Next up: Immigration reform (one more time)

[Chen019]

@joebuck20

Anyway in 2004, 44 percent of Latinos voted for Bush. Cite.

Those figures are based on an one NEP exit poll, which also predicted that Kerry would win by three points.

National exit polls show that President Bush received an impressive 42 percent of the nationwide Latino vote Tuesday, seven to 10 points higher than his first run and possibly unprecedented for a modern-day Republican candidate.

But a prominent Latino organization claims the numbers are as incredible as they appear.

“It ain’t true,” said Antonio Gonzalez, president of the Willie C. Velazquez Institute, which researches Latino voting patterns. “Their poll showed more Latinos voting than there are registered Latino voters. That tells you everything you need to know.”

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/2886704.html

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

I don’t see why though. What in the article is incorrect?

As even commentators pointed out, there is no actual evidence linking CRA to the out of control situation in the 2003-2007 period, and lots of evidence that CRA-related mortgages aren’t part of the problem.

Also the real state market did go belly up with no CRA there.

Adding then a potshot to diversity and immigrants is getting into misleading and discriminatory territory, but you have a problem if you do not realize that some sources are not just biased but discriminatory and an insult to the intelligence. (World Net Daily is conspiracy central)

[Chen019]

@GIGObuster

As even commentators pointed out, there is no actual evidence linking CRA to the out of control situation in the 2003-2007 period, and lots of evidence that CRA-related mortgages aren’t part of the problem.

Also the real state market did go belly up with no CRA there.

Adding then a potshot to diversity and immigrants is getting into misleading and discriminatory territory, but you have a problem if you do not realize that some sources are not just biased but discriminatory and an insult to the intelligence. (World Net Daily is conspiracy central)

The John Carney piece above and here set out the argument in detail. Also, the article by Buchanan stands on its own, if you consider it is incorrect say why - don’t just tell me “it’s biased” - that’s not an argument.

Here's How The Community Reinvestment Act Led To The Housing Bubble's Lax...

[BrainGlutton]

@magellan01

I know no such thing. They are anti-illegal immigration—of any color. They also think immigration should be curtailed, and that we should have immigration policies that do not change the country overnight; that we shouldn’t allow ANY group in in numbers that can’t quickly be absorbed an assimilated.

Bullshit. VDARE would not exist, nor would the Minutemen, if the illegal-immigration pressure were coming from Canada instead of Mexico.

@magellan01

You may not agree with that position, but it is a sound academic position. Similar to Pat Buchanan’s, and my, position. You remember Pat, don’t you. The presidential candidate who chose a black woman to run as his VP.

:rolleyes: You really don’t believe that makes Buchanan any less of a racist, do you? He would not have done so if he had been running with a chance of winning.

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

The John Carney piece above and here set out the argument in detail. Also, the article by Buchanan stands on its own, if you consider it is incorrect say why - don’t just tell me “it’s biased” - that’s not an argument.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

Well no, what I said was that you are ignoring still other evidence that was even shown in the comments of the article you posted:

Sorry John, you are totally wrong. Other posters have laid out the overwhelming evidence that it didn’t and have pointed to the actual absence of evidence that it did. You are just choosing to ignore the hard`evidence of what happened in the 2003-2007 period and why.

The hundreds of acres of housing in the suburbs of LV, PHX, LA, etc were not subject to CRA, the blocks of condos in Miami, LV, San Diego, etc were no subject to CRA. And this massively overbuilt and over priced housing boom did not benefit at all from CRA.

CRA applied to banks, yet banks weren’t the driving force in toxic mortgage origination, though they got stuck with them because they were involved in the securitization. Before 1999 they couldn’t have even done this, so the real driving force for this was the removal of the Glass-Steagall Act restrictions on banks.

So if you want to blame some legislation for the financial meltdown, how about blaming the 1999 removal of Glass-Steagall instead of legislation which was designed to prevent banks ‘redlining’.

By fixating on CRA, you are helping freeze out the discussion on the real causes and undermine the building of a consensus to prevent it happening again.

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html

Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.

The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.”

Not surprisingly given the higher degree of supervision, loans made under the CRA program were made in a more responsible way than other subprime loans. CRA loans carried lower rates than other subprime loans and were less likely to end up securitized into the mortgage-backed securities that have caused so many losses, according to a recent study by the law firm Traiger & Hinckley (PDF file here).

Finally, keep in mind that the Bush administration has been weakening CRA enforcement and the law’s reach since the day it took office. The CRA was at its strongest in the 1990s, under the Clinton administration, a period when subprime loans performed quite well. It was only after the Bush administration cut back on CRA enforcement that problems arose, a timing issue which should stop those blaming the law dead in their tracks. The Federal Reserve, too, did nothing but encourage the wild west of lending in recent years. It wasn’t until the middle of 2007 that the Fed decided it was time to crack down on abusive pratices in the subprime lending market. Oops.

Better targets for blame in government circles might be the 2000 law which ensured that credit default swaps would remain unregulated, the SEC’s puzzling 2004 decision to allow the largest brokerage firms to borrow upwards of 30 times their capital and that same agency’s failure to oversee those brokerage firms in subsequent years as many gorged on subprime debt. (Barry Ritholtz had an excellent and more comprehensive survey of how Washington contributed to the crisis in this week’s Barron’s.)

And I made a mistake in my previous post, I meant to say that if CRA was the big boogie man, it is hard to explain then the simultaneous **business **real state failure.

[magellan01]

@BrainGlutton

Bullshit. VDARE would not exist, nor would the Minutemen, if the illegal-immigration pressure were coming from Canada instead of Mexico.

This is partially true, but probably not for the reasons you think. If the illegal activity coming through Mexico (from Mexico and points south) was zero, illegal immigration in general would be reduced greatly. And if the problem was just a tiny fraction of what it is today, there probably would be little, if any, anti-illegal immigration movement. Why? Because it wouldn’t be need—there wouldn’t be a problem.

I will even grant you that it would take more of an influx of Canadiens than people from south of the border to reach a threshold where the movement would start. But that’s because the similar language/culture of Canadiens would make the problem less noticeable. And less real, as assimilation would be less of an issue than with those speaking another language.

@BrainGlutton

:rolleyes: You really don’t believe that makes Buchanan any less of a racist, do you? He would not have done so if he had been running with a chance of winning.

As you say, “Bullshit.” In fact, Bullshit with Der Trihs and a laugh box on top. The fact is is that he is not a racist. That one move is striking evidence to that. You seem to be operating from the assumption that he IS a racist and anything that he does can be explained through racist motivations. You may want to take those glasses off.

[GIGObuster]

Ezola Foster was quite a number:

http://www.issues2000.org/Ezola_Foster.htm

*  Homosexuality is biologically & psychologically damaging. (Aug 29)
* Racism is out of govt; now focus on people. (Aug 29)
* Supports display of Confederate flag in southern states. (Aug 12)
* Against racial preferences. (Aug 12)
* Confederate battle flag should be honored. (Aug 11)
* Against gay rights & women in military. (Aug 11)
* Accuses Jesse Jackson campaign of using fascist slogans. (Feb 14)
* Democratic party policies are motivated by racial hatred. (Feb 14)
* Reparations bill for descendants of slaves is socialist. (Feb 14)
* No pro-gay groups & no AIDS education at RNC. (Feb 14) 

Foster was president of California John Birch Society. (Aug 14)

[God brought African slaves to America] so that their descendants would know freedom.
– Ezola Foster, at a January, 2000, “Repudiate Jesse Jackson” rally, quoted from Peter Carlson, “Ezola Foster: Pat Buchanan’s Far Right Hand,” The Washington Post, September 13, 2000

No wonder Pat selected her… But IIRC she was his third choice.

[Chen019]

@BrainGlutton

Bullshit. VDARE would not exist, nor would the Minutemen, if the illegal-immigration pressure were coming from Canada instead of Mexico.

But illegal immigration from there would be far less damaging as the next generations would likely have greater prospects of assimilation and not be dependent on affirmative action. As noted above:

They’re not just like the Irish — or the Italians or the Poles, for that matter. The large influx of Hispanic immigrants after 1965 represents a unique assimilation challenge for the United States. Many optimistic observers have assumed — incorrectly, it turns out — that Hispanic immigrants will follow the same economic trajectory European immigrants did in the early part of the last century. Many of those Europeans came to America with no money and few skills, but their status steadily improved. Their children outperformed them, and their children’s children were often indistinguishable from the “founding stock.” The speed of economic assimilation varied somewhat by ethnic group, but three generations were typically enough to turn “ethnics” into plain old Americans.

This would be the preferred outcome for the tens of millions of Hispanic Americans, who are significantly poorer and less educated on average than native whites. When immigration skeptics question the wisdom of importing so many unskilled people into our nation at one time, the most common response cites the remarkable progress of Europeans a century ago. “People used to say the Irish or the Poles would always be poor, but look at them today!” For Hispanics, we are led to believe, the same thing will happen.

But that claim isn’t true. Though about three-quarters of Hispanics living in the U.S. today are either immigrants or the children of immigrants, a significant number have roots here going back many generations. We have several ways to measure their intergenerational progress, and the results leave little room for optimism about their prospects for assimilation.

http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=YjQ4N2EyMTQ4NzZjZmNlOWQwN2RiNTZjMWZiZDY4YzQ=

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

But illegal immigration from there would be far less damaging as the next generations would likely have greater prospects of assimilation and not be dependent on affirmative action. As noted above:

http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=YjQ4N2EyMTQ4NzZjZmNlOWQwN2RiNTZjMWZiZDY4YzQ=

Oh boy, even the CNN documentary Latino in America showed that one of the largest Latino communities, besides speaking mostly English, had virtually all celebrating the 4rth of July and ignored the 5 de mayo (5th of May)

But lets see some other work from that NRD contributor:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/09/04/white-nationalists-applaud-american-enterprise-institute-fellow/

Ever heard the classic breakup line, “It’s not you, it’s me”?

That, in a nutshell, is the thesis of the book The New Case Against Immigration: Both Legal and Illegal by Mark Krikorian, who heads the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates sharply reducing immigration. Krikorian argues that, while the immigrants coming here now are similar to those that arrived a century ago, the United States has undergone profound changes that make it much less able to absorb newcomers.

But at a recent discussion of Krikorian’s book that aired on C-SPAN, a young academic offered a different twist on Krikorian’s argument — one that’s far more appealing to white nationalists. Jason Richwine, a doctoral student at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, essentially asserted, “It’s partly me, but there’s no question it’s you, too.”

Or, as he actually said: “The argument that immigrants themselves are no different from the ones that came 100 years ago I think is quite wrong, and I think that the major difference here is ethnicity — or race, if you will.” Not only do people of the same race tend to stick together, Richwine said, but “races differ in all sorts of ways, and probably the most important way is in IQ.”

Not surprisingly, Richwine’s remarks were warmly received on white nationalist blogs. “Definitely someone we want to keep our eye on,” wrote Marcus Epstein on the blog of the anti-immigration hate site VDARE.com.

“[His] name sounds Jewish, which makes what follows even more remarkable,” crowed Larry Auster, who runs the blog View from the Right.

Richwine joined Krikorian and Fred Siegal, a professor at Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, for the July 1 discussion at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an influential, conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. Richwine, who is completing a dissertation on immigration and IQ, is a National Research Initiative fellow at AEI and will remain there after finishing his degree this fall. He joins AEI-sponsored scholar Charles Murray, co-author of The Bell Curve, the highly controversial 1994 book that argues that blacks and Latinos have lower IQs than whites and that most social welfare and affirmative action programs are doomed to failure as a result.

For those who thought that ranking immigrant groups based on IQ was a relic of the early 20th century, Richwine’s remarks were instructive. He said that in America there’s an IQ hierarchy, with Jews at the top, followed in descending order by East Asians, non-Jewish whites, Hispanics and blacks. “Group differences in ability, combined with a natural tribal disposition, is going to create, usually, parallel cultures within a multiracial society rather than an assimilated culture,” he said. “I think that is a major, major obstacle to the assimilation of today’s immigrants, because they are not from Europe which is, I think, a major difference.”

Never mind that East Asians, a so-called high IQ group, aren’t European, or that many Latinos trace their ancestry to the European country of Spain. Richwine said it doesn’t matter that some immigrant groups not considered white when they came to the United States are considered white today, such as the Irish and Sicilians. Just because some groups that were thought unable to assimilate defied expectations doesn’t mean that’ll be true of all groups, he said.

To bolster his case, he named three groups that have been in the United States a long time — blacks, American Indians and early Mexican Americans — and “have not assimilated to the cultural mainstream as typified by white Americans.” He failed to mention that those groups were subject to decades of institutionalized prejudice that European immigrants did not face to the same degree when they arrived in the United States. Nor did he address the fact that, unlike European immigrants, the groups he cited were either conquered on North American soil or brought unwillingly here from Africa. And he did not discuss any research on how well contemporary immigrants are assimilating; if he had, listeners might have learned about a recent Manhattan Institute study that found that today’s newcomers, while currently less assimilated than their counterparts of 100 years ago, are in fact assimilating at a faster rate than those earlier immigrants.

[Chen019]

@GIGObuster

Oh boy, even the CNN documentary Latino in America showed that one of the largest Latino communities, besides speaking mostly English, had virtually all celebrating the 4rth of July and ignored the 5 de mayo (5th of May)

But lets see some other work from that NRD contributor:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/09/04/white-nationalists-applaud-american-enterprise-institute-fellow/

Interesting piece, this is consistent with the educational outcomes cited by Richwine above (iq being predictive of academic outcomes). Again it reinforces the point that illegals from Canada would be less likely to show educational underachievement and require affirmative action.

For those who thought that ranking immigrant groups based on IQ was a relic of the early 20th century, Richwine’s remarks were instructive. He said that in America there’s an IQ hierarchy, with Jews at the top, followed in descending order by East Asians, non-Jewish whites, Hispanics and blacks. “Group differences in ability, combined with a natural tribal disposition, is going to create, usually, parallel cultures within a multiracial society rather than an assimilated culture,” he said. “I think that is a major, major obstacle to the assimilation of today’s immigrants, because they are not from Europe which is, I think, a major difference.”

And the costs of this are seen in the demise of California discussed here.

For a closer glimpse of what’s in store for California, look at the Los Angeles Unified School District, the largest in California and the second largest in the country. Of its roughly 700,000 students, almost three-quarters are Hispanic, 8.9 percent are white, and 11.2 percent are black. More than half of the Latino students (about 300,000) are “English learners” and, depending on whether you believe the district or independent scholars, anywhere between a third and a half drop out of high school, following significant attrition in middle school. A recent study by UC Santa Barbara’s California Dropout Research Project estimates that high-school dropouts in 2007 alone will cost the state $24.2 billion in future economic losses.

Even those who graduate aren’t necessarily headed to success. According to one study, 69 percent of Latino high-school graduates “do not meet college requirements or satisfy prerequisites for most jobs that pay a living wage.” It is difficult to see how the majority-Hispanic labor force of the future can provide the skills that the sophisticated Los Angeles economy demands. Already studies show that as many as 700,000 Los Angeles Latinos and some 65 percent of the city’s illegal immigrants work in L.A.'s huge underground economy.

National Review Online: Stop Illegals, Save CA

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

Interesting piece, this is consistent with the educational outcomes cited by Richwine above (iq being predictive of academic outcomes). Again it reinforces the point that illegals from Canada would be less likely to show educational underachievement and require affirmative action.

And the costs of this are seen in the demise of California discussed here.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112167023

The demise of California was mostly caused by Enron and Proposition 13.

The reality is that once poverty is removed from the equation, Latino immigrants make a mockery of all your points.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0910/25/cp.01.html

O’BRIEN: But take a closer look at the jerseys, the faces. These kids are Fuentes, Vazquez, Aramentaz, Garcia, Lopez, and Martinez. That’s because Pico Rivera is 92 percent Latino, and as American as apple pie.

GRACIE GALLEGOS, MAYOR OF PICO RIVERA: Pico Rivera is one of those grassroots towns. It’s kind of like the Brown Mayberry. We all watch that show. O’BRIEN: Gracie Gallegos is Pico born and bred. She was once El-Grito Queen here. That’s like Miss Pico Rivera. Her mother is from Mexico, and her dad’s family from Spain.

GALLEGOS: How are you? Good, good.

How are you?

O’BRIEN: When we first met Gracie, she was the mayor of this town of 67,000 people, and its biggest cheerleader.

GALLEGOS: How do you like it?

O’BRIEN: That’s Bob Spencer, the lone Australian in town, Pico’s Public Information Officer.

BOB SPENCER, PICO RIVERA PICO: For the PIO of this town not to speak Spanish is probably not a good thing, but I speak Australian. So they tend to listen to me because of that.

O’BRIEN: As the demographics of our nation change, we wonder whether a place like this could be a window into the future. So I asked Bob for a tour of the nine square miles known as Pico Rivera.

(on camera): It looks like a movie set.

SPENCER: A little bit it does. You see American flags. There’s American flag.

O’BRIEN: Another one down there.

SPENCER: There’s one there. There’s one here.

O’BRIEN (voice-over): In the early 1900s, Pico Rivera was mostly farmland. After World War II, veterans, mostly young and white, began moving in. And then came a manufacturing boom.

Fast forward to 2008. Pico Rivera celebrates its 50th anniversary. The town is flourishing, but the faces have changed.

GALLEGOS: Pico Rivera turned predominantly Latino probably somewhere in the early '70s. Folks were just moving to other communities, and Latinos just filled in the gaps.

O’BRIEN: For decades, a move to Pico was a move up. Latinos came here from the barrios of east L.A. looking for cheap housing and manufacturing jobs. But as the demographics changed, new businesses were slow to come.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a challenge even getting a bookstore here.

O’BRIEN (on camera): Really?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because there was a misnomer that Latinos don’t read either. O’BRIEN: That Latinos wouldn’t buy books.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, absolutely.

O’BRIEN: And a community that’s 92 percent Latino would definitely not buy books.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Correct.

O’BRIEN: What do you think that means? They look at that 92 percent on paper and they think under-educated, low income, impoverished, don’t speak English?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All of the above.

O’BRIEN (voice-over): Those businesses that did come to Pico found huge success. This Borders is one of the chain’s top selling stores in the nation for Latino books. Today, Pico Rivera is solidly middle class. The median income here is nearly 60,000 dollars, and there’s a home ownership rate of 70 percent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I often have people tell me hey, man, this isn’t Beverly Hills. But this is Beverly Hills to me.

O’BRIEN: The children of those Latinos who came in search of manufacturing jobs are now teachers, small business owners, and professionals.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Welcome to the doll house.

O’BRIEN: Pico even has its own Hollywood star. You met her in last night’s program, Lupe Ontiveros. You’ve seen her in “Desperate Housewives,” “As Good As It Gets,” “The Goonies,” “Selena.”

(on camera): How come you don’t live in Beverly Hills?

LUPE ONTIVEROS, ACTRESS: What for?

O’BRIEN: Because you’re a movie star. That’s what for.

ONTIVEROS: No, no, no. That’s not me. I’m just a real, real person. And Pico Rivera is my heritage. And I don’t have my pretensions of any sort. And, plus, they consider me their most famous resident.

O’BRIEN: So you won’t leave?

ONTIVEROS: Beverly Hills won’t even know. They probably ask me to clean their house.

O’BRIEN (voice-over): The immigration debate raging around the country is a non-issue in Pico.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Potato salad, carne asida (ph) –

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don’t even speak Spanish and –

O’BRIEN: Immigrants here have aggressively Americanized, and they’re succeeding.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I call it Pico Rivera Americans. In Pico Rivera, everything is done the American way. You’ll have 10,000 people at the Fourth of July Celebration. Cinco de Mayo, let’s have a Corona and we’re done.

You know, it’s – it’s definitely – I can see it as a model city.

Points that, I have to warn you, they are beginning to sound like the same old coming from many prejudiced people I have met before, you can rely on biased sources, but please avoid some of the ones you are using.

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

Interesting piece, this is consistent with the educational outcomes cited by Richwine above (iq being predictive of academic outcomes).

[Looks at the bolded part of the quote]…

:rolleyes:
You must have a dictionary with a different definition of “consistent”.

[Chen019]

@GIGObuster

[Looks at the bolded part of the quote]…

:rolleyes:
You must have a dictionary with a different definition of “consistent”.

How is it not consistent? According to the SPLC quote Richwine noted that groups have different average levels of cognitive ability as measured by iq tests. IQ is predictive of academic performance (see below) and in the earlier article Richwine noted that subsequent generations of Hispanic migrants still had high dropout and low college-completion rates compared with europeans and asians. This is what you would expect if groups differ in average cognitive ability. It is also is consistent with the data presented by Alexiev in the article about educational outcomes in California.

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/01/iq-academic-achievement.php

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

How is it not consistent? According to the SPLC quote Richwine noted that groups have different average levels of cognitive ability as measured by iq tests. IQ is predictive of academic performance (see below) and in the earlier article Richwine noted that subsequent generations of Hispanic migrants still had high dropout and low college-completion rates compared with europeans and asians. This is what you would expect if groups differ in average cognitive ability. It is also is consistent with the data presented by Alexiev in the article about educational outcomes in California.

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/01/iq-academic-achievement.php

Please, you are whistling pass the graveyard. I was not talking about IQ, but assimilation.

he did not discuss any research on how well contemporary immigrants are assimilating; if he had, listeners might have learned about a recent Manhattan Institute study that found that today’s newcomers, while currently less assimilated than their counterparts of 100 years ago, are in fact assimilating at a faster rate than those earlier immigrants.

And as the CNN documentary showed, IQ seems to be more connected to poverty than ethnicity.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/09/04/white-nationalists-applaud-american-enterprise-institute-fellow/

But the “research” on IQs of early 20th century immigrants has not held up — and the racial IQ differences that Richwine posits are likewise disputed. The prominent social scientist James Flynn, who debated Murray in 2006 at AEI, believes that the cause of the black-white IQ gap is environmental, rather than genetic, and can be further reduced by improving the conditions in which black children grow up.

[Chen019]

Also, Alexiev notes that the least educated from Mexico were coming to California. If you look at average cognitive ability average in Mexico, based on TIMS, PISA and PIRL studies it is 85.37, compared to say 101.75 for Canada.

http://iratde.org/issues/1-2009/tde_issue_1-2009_03_rindermann_et_al.pdf

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

Also, Alexiev notes that the least educated from Mexico were coming to California. If you look at average cognitive ability average in Mexico, based on TIMS, PISA and PIRL studies it is 85.37, compared to say 101.75 for Canada.

http://iratde.org/issues/1-2009/tde_issue_1-2009_03_rindermann_et_al.pdf

There was no Alexiev there.

But, I see, it is more important to blame the intelligence of the ones being given a raw deal, than to make the point that we should do something against Enron or nonsensical taxation.

What you are missing is that even **if **you are correct, there are other factors that are causing those IQ levels, and clearly one of them is poverty.

IQ is not a very useful item to bring up when immigration and assimilation are the issue. Not all jobs are going to depend on a high IQ.

[Chen019]

@GIGObuster

Please, you are whistling pass the graveyard. I was not talking about IQ, but assimilation.
And as the CNN documentary showed, IQ seems to be more connected to poverty than ethnicity.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/09/04/white-nationalists-applaud-american-enterprise-institute-fellow/

If you read the actual report by the Manhatten Institute you will see that assimilation differs across groups.

Immigrant children born in Mexico are more distinct than immigrant children born in other foreign nations. This distinction is most obvious in terms of comparative naturalization rates, but extends to other dimensions as well. Mexican adolescents are imprisoned at rates approximately 80 percent greater than immigrant adolescents generally…

Figure 5 **shows a country-of-origin group, Canadians, that can claim to be culturally indistinguishable from native-born Americans. **Immigrants born in the Philippines and the Dominican Republic also show relatively high levels of cultural assimilation. At the other end of the spectrum, immigrants born in China and India show the greatest degree of cultural distinction from the native-born. It is interesting to note that both these groups show average or above-average levels of economic assimilation, a first clue that cultural assimilation is not a prerequisite for economic assimilation. The least economically assimilated large group, the Mexican-born, posts cultural assimilation levels nearly identical to those of Vietnamese immigrants, who are nearly indistinguishable from the native-born along economic lines…

By a substantial margin, Mexico was the largest source of immigrants to the United States in 2006. Between 1980 and 2006, the number of Mexican-born residents of the United States more than sextupled, to nearly 11 million, representing an annual growth rate of over 6%, which was more than five times the growth rate of the U.S. population over the same time period. This growth rate accelerated after 1990. A large proportion of these immigrants live and work in the United States illegally. **Finally, as shown in the basic summary in Chapter 2, Mexican immigrants attain the lowest assimilation-index value among large immigrant groups, both in the composite index and in the component indexes of economic and civic assimilation.

If the long-run image of early-twentieth-century Italian immigrants is that they were successful in assimilating into American society, then a comparison of their early assimilation trajectory with the two recent cohorts now under analysis leads to some quick conclusions. Vietnamese immigrants, taken as a whole, are well on track to be considered successful. Mexican immigrants, by contrast, display much more worrisome patterns…

**As the case studies of Chapter 4 make clear, immigrants originating in different nations have also had very different experiences. Mexican immigrants, who find themselves at the center of current policy debates, show evidence of assimilating very slowly in comparison with other contemporary immigrant groups as well as groups that found themselves at the crux of past immigration policy debates. Mexican immigrants are distinct in their relative lack of economic progress and in their low rates of naturalization and civic assimilation. **These difficulties may reflect the tendency of Mexican immigrants to live and work in this country illegally; or the influx of large numbers of unskilled workers; or the decision of many of them to remain in the United States for a relatively short period of time. The young children of Mexican-born immigrants also appear more distinct not only from the native-born but from the children of other immigrant groups.

Mexican immigrants are less distinct from the remainder of the foreign-born population in terms of cultural assimilation. A relative lack of cultural progress is shared by many country-of-origin groups arriving more than a decade ago—even groups such as the Vietnamese that have made rapid progress along other dimensions. Moreover, the shift toward more rapid cultural assimilation seen in the broader immigrant population is also evident in recent cohorts of Mexican immigrants.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm

[Chen019]

@GIGObuster

There was no Alexiev there.

But, I see, it is more important to blame the intelligence of the ones being given a raw deal, than to make the point that we should do something against Enron or nonsensical taxation.

What you are missing is that even **if **you are correct, there are other factors that are causing those IQ levels, and clearly one of them is poverty.

IQ is not a very useful item to bring up when immigration and assimilation are the issue. Not all jobs are going to depend on a high IQ.

Alexiev wrote this article pointing out the educational outcomes in California, which I cited above. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112167023

I mention IQ because it predicts academic and a range of socioeconomic outcomes. If groups differ substantially on average, then you’re going to get inequality that leads to tension.

Gottfredson, L. S. (2006). Social consequences of group differences in cognitive ability (Consequencias sociais das diferencas de grupo em habilidade cognitiva). In C. E. Flores- http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2004socialconsequences.pdf

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

If you read the actual report by the Manhatten Institute you will see that assimilation differs across groups.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm

So you forgot that I say that once you exclude poverty then that does not apply?

Really, the CNN documentary showed that I was right, you are still just pushing items that in reality could be solved by reforming immigration. Now, sure you will then in favor of it then?

[GIGObuster]

@Chen019

Alexiev wrote this article pointing out the educational outcomes in California, which I cited above. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112167023

I mention IQ because it predicts academic and a range of socioeconomic outcomes. If groups differ substantially on average, then you’re going to get inequality that leads to tension.

Gottfredson, L. S. (2006). Social consequences of group differences in cognitive ability (Consequencias sociais das diferencas de grupo em habilidade cognitiva). In C. E. Flores- http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2004socialconsequences.pdf

And once again, lets not forget the subject of this thread: immigration reform, as IQ discussions also affect even black Americans, you are still pushing an item that has very little relevance to immigration reform. Incidentally, just to clarity where you are coming from, do you realize that IQ will not be an issue with immigrants that happen to be smarter? What are you offering to them with your efforts here?