between current American and Mexican GDP: and I get $500 trillion.
That huge number actually helps you focus on tge real question, which is, What's the cost of destroying the US? And I think tge only right answer is: Nonnegotiable!
You would be a lot more credible on the issue of unskilled illegals being tax-drains, if you didn't devote half your posts this month to about the horrors of high-skilled H1B visas. Who overwhelmingly are massive tax contributors.
Anonymous said...
"Always money, money, money.
Shouldn't an organization called the HERITAGE Foundation be more worried about the racial and cultural impact of current immigration?"
Yes. But the power of the international Marxists is so oppressive, that it is socially more acceptable to argue dollars and cents than to have the contumelious temerity to suggest that our government should not finance our ethnic cleansing.
You would be a lot more credible on the issue of unskilled illegals being tax-drains, if you didn't devote half your posts this month to about the horrors of high-skilled H1B visas. Who overwhelmingly are massive tax contributors.
"Tax" contributions are only part of the story, DR. Their presence shrinks every American's per capita share of land, water, natural resources, glorious open space, and voting power. They pollute, consume water, drive up housing prices, undermine social solidarity, and potentially discriminate against ethnic Americans. Externalities. They aren't a risk worth taking.
That huge number actually helps you focus on tge real question, which is, What's the cost of destroying the US? And I think tge only right answer is: Nonnegotiable!
Thank you International Jew.
Does anyone have thoughts on the criticism of this study?
Conservative Are Piling on the Flawed New Heritage Study
Here's the Massive Flaw in the New Heritage Study
You would be a lot more credible on the issue of unskilled illegals being tax-drains, if you didn't devote half your posts this month to about the horrors of high-skilled H1B visas. Who overwhelmingly are massive tax contributors.
You'd be a lot more credible if you posted anonymously.
Australian academic Frank Salter on the corrosive effects of immigration-induced diversity and the asymmetry of multiculturalism:
The Humanitarian Costs of Western Multiculturalism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX_5J76h7N8
Heritage Foundation now? What next, a Wall Street Journal editorial against illegal immigration?
Why, it's almost as though the reason illegal imigrants do the jobs Americans won't do is because Americans are eligible for far more government poverty benefits, so you have to pay them better if you want them to take crappy jobs at starvation wages.
DR:
Actually, I think it's the authors of the linked study who are making a taxes vs benefits argument--Steve is just quoting that argument.
Personally, I'm mixed on high tech immigration. There are big benefits to importing the best and brightest of the world to the US, especially if they stay here, assimilate, and have kids. However, there are costs to making engineering and science fields Americans avoid, as they have to pay sky-high tuitions on Dickensian student loan agreements and then they get salaries lowered by a large pool of imported engineers. It's not healthy to have Americans pushed away from those fields. (I think AA does the same thing with blacks, and it is overwhelmingly not to blacks' advantage to have all their brainpower highly educated in playing with words and ideologies rather than in building things and discovering things.)
And in any event, we ought not to have visas that chain an immigrant to one employer. If we decide you can come work here, itshould be as a normal participant in the job pool, on the same terms as anyone else. Having a special class of employees with fewer rights is a bad idea on all kinds of levels. We got rid of indentured servitude for very good reasons.
Indian-American:
"Who overwhelmingly are massive tax contributors."
There's more to a nation than the ratio of its tax recipients and tax payers.
I really appreciate info like this.
It would be interesting to see cost breakdowns among other groups, derived from known data.
I want a 50-year moratorium on immigration to our homeland.
You would be a lot more credible on the issue of unskilled illegals being tax-drains ..
That's "DR" displaying his customary delusions of grandeur.
"$14,387 per household"
A family with 3 children would cost 30k just for school.
How comprehensive is the calculation?
Increasing population means:
Build new roads.
Build new power plants.
Build new police fire dept.
Build new prisons.
Etc.
Does anyone have thoughts on the criticism of this study?
Conservative Are Piling on the Flawed New Heritage Study
Here's the Massive Flaw in the New Heritage Study
The latter is stupid and dishonest; the former does not criticize the study.
You calculate the average total taxes paid per capita and assume this represents the cost of maintaining infrastructure per capita. Any immigrant whose total taxes per capita is less than this average, the difference has to be made up.
NYT: US Workers Claim Race Bias as Farms Rely on Immigrants
"[A]s Congress weighs immigration legislation expected to expand the guest worker program, another group is increasingly crying foul — Americans, mostly black, who live near the farms and say they want the field work but cannot get it because it is going to Mexicans. They contend that they are illegally discouraged from applying for work and treated shabbily by farmers who prefer the foreigners for their malleability."
Story here.
With the way the subsidies work with ObamaCare, the punch bowl is about to be flushed before the party can get started. Only people who are lawfully present will be eligible for the tax credits through the new exchanges that are being set up and they are going to verify it with the SAVE data base. That means the majority of illegals, 99% of whom are low income, will have to pay full freight of a bloated premium if they are to have health insurance. Of course they cannot pay. They also will not be able to participate in the state Medicaid plans. undoubtedly, as they do now, they will just end up in the ER room using an assumed name but the backlash will be horrendous. Much of the pity for illegals will evaporate when the middle class has to rub elbows with them as they stand in line for their newly reduced shitty medical care. Part of the urgency for amnesty this time around is that it will become manifestly apparent after January 1st, next year when most of PPACA kicks in. If they get legalized now before public realizes that they will be getting substantially free health care then it will be much easier to pull off. Once this door closes it might never open up again.
Why, it's almost as though the reason illegal imigrants do the jobs Americans won't do is because Americans are eligible for far more government poverty benefits, so you have to pay them better if you want them to take crappy jobs at starvation wages. I remember Heathe Macdonald pointing out that Mexicans took more welfare in Orange County. There are stats to back this up, the New York Times had low food stamp count for OC, whites in 2009 at 2 percent and blacks at 9 percent but blacks are only 2 percent of the population. Others were at 4 percent and a large shared of others are Hispanic whether legal or illegal, illegals are already getting food . So, its a myth that in heavily Mexican states that whites can more welfare.
Did they include this in their calculation:
Boston Bombing Cost Economy an Estimated $333 Million
There's more to a nation than the ratio of its tax recipients and tax payers.
Yeah, there's also the quality of its populace. And basic HBD tells us that the East Asians and high-caste Indians that make up the majority of H1B visas are better than your typical American white that they're diluting (not to mention NAMs that make up close to 50% in many states).
East Asians and Indians in America have much fewer out of wedlock births, lower divorce rates, lower crime rates, higher standardized test scores, higher educational attainment, lower unemployment rates, and start more businesses.
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian. No one here would choose to live in a randomly selected Scotch-Irish zipcode in the Ozark vs. a randomly selected East Asian zip code in New Jersey.
There isn't one non-Communist city in East Asia that isn't a far better place to live, work and raise a family than Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Memphis or Philadelphia.
Cities like Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo and Taipei far surpass even our best cities like New York or San Francisco in terms of safety, cleanliness, orderliness and efficiency.
America should be striving to become more like Singapore, which in virtually every measure: GDP growth, unemployment, health outcomes, crime, and many others has far surpassed the U.S.
One way to do that is to start targeting the population makeup of Singapore: a mixture of Chinese, high-caste Indians and skilled Europeans. Another way to do that is to emulate Singapore's immigration policy which sets high allowances on skilled workers, while strictly limiting unskilled workers to non-citizen guest status who are deported at the slightest sign of trouble.
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian.
Who is this "country" you speak of?
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian.
Who are these "countries" and how do you know what makes them happy?
Anyone else following the Amanda Berry/Gina DeJesus/Michelle Knight kidnapping story? Apparently an Ariel Castro is to blame, and possibly his brothers. "The Cleveland Division of Police confirms that there are now three suspects under arrest. All three are Hispanic males, ages 50, 52 and 54."
http://clevelandpolice.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/update-missing-persons-investigation-3-arrests-search-warrant-being-executed-now/
I'm not sure whether the perpetrators are white, black or pink polka dot Hispanics.
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian.
I am curious as to why you are so concerned about the United States. As an Indian, shouldn't you be proud of your people and wish for them to build India into a great and prosperous nation? This cannot be done if your best and brightest leave.
We too are proud of our nation and regard other whites as kin. In fact the overwhelming majority of whites do not have to go too far back in their family history to be considered poor and uneducated. So when you put down those people, you put us down.
Just look at many of our leading figures from the past 200 years to see how many came from the very type of whites you'd like to replace.
Sorry, but most of us will keep our whites. They carry the genes and one never knows when that will manifest into another Sam Walton.
No one here would choose to live in a randomly selected Scotch-Irish zipcode in the Ozark vs. a randomly selected East Asian zip code in New Jersey.
Tell that to all the people trying to move to Bentonville, Ar. There you will find a little company created by rural whites called Walmart. You might have heard of it.
Steve Sailer actually wrote a piece about Jews heading to Bentonville a few years ago to partake in this good fortune.
America should be striving to become more like Singapore, which in virtually every measure: GDP growth, unemployment, health outcomes, crime, and many others has far surpassed the U.S.
One way to do that is to start targeting the population makeup of Singapore: a mixture of Chinese, high-caste Indians and skilled Europeans.
What good does it do us to become like Singapore if the country will no longer belong to us?
As an Indian, shouldn't you be proud of your people and wish for them to build India into a great and prosperous nation?
Uhh? What? I'm a native born WASP American, who's ancestry traces well before the American Revolution.
In fact the overwhelming majority of whites do not have to go too far back in their family history to be considered poor and uneducated.
Not too far at all. In fact the majority of American whites are now lower-class than they've ever been in their ancestral history. In terms of behavior: illegitimacy, criminality, parasitism, divorce, sloth, unemployment, and an entitlement mentality.
The "white trash" sub-culture use to be a tiny minority. Now it's well over 50% of American whites and growing. As an educated upper-class white male, I feel much a much close cultural connection to the educated elite of foreign countries than I do to my lower-class co-nationals.
The European-Americans of yester-century built an amazing and powerful civilization. They were also a smart, industrious, risk-taking folk with a can-do attitude and no sense of entitlement. If you think modern-day European Americans have even half the virtues that made their grandparents great... well let's just say you ain't in touch with the common man.
And man, whatever, you can jabber on and on about Bentonville, Arkansas, and that's sure great. But Bentonville is 36,000 people. The way Charles Murray estimates it, you've got nearly 100 million whites who have adopted ghetto culture hook, line and sinker. You're going to need a hell of a lot Sam Waltons to undo that damage.
Our own population is being rendered incapable of running our civilization before our very eyes. The New Deal welfare state has been a tumor that's eaten away at our culture. If we want to maintain our status as an economic and technological super-power we have no choice but to import new populations to replace the population that we've ruined.
East Asians and high-caste Indians make ideal targets. First HBD guarantees that they and their children will be ipso factor more economically productive and intelligence than people of European descent.
Second recent history has clearly demonstrated that type more K-type the sub-population the more resistant they are to the deleterious effect of the welfare state. East Asians are the highest K sub-population in the world. The welfare state ain't going soon since the majority of voters are on it. This gives their superior HBD Asians a double advantage over our native whites.
Third huge number of East Asians and high-caste Indians still want to immigrate to America, despite our country going down the toilet. Now's the time to act. We don't really have that long before all the East Asian countries reach higher levels of economic development than the US and we lose the opportunity. In 30 years all of China will look like Singapore, and all of California will look like Stockton. That's going to put a dampener on the US's derivability as a residency.
We need to strike while the iron's hot. We've ruined our once great culture. It won't be too long until that inevitably leads to us ruining our dynamic economy. Our people are turning into animals. Our cities are rotting from the inside out. Out industries are withering away.
Yet we have a life raft. Hundreds of millions of the smartest, hardest-worest, most well-behaved people in the history of the world want to move here, no questions asked. They want to pay our taxes for us. They want to work for our companies and make our investors rich. They want to build the next-generation of technology on our soil.
If we don't take this rapidly closing opportunity now, the future denizens of this once-great nation will never forgive us.
But again and again you here the mantra screamed 'but immigrants are necessary to save social security!' by the leftists.
Evidently that is an exploded fallacy - but, nevertheless, you hear the bleats just the same.
DR,
Well pehaps the solution is for you and yours to move Singapore.
It would certainly benefit you. And it will benefit us.
You notice how DR cits Singapore - a city state founded by the British and built into an economic miracle by the Chinese, rather than anything India has got to offer. Somehow I doubt the Chinese or Malays would be to keen on being swamped by opportunistic, fly by night, Indians.
It's curious how Indians are so keen to impose themselves on other people's nations - and aggressively assert their 'right' to do so, whilst abandoning their native land and doing nothing to make it more amenable. It's doubly curious how they follow white people everywhere white people go, like lost sheep.
"What good does it do us to become like Singapore if the country will no longer belong to us?"
Let me tell you a secret that the elites know, but the "people" don't. The country never belonged to the people. No country ever has. From 1776-1860 the landed aristocracy owned this country. From 1860-1933 the Northern industrialists owned this country. From 1933 onwards the "public intellectuals" and their institutions own the country.
All states are subject to the iron law of oligarchy. The will of the people is no barrier to the elites in the long-run (and elites always think in the long-term, that's something that makes them elite). Whether a state is nominally a democracy or not is irrelevant. In a democracy those who control public opinion (which is infinitely malleable) control the state.
But you know what. It doesn't have to be that bad. I rent an apartment, and it's not that different from my friends who own condos. As long as you have a decent landlord you don't have to own where you live to have a good life.
So the question is who would you rather be your landlord: the New York Times-Harvard-federal bureacracy complex or Lee Kuan Yew?
Before you answer you might want to compare how each landlord maintain their common areas and amenities.
I saw Singapore on House Hunters...
It looked like Every other Slummy Asian/Indian-ish neighborhood
Let's face it...Whites created the 'middle class' neighborhood of single-family homes...beautiful flower gardens...easy breezy roads to drive down...Organization that is both functional and oftentimes beautiful in itself. Ahhh, there's nothing more stunning than Anglo-Saxon/English Derived Suburbia!
High Caste Asians and Indians genuinely enjoy living like Sardines in slummy ghetto-like neighborhoods...despite their IQs.
Has anyone ever noticed that Asians just do not do yard work like ever? I always know which houses are occupied by Asians by looking at the woefully sad, pathetically drab colorless front yard.
"Yeah, there's also the quality of its populace. And basic HBD tells us that the East Asians and high-caste Indians that make up the majority of H1B visas are better than your typical American white that they're diluting (not to mention NAMs that make up close to 50% in many states).”
Wrong. HBD does not pass value judgements on populations. Furthermore, even the most crass deracinated liberal materialist (i.e. you) would be advised to consider that HBD contains many moving parts. It’s not as simple as black<white<yellow.
It seems likely to me that the art and ideas of high IQ black men living a violent and physical-centric black society are not the same as that of equally smart East Asians living in East Asian ant colonies. Even if we imagine a high IQ black man who is intrinsically exactly the same as some other high IQ Asian, their societies will still have different demands of their talents.
"No one here would choose to live in a randomly selected Scotch-Irish zipcode in the Ozark vs. a randomly selected East Asian zip code in New Jersey.”
Nor, I imagine, would you choose to live in rural China rather than Barbados. But this all irrelevant, if I have the financial means to live in an East Asian New Jersey zip, then I can afford to live a white area outside of the Ozarks. I will also say that I am far more content to have the Ozarks within our national borders than New Jersey... and much more impressed with the cultural contributions of the Scotch-Irish than those of the East Asians.
"America should be striving to become more like Singapore...”
Oh crap! Never mind. My stupid white brain could not detect that you were being sarcastic until now, and I now I’ve wasted all this time.
And to be completely honest...
Indians from India should think twice about bringing their uhhh *cough* Daughters to a Country next to Mexico.
Several Indian families I know have low-IQ (reversion to the mean) daughters who are shacking up with Mexicans. Maybe the families will talk their daughters out of marrying the guys...but either way the ball has started rolling down the hill...
So...something to think about if high-caste Indians want to remain high-caste...
Absolutely shocking.
Great article. I am amazed at your productivity, the number or valuable articles you crank out.
Do it while you still can. Did you read that the UN has formally admonished Germany for not prosecuting Thilo Sarrazin for making "racist" anti-immigrant statements?
Click on the link above to my site's race and IQ section
Another very interesting take:
restricting immigration would be the best affirmative action for US citizens on the lower half of the Bell curve (recent article written by Steve himself)
These immigrants crowd out Blacks and low IQ whites from low paid job and drive salaries down.
DR - Does it give you any pause that high g Indians show zero interest in improving their own country? Given their track record why would I want them here?
Anon Said: Whites of Any IQ levels just Do More Shit That Leads to Cooler, Nicer Societies.
Widespread curiosity is perhaps the key difference between Europeans and other civilized peoples. Curiosity is woefully underrated by the IQ fetishists that populate the wonkier corners of the blogosphere.
-The Judean People's Front
"Does anyone have thoughts on the criticism of this study?
Conservative Are Piling on the Flawed New Heritage Study
Here's the Massive Flaw in the New Heritage Study"
Borjas just released a study looking at the issues these two articles try to raise as counterarguments. Borjas finds exactly the opposite of what these two articles assert (without evidence). He finds that immigration causes a massive transfer from poor Americans to rich Americans of about $400 billion per year. He finds that the immigrants themselves capture the value of what they create. So, on average, immigrants add no net value, and for poor Americans they are a bad thing.
The second article is particularly dishonest. It simply claims magical pixie-dust multiplier effects without any support.
"Has anyone ever noticed that Asians just do not do yard work like ever? I always know which houses are occupied by Asians by looking at the woefully sad, pathetically drab colorless front yard."
I take it you don't live in a Japanese neighborhood?
Yeah, there's also the quality of its populace. And basic HBD tells us that the East Asians and high-caste Indians that make up the majority of H1B visas are better than your typical American white that they're diluting (not to mention NAMs that make up close to 50% in many states).
East Asians and Indians in America have much fewer out of wedlock births, lower divorce rates, lower crime rates, higher standardized test scores, higher educational attainment, lower unemployment rates, and start more businesses.
Basic logic tells us that the people fleeing the shitty countries their kind creates are inferior to the people who create the countries they're fleeing to.
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian. No one here would choose to live in a randomly selected Scotch-Irish zipcode in the Ozark vs. a randomly selected East Asian zip code in New Jersey.
Objectively speaking, this means we should just send our gov't and elite to India and China, and they'll be in Paradise.
Objectively speaking, saying a typical American white is inferior to a high-caste Indian is racist against Indians, because you have to cherry-pick your Indians to make your statement true, while any old average white will do.
No one here would choose to live in a randomly-selected Han zip code, over a randomly-selected Scots-Irish zip code.
No one here would choose to live in a randomly-selected Indian zip code, over a randomly-selected Scots-Irish zip code.
Han and Indians know this perfectly well, which is why they're all trying to move to America, and white people know this perfectly well, which is why none of them are trying to move to China or India.
There isn't one non-Communist city in East Asia that isn't a far better place to live, work and raise a family than Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Memphis or Philadelphia.
Nobody in America is trying to move to China. Everybody in China is trying to move to America. This probably has at least something to do with the fact that the Chinese were too stupid to avoid Communism.
Cities like Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo and Taipei far surpass even our best cities like New York or San Francisco in terms of safety, cleanliness, orderliness and efficiency.
And those very same cities do not allow mass immigration. They are not importing the "cognitive elite" of India.
If you're an Anglo-Saxon with a long ancestral history in America, I'm a Chinaman. In fact, you're either a Chinaman or an Indian; probably an Indian, since yellows don't tend to champion WOGs the way you do.
America should be striving to become more like Singapore, which in virtually every measure: GDP growth, unemployment, health outcomes, crime, and many others has far surpassed the U.S.
If by that you meant we should dispense with democracy and operate as a Machiavellian majority, then I agree.
Uhh? What? I'm a native born WASP American, who's ancestry traces well before the American Revolution.
Haha, liar. You're definitely a sociopath, though. That's independent of your specific ancestry (which definitely isn't Anglo-Saxon, or deeply-rooted in America), btw.
As an educated upper-class white male
Tell us about your education. Where did you go to school?
If we don't take this rapidly closing opportunity now, the future denizens of this once-great nation will never forgive us.
Like I said, you're definitely a sociopath. You might be a Jewish sociopath, an Indian sociopath, or a yellow sociopath. Hell, you might even be a White Nationalist sociopath, what with the increasingly absurd stuff you're posting. But you're definitely a sociopath.
Oh crap! Never mind. My stupid white brain could not detect that you were being sarcastic until now, and I now I’ve wasted all this time.
Yep, he's just here having some fun. God knows why this sort of thing is fun for him, though. I confess to not really understanding sociopaths, and just thinking of them as people with bad wiring.
Widespread curiosity is perhaps the key difference between Europeans and other civilized peoples. Curiosity is woefully underrated by the IQ fetishists that populate the wonkier corners of the blogosphere.
Seconded, big time. Though I would probably substitute another word for "curiosity," if I had a good one to give. It's a sort of "x factor" that involves not just curiosity, but also individualism, creativity, square dealing, etc.
"Has anyone ever noticed that Asians just do not do yard work like ever? I always know which houses are occupied by Asians by looking at the woefully sad, pathetically drab colorless front yard."
I take it you don't live in a Japanese neighborhood?
That's probably why the Japanese aren't much interested in swamping the rest of the world with hordes of themselves; they don't foul their own nest.
To recapitulate:
If you want America to resemble China or India, it makes sense to bring in substantial numbers of Chinese or Indians.
If you don't, it makes sense to keep Chinese and Indians out.
This is really simple, and doesn't require anywhere near as much energy as DR is expending.
DR,
If you Indians are so damned wonderful, then why is your nation simply the worst nation on earth?
Black Africans are a cleaner people than the Indians are.
Now DR claims to be a WASP with 'pre-revolutionary roots'.
HINT - Don't believe *anything* DR writes. If lies once, he'll lie a thousand times.
Let me tell you a secret that the elites know, but the "people" don't. The country never belonged to the people.
At the end of the day, all libertarians are totalitarianism lovers. Their ideal state is an oligarchy run by rich people. A quick glance at libertarian literature will show that their favorite country is - Abu Dhabi!
Steve thinks he's making a good point by attacking open borders as a get-rich-quick scheme for the rich, and perhaps it is a good argument for most people. But for libertarians it is axiomatic that whatever makes rich people richer is the thing we must do.
Conservative Are Piling on the Flawed New Heritage Study
None of the people mentioned are conservatives. None of the people mentioned even attempt to seriously engage with the studies findings. They don't want it to be true, so to them it is not true. End of.
Objectively speaking any country should be happy to swap out one typical American white for a East Asian or high-caste Indian.
Is "DR" the latest Ron Unz sock-puppet?
Objectively speaking, those "typical American whites" have created a country which everyone else in the world wants to live in. Which is a lot more than can be said for those "East Asians and high-caste Indians" DR has set up on a pedestal.
There isn't one non-Communist city in East Asia that isn't a far better place to live, work and raise a family than Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Memphis or Philadelphia.
Because nothing says "typical American white" like Detroit, St. Louis, Oakland, Memphis or Philadelphia.
If we want to maintain our status as an economic and technological super-power we have no choice but to import new populations to replace the population that we've ruined.
Where exactly is it written that the raison d'être of America is to be an "economic and technological super-power"?
Is there some secret US Constitution I don't know about which begins with the words, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a economic and technological super-power ..."?
And if the problem with the US is that it "ruins people", how is importing more people for it to ruin a good thing? Seems like the correct thing to do would be for it to stop ruining people. One of the ways it has ruined many of its existing people is .... immigration.
Svigor:
South Korea isn't fouling its nest either. Nor is Singapore. And it looks plausibly like China is getting its shit together. And historically, a bunch of East Asia, India, the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe have been pretty high functioning civilizations for their times. It's not a shock to see China coming up, since they've usually been a pretty advanced culture--history suggests they've got the ability to keep up a pretty advanced culture. Indeed, the modern performance of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore make a strong case that Mainland China's current backwardness is more like local fluctuation than like lack of innate ability to keep a high functioning culture going.
By contrast, as far as I know, sub-Saharan Africa has never been close to the state of the art in human culture. Maybe that's by accident, but it's quite possible that's a lack of innate ability, or too much parasite load, or some other thing.
Central/South America is an intermediate case: there were pretty advanced civilizations in Central and South America, and it's plausible that they would have caught up with the state of the art given a little more time, and there may be other explanations for why they lagged behind, but they never quite did catch up. But now, Central and South America are inhabited by a mix of Central/South American Indians, Europeans, and Africans, so who knows what their potential is.
Post a Comment