Translate

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Economists make astounding discovery

Importing poverty increases inequality. (Via Marginal Revolution).
Given current patterns of immigration to the United States, Washington faces an enormous policy challenge. Two in five of all immigrants to the United States are from Mexico and Central America. Latinos now constitute 22 percent of all children in the United States; by 2050, they are expected to be 39 percent. But the social status of Latinos, even those born in the United States, is persistently low.

This perhaps shouldn't be a surprise, given that migrants from Mexico and Central America tend to be negatively selected from their home populations: they are often the people who found themselves in such desperate economic circumstances at home that they preferred to live as illegal immigrants in the United States. (Latinos constitute nearly half of the foreign born in the United States, but four in five of illegal migrants.) The effects have been dire: there can be no doubt that immigration is widening social inequality in the United States.

Consider the table below, which shows educational attainment of 25–34-year-olds in the United States in 2009. Descendants of Latino immigrants are dropping out of high school at rates far in excess of the domestic population and the descendants of other immigrant groups; similarly, the Latino population is much less likely than those other groups to complete higher education. Educational attainment in all societies is a strong predictor of future social status, and the prediction here for the Latino population is not good.

Of course, Clark cannot bring himself to mouth the dread word, "I.Q." but that's why he's published in Foreign Affairs and Steve Sailer is not. Thus, given the human capital we're importing, lots of such people from crowded, destitute places can only mean the same lowered wages and increased competition for housing, education, green space, public utilities, etc. as in the originating country. Wages stagnate, goods and services get more scarce. Profits are captured at the top, costs are socialized downward, and the bottom finds socio-economic break-out increasingly difficult.

In sum, immigration means the developing-world (i.e., those regions which are perenially "developing" yet never ultimately developed) conditions are simply replicated here. The US is literally engineering its own decline into Third World status.

And, once again, we have been over this before. My question is, if the Council of Foreign Relations has figured this out; if prominent academic economists like Tyler Cowen have figured this out, then why aren't they shouting it from all their high profile outlets? The same tsunami is going to drown them and theirs too, after all. Are they insane, or just evil?

7 comments:

Your Kakistocracy said...

Men do what they may, not what they must.

They know what they are permitted to say and what they are not. And they also know that a nanometer too much candor will leave them an income stream from a "donate" button on a blog. The end.

Ian F. Shield said...

Cowen recently put out a book titled "Average is Over," in which he forecasts that life in the US is going to get much, much worse for the large majority of people. We will have a social structure like Brazil or Mexico, and he seems to be okay with that. The assumption is that high-IQ people like himself will be part of the small aristocracy able to insulate themselves, and their kids, from the proles. He's probably correct about that, at least for another 2 or 3 generations.

Ian F. Shield said...

I see from your link that you're already aware of "Average is Over." So my previous comment was not necessary.

Northern Refugee said...

"The assumption is that high-IQ people like himself will be part of the small aristocracy able to insulate themselves, and their kids, from the proles. He's probably correct about that, at least for another 2 or 3 generations."

Hmmmm.
This fellow needs to read up on history. This might work in mestizo countries like Brazil, but in western societies, when a small, insular elite completely immiserates the populace, things tend to get violent. In my estimation, things will come to head far sooner than the hopefully anticipated (at least for Cowan and his ilk) day when whites become a minority. The last Western country I can think of where a small tribe flourished while the populace as a whole starved was Germany. How did that work out?

Northern Refugee said...

AG:

Steve Sailer is fond of pointing out that the left-wing mythos is that the mestizos are the new Italians/Irish, and that REAL soon they'll leave the barrios and join the middle class. This article implies that instead they will be the new blacks, with all the commensurate social and economic problems. You would have thought that we'd have learned our lesson by now: importing browns to do work you don't want to do is a long term losing strategy.

Ian F. Shield said...

I won't comment on Northern Refugee's silly notion that the Jews were responsible for the rise of Hitler, but I see no evidence, based on US history since WWII, that white Americans will take up arms against the people who are harming them. Hell, they won't even vote them out of office.

Toddy Cat said...

Americans can go from stupid passivity to deranged levels of violence faster than any people on Earth, and over the strangest things. All it might take is one NFL game disrupted...