pantom was indicating a correlation between NYC immigrants and crime. Even if there was a correlation, weak as it may be, it says nothing to causation, which I took to be the point of the post.
Strongly? Maybe you don’t know the difference between correlation and causation. I’d say it argues against any link rather sloppily, meaning leaving out contributing factors: the dot.com boom of the '90s, for instance. And the next President of The United States of America: Rudy.
Please keep in mind I did not and do not now argue that there is or is not any correlation—positive or negative, never mind causation. I was simply pointing out what I took to be in error.
But please, feel free to jump on me again for no reason.
Your post was sufficiently cryptic that it appeared to me (based on your earlier statements in several threads on immigration in which you have correlated crime and immigration) that you were simply looking for a different causative agent while ignoring the lack of correlation.
Oh, I take it from your post that you’ve looked at the immigrant mix of all U.S. cities, determined San Diego and San Jose to be fairly representative of those cities with the highest immigrant percentages and measured them against all the crime rates in all those cities and find that they are low compared to the average of all cities. And that you have determined it more likley than not that there were not other major contributing factors. If so, thanks for the info. It has nothing to do with the point I was making earlier (which was just pointing out that the correlation indicated said nothing to causation), but your info is interesting. May I have a cite for it?
I said nothing of the sort, but then you certainly haven’t made that analysis either. I just thought it was interesting that pantom’s cite specifically mentioned two large cities in California, one within a few miles of the Mexican border, which may reasonably be assumed to have larger populations of people here illegally than, oh, Cleveland, or most other cities in the interior of the U.S. And coincidentally or not, those particular cities appear to have the lowest crimes rates, statistically speaking, of the 25 largest cities in the U.S.
I’m think we should put a chip in all Mexican individuals caught entering this country illegally. I don’t know how expensive it would be, but compared to having to manually check the records of all illegal aliens caught crossing the border, it might not be cost prohibitive. When they enter hospitals and just walk out the door after thousands of dollars in care, that should be known in the future so that all care except emergency can be refused the next time until the bill is paid. They could be scanned in the hospital and if they refuse, no care. Like when you go to jail if you refuse a breathalator test. It would be cheaper to stabilize them and transport them across the border to the nearest Mexican hospital. As it is they just walk out of the hospital and disappear into the sunset. And if the Mexican government had to bear the cost of the millions we have to spend on care, they might actually discourage running the border; or they can use part of that 30 billion the illegals send back to Mexico every year to pay for the care of their own citizens. Maybe we should bill Mexico for that care. When my son was treated in Scotland the hospital sent a bill to Germany because he was at the time a resident there.
Also, I was pondering the effectiveness of a disinformation campaign in Mexico that would discourage people from trying to run the border. This would be cheaper than actually doing all the things the government would like to but can’t afford, like having thousands of border patrol agents stationed on the border. Just like when the CIA inserts itself into foreign countries, people impersonating Mexicans could spread information that would discourage runners. I can’t be the first one of course to think of this.
Illegals come here because despite whatever is in the news, or whatever propaganda is being spread, they know darn well there are jobs here waiting for them. It’s the employers we need to go after. Were there really no jobs for them, this information would spread at the near light speed of gossip.
Unless you’re insisting that the chip be implanted in the brain or deep within the body (which would be extremely expensive) it would be a very simple matter to remove it. A guy at home with a razor blade could remove a chip implanted under the skin, and I know that’s be the first thing I’d do when I got home. The idea of being tagged like a dog would be extremely offensive to me.
Secondly, I belive it may be a violation of human rights, since everyone has the rights to refuse certain aspects of health care. For example, I may refuse a blood transfusion, but still accept stitches. People also could refuse on religious grounds (mark of the Beast, and all that). I don’t think it could be legally done.
Have you ever ridden in an ambulance as a patient? Trust me-- it ain’t cheap. I was once transported less than a mile to the nearest hospital. I did not need any measures to stabalize me, and it still cost about a thousand dollars.
Secondly, where is the nearest Mexican hospital? Can they deal with brain trauma or complicated injuries? You can’t just dump them on the doorstep of some place which isn’t capable of treating them.
Thirdly, every ambulance employed in transporting Mexicans to hospitals which may be deep inside the country is one ambulance not available to respond to emergencies in the US. Some municipalities have lots of amulance services, even private companies which operate them, but my town only has two or three in service.
The sheer logistics are crazy. I live about 1600 miles from the border-- should we have to use one of our ambulances to drive over 24 hours down to the Mexican border (and possibly further into Mexico) to reach a hospital?
Next, how long would it take to stabalize the patient to the point where they could be moved? Not all patients can be moved safely, especially if it’s a long ambulance ride to their destination. (Which is why many patients are Life Flighted if they have to be moved for more extensive treatment.)
As my granny always said, “Sue a beggar, catch a louse.” Sure, send Mexico the bills. Everyone knows they’re sitting on a pile of cash.
Remember that the money illegals send back doesn’t go into the government’s coffers. It goes to buy food and other essentials for the families who recieve it.
Your post #179 was making the argument that there is not a correlation between crime and immigration. The fact that you did so cavalierly, without any regard for real analysis, is what caught my attention. Your starting it off with the old “Hmmm”, as in “well what do we have here, evidence that you are wrong and I am right”, shows that your claim now—that you were just sharing an interesting observation—doesn’t seem, shall we say, to comport with reality.
I like the chip idea, with one stipulation: that it be hard-wired to the brainlinked to a remote control device which we can turn on and make them run back across the border and into the home of Vicente Fox. You know like players in a video game.
Can we please limit our cites to sites that are at least semi-credible? Linking to Federation for American Immigration Reform as evidence of immigrant-caused problems is like linking to the KKK to show that African-Americans are the root of all evil.
You really need to be more selective in your outlets for information.
magellan01, there is no correlation between high rates of immigration and high rates of crime. If NYC’s experience, only the largest city in this country, doesn’t prove that to you, nothing will. I didn’t notice the San Jose and San Diego parts of that quote I cited, as I was focusing on NYC, but of course those cities go even further towards proving that point.
Trawling the internets, I find lots of claims that immigrant populations have stronger families than US-born. So, I go to the source, the oft-cited (by me) Statistical abstract of the US and find the following interesting bit in table 40, Social and Economic Characteristics of the Population By Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin:
White divorced people as percent of whites: 10.1%
Hispanic divorced people as percent of Hispanics: 7.5%
Non-Hispanic white divorced people as percent of non-Hispanic whites: 10.6%
In other words, the Hispanic whites are actually managing to supress the actual number of divorced people among whites by a full half-percent nationally, because the number of Hispanic divorced people is so much lower.
What, pray tell, does this have to do with crime? Only this:
So, this researcher appears to have found that family structure is the single most important variable in determining the rate of crime in a community.
And so, since Hispanic families have fewer divorces, leading to fewer broken families, it would be logical to conclude that this leads to…less crime.
That wasn’t even my point, but it looks like the data actually support it.
Or, as this conservative commentator put it:
So much for the allegedly high cost of immigrants. If they work for lower wages and cost less in terms of crime, it would appear that it is us, not them, who are benefitting from immigration.
Considering that the US has been so open to immigration, and that it’s also the most prosperous country on the planet, this actually shouldn’t be a surprising conclusion. I was actually surprised by what I found though, because you anti-immigrant types are so loud about how them damn Messicans are destroying the country that you figure there must be some truth to what you guys are saying, somewhere.
Except there is no truth to any of the assertions you make. You’re all jumping to conclusions based strictly on anecdotal evidence, none of which has any data to support it.
There’s a word for this…
No, it actually wasn’t making any argument at all except possibly that if you were trying to draw some sort of cause/effect relationship, or even a correlation, between illegal immigration and crime, you were doing a lousy job of backing it up with actual data if NYC is your only sample. The only references you made which might conceivably be construed as facts were detrimental to what I perceive as your point.
(Or maybe I’m being too charitable, and you don’t actually have a point at all.)
[QUOTE=Eva Luna]
No, it actually wasn’t making any argument at all except possibly that if you were trying to draw some sort of cause/effect relationship, or even a correlation, between illegal immigration and crime,…
Oh, come on. pantom constructed a post in which he denied a correlation between immigration and crime. He cited NYC as an example. Aside from the fact that it is ridiculous to look at a correlation between to factors with such a small sample size, to ignore two blaring factors that did comntribute to the crime rate in NY—the dot.com boom and Rudy—was ridiculous. So I pointed it out.
I did not, if you would take the trouble to read what I wrote, argue the inverse.
Then you posted in support of her. Hence my posts to you.
