See post #31; they do pay taxes.
That would only help them integrate into our society, leading to them becoming productive and supportive members. Can’t be having that, now.
See, because they’re brown.
If memory serves me, I think you live is the SF Bay Area. If so, the diversity that does exist in the Bay Area is not really seen in Silicon Valley. and although Asians are fairly well represented in tech, it’s really more of a homogeneous geek culture. And Blacks are virtually unseen in SV. Hispanics, too, even you exclude manual labor. Blacks also not very well integrated in the San Francisco itself.
The point is that I think unless you meant your statement to string together unrelated facts, it is misleading.
You’re saying there’s no ethnic diversity in the SF Bay Area?
Have you ever been to Oakland?
Lots of Hispanics, and not as many as you think are “Manual Labor” unless you think City Manager, Councilmember, State Assembly and County Supervisor as “Manual”.:rolleyes: It’s true SJ has less than average Blacks, but more Asian and Hispanic, *and has a White minority. *
Except the linked study says that diversity causally reduces social trust, and that if anything the effect is understated.
But as the research has demonstrated, even 150 years after the end of slavery and 50 years after the end of segregation, diversity is still harmful. Europeans have successfully integrated together, but racial boundaries are still stark. For whatever reason, the United States can easily integrate Europeans but has not successfully integrated Blacks or Hispanics. I don’t want the United States to become another Brazil just to fulfill some fanciful progressive’s dream of a utopia free of White people.
Because there’s no point crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best thing we can do, for a variety of reasons, is to the extent possible preserve ethnic homogeneity among all populations. It improves trust, community, health, and other beneficial aspects.
It’s certainly true that African Americans and some number of Asians were imported to America by nominally conservative business interests, but the racial composition of America was in fact becoming increasingly White until the 1965 immigration act, spearheaded by liberal Democrat Ted Kennedy, was passed. This specific act, as well as the succession of amnesties pushed by progressives (although sometimes enacted by Republicans), is responsible for the diminished White population of the United States.
Oh, John Mace, so you live in San Francisco? That’s unfortunate. See, according to the Putnam study I linked before, you have only a 17-18% chance on average of trusting other races “a lot”. People who live in San Fransisco, hilariously, are among the most prejudiced in the United States. There’s also only a 30% chance that your neighbors trust you “a lot”, which is likewise among the lowest in America (beat by other liberal cities such as East Bay, Boston, North Minneapolis, and Los Angeles). Diversity sucks.
Here?
http://www.demotix.com/news/510311/life-rural-mexican-village#media-510280
Or worse. Picture 12/13 actually shows a dirt floor in Chiapas. Adobe bricks can also be called “mud bricks”. I seriously doubt the accountants and doctors of Mexico are flooding north. It’s the lower class who see a better life working for below minimum wage in the USA.
You mean some of that Mexican territory they actually bought? Texas I suppose we count as “receiver of stolen goods”.
Of course, what’s even funnier is how the goalposts move. The French and Dutch were annoyingly unfamiliar types before the Revolution… in the mid to late 1800’s, Irish were excluded from “normal us”. In the early 1900’s it was eastern European people like Poles and Slavs. Now, they are all standing with us as “white people” fighting the tide of pigmented “furrinners” ruining the country. We’re running out of people to hate next, once the latinos are “us” too.
Meanwhile, it reduces economic growth, innovation, creativity, and scientific achievement. Are you capable of acknowledging this?