Spot on, Lipton. We should also distinguish between illegal and legal immigration. The former is mostly unskilled, while the latter is mostly skilled. Leftists manipulate language to conflate all immigration as the same, but most refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers are illegals taking advantage of the system: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/illegal-immigration-guide-usa-open-borders
Exactly. You can have a class or so of immigrants known for specializing in small business, such as hospitality (motel keeper) or dry cleaning, yet it still doesn’t prove the majority of those immigrants are/will be productive tax payers. How many motels or dry cleaners do we need? ;-)
What intelligent countries do that seek increased numbers of citizens through immigration is to look at/evaluate each immigrant application individually for education and skill sets desired for the good of the country. New Zealand does this I believe. They have a list of occupations needed and if you desire to immigrate and work in that field, “you’re in”!
The key here is not simply quantity, but quality. Select on quality and you’ll never go wrong. Used to be that way in the US. That’s how my father came here. He had a skill, a promised job, and was Imever* unemployed a day in his life from his second week off the proverbial “boat”.
Most businesses of that nature never scale. The important thing is that these people are earning rather than imposing a cost on the economy. It also shows that one does not need high level education to create wealth and build inter-generational wealth. African immigrants are highly educated but many don't start businesses.
"What intelligent countries do that seek increased numbers of citizens through immigration is to look at/evaluate each immigrant application individually for education and skill sets desired for the good of the country."
Absolutely correct, this is crucial...sadly the United States is not one of those countries.
"The key here is not simply quantity, but quality. Select on quality and you’ll never go wrong."
Another excellent point. I have stated quality over quantity always.
Immigrants are great but they are Europeans. People say Google was built by immigrants, when they could have said that one of the founders was a Russian immigrant.
Very interesting article. The idea that all immigrants contribute to American society equally is ridiculous. We should absolutely try to get immigrants who are likely to contribute to the nation, while keeping out those who are likely not to.
I don’t doubt that many of the differences you mention are due to culture or genes, but I doubt that we will ever be able to get to an immigration policy based on those characteristics.
I wonder if less controversial criteria based on a certain level of education (like a 4-year degree in a field that pays above average for college grads) or demonstrated employment skills for industries that need to hire can be a reasonable proxy.
The idea that immigration is "necessary" is a brainworm that has been implanted by the left. Even if some migrants are beneficial in the short term, they are replacing us genetically and polluting the gene pool of our nations, dooming Europeans to extinction. Would you wish extinction on any non white nation?
I noticed that Koreans owned and operated most of the liquor stores in Los Angeles back in 90s. They and others practise one-way valve capitalization. An ethnic immigrant group will pool their resources and finance a business for individual families. These businsses will SELL outside the circle, but will mostly refrain from purchasing outside the circle. Money comes into the immigrant pool's circle, but the one-way valve impedes money leaving the circle. Jews laso practised this over centuries. This process allows for immigrants of lower and working class backgrounds to exceed the country's native population in wealth in scarcely a genertion.
Dividing up immigrants by country of origin ignores an important factor: Those who immigrate are likely to be different from the average person who stays behind. It takes energy, courage, and commitment to leave your country and start again. All immigrants are beneficial. The problem in some countries is that taxpayer money is thrown at them in ridiculously inefficient ways.
"It takes energy, courage, and commitment to leave your country and start again."
This is no longer true. You are often getting on a plane and arriving at a country with a preexisting immigrant community you can join. Often you will have immediate access to social benefits and almost always you will have access to all the benefits a citizen has after a brief waiting period.
A large minority of immigrants in previous generations would return to their home countries. That no longer happens as it's financial disadvantageous to give up welfare benefits in Western countries.
You make a good point. Certainly, immigration works better without a tax-funded welfare system. At least, exclude immigrants from welfare for x years. (I was an immigrant without welfare.)
When my father immigrated, the policy of this country was that his resident VISA was contingent on him *not* receiving welfare benefits. If he became indigent and a ward of the State, he’d have his VISA revoked and be deported. Of course, he toed the line for 5 plus years and then obtained citizenship. It was a good bet that one employed gainfully for the first 5 years would remain so—and he did for the rest of his life.
Very good piece. Just one question. Though Europeans come from an individualist society it is often said that east Asians don't. Is this untrue or does their high IQ make up for their coming from a collectivist culture? Or am I only thinking of the Japanese?
East Asians are higher in longer orientation and this compensates for the deficits of collectivism. Secondly, research shows that culture can be reconfigured to serve alternative aims. So, although Confucianism promotes conformity, it emphasises human capital accumulation so East Asians during their modernization period adjusted their culture to reflect global trends.
That will be rectified. Neither did I state that almost half of those immigrants were in public housing in the UK. Omitting London was the error. This omission, however does not refute the argument.
I’m in agreement with most of the comments posted here; it’s comforting to interact with others who are indeed educated. However , this is not the case with the current influx of illegal aliens. The liberals have an agenda that is in their best interests; NOT the interests of the American people. This is horrible.
The U.S. government is inviting unknown aliens into our presence. This invites conditions that most law abiding citizens are not familiar. I surmise they are not “cream of the crop,” but rather the dregs of their country. This is not absolute, surely there is a minority of people that may contribute a sample of ingenuity. Again, note that these people are not Europeans, these opportunists are on the other side of the spectrum, those that are “on the take.” These aliens will fail to impart a positive impact on our society as the liberals say. If they were indeed productive citizens they would have remained in their country of origin instead of coming here to take advantage.
This Country has witnessed already a massive surge in crime brought to us by these people. Drugs, courtesy of the cartels (aliens) have killed thousands of Americans; by design of course. This organized crime from abroad is not welcome here.. Social problems will continue to skyrocket along with our national debt. Many of these lower IQ races will displace our children from their schools. Appalling .
No, this conservative Southerner is not in agreement with the current administration with regard to the invasion of millions of illegal aliens. I believe that this will support a decay of this great Republic.
Again, the impact on the economy of non European migrants, even if very beneficial, doesn't matter. They aren't us and they are replacing us.
If your child was kidnapped would you happily accept a replacement child from another family? Why not? Because they're not your kin and humans aren't interchangeable. Common sense and ancient wisdom is eradicated by academic "analysis".
"Asserting that European immigrants, rather than immigrants in general, have a disproportionately positive impact can be risky indeed."
Indeed, speaking truth to dogma can be risky. But people of integrity should always speak the truth.
A very good informative article. It should be intuitive that immigrants from non-developed countries will bring little benefit to developed countries. If they had the ability, they would have excelled in their home country
Yes, but what about the fact that there are lots of crappy, low-skill jobs that somebody needs to do? Where is the disadvantage in letting low-skill foreigners do this work?
Those “crappy, low skilled jobs” are suitable for the low skilled workers in this Country who pay taxes and are responsible citizens. These illegals are called “illegal aliens” because they are here illegally; they don’t pay taxes and don’t contribute anything to the Country. They are here “on the take.” Also consider the crimes they commit here.
Spot on, Lipton. We should also distinguish between illegal and legal immigration. The former is mostly unskilled, while the latter is mostly skilled. Leftists manipulate language to conflate all immigration as the same, but most refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers are illegals taking advantage of the system: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/illegal-immigration-guide-usa-open-borders
Exactly. You can have a class or so of immigrants known for specializing in small business, such as hospitality (motel keeper) or dry cleaning, yet it still doesn’t prove the majority of those immigrants are/will be productive tax payers. How many motels or dry cleaners do we need? ;-)
What intelligent countries do that seek increased numbers of citizens through immigration is to look at/evaluate each immigrant application individually for education and skill sets desired for the good of the country. New Zealand does this I believe. They have a list of occupations needed and if you desire to immigrate and work in that field, “you’re in”!
The key here is not simply quantity, but quality. Select on quality and you’ll never go wrong. Used to be that way in the US. That’s how my father came here. He had a skill, a promised job, and was Imever* unemployed a day in his life from his second week off the proverbial “boat”.
Most businesses of that nature never scale. The important thing is that these people are earning rather than imposing a cost on the economy. It also shows that one does not need high level education to create wealth and build inter-generational wealth. African immigrants are highly educated but many don't start businesses.
"What intelligent countries do that seek increased numbers of citizens through immigration is to look at/evaluate each immigrant application individually for education and skill sets desired for the good of the country."
Absolutely correct, this is crucial...sadly the United States is not one of those countries.
"The key here is not simply quantity, but quality. Select on quality and you’ll never go wrong."
Another excellent point. I have stated quality over quantity always.
Immigrants are great but they are Europeans. People say Google was built by immigrants, when they could have said that one of the founders was a Russian immigrant.
"The latter is mostly unskilled, while the latter is mostly skilled."
This sentence needs to be corrected.
Very interesting article. The idea that all immigrants contribute to American society equally is ridiculous. We should absolutely try to get immigrants who are likely to contribute to the nation, while keeping out those who are likely not to.
I don’t doubt that many of the differences you mention are due to culture or genes, but I doubt that we will ever be able to get to an immigration policy based on those characteristics.
I wonder if less controversial criteria based on a certain level of education (like a 4-year degree in a field that pays above average for college grads) or demonstrated employment skills for industries that need to hire can be a reasonable proxy.
This is what I advocate for in my book.
The idea that immigration is "necessary" is a brainworm that has been implanted by the left. Even if some migrants are beneficial in the short term, they are replacing us genetically and polluting the gene pool of our nations, dooming Europeans to extinction. Would you wish extinction on any non white nation?
I noticed that Koreans owned and operated most of the liquor stores in Los Angeles back in 90s. They and others practise one-way valve capitalization. An ethnic immigrant group will pool their resources and finance a business for individual families. These businsses will SELL outside the circle, but will mostly refrain from purchasing outside the circle. Money comes into the immigrant pool's circle, but the one-way valve impedes money leaving the circle. Jews laso practised this over centuries. This process allows for immigrants of lower and working class backgrounds to exceed the country's native population in wealth in scarcely a genertion.
Yes, I have heard the Indian GOVERNMENT is buying up convenience stores in some western nations.
Your description does appear to be the case.
Dividing up immigrants by country of origin ignores an important factor: Those who immigrate are likely to be different from the average person who stays behind. It takes energy, courage, and commitment to leave your country and start again. All immigrants are beneficial. The problem in some countries is that taxpayer money is thrown at them in ridiculously inefficient ways.
"It takes energy, courage, and commitment to leave your country and start again."
This is no longer true. You are often getting on a plane and arriving at a country with a preexisting immigrant community you can join. Often you will have immediate access to social benefits and almost always you will have access to all the benefits a citizen has after a brief waiting period.
A large minority of immigrants in previous generations would return to their home countries. That no longer happens as it's financial disadvantageous to give up welfare benefits in Western countries.
You make a good point. Certainly, immigration works better without a tax-funded welfare system. At least, exclude immigrants from welfare for x years. (I was an immigrant without welfare.)
When my father immigrated, the policy of this country was that his resident VISA was contingent on him *not* receiving welfare benefits. If he became indigent and a ward of the State, he’d have his VISA revoked and be deported. Of course, he toed the line for 5 plus years and then obtained citizenship. It was a good bet that one employed gainfully for the first 5 years would remain so—and he did for the rest of his life.
"All immigrants are beneficial". What? You might want to check with Europe about their African migrant experiences.
"The problem in some countries is that taxpayer money is thrown at them in ridiculously inefficient ways."
The fact that governments 'throw' money at anything is always inefficient and a big problem.
Very good piece. Just one question. Though Europeans come from an individualist society it is often said that east Asians don't. Is this untrue or does their high IQ make up for their coming from a collectivist culture? Or am I only thinking of the Japanese?
East Asians are higher in longer orientation and this compensates for the deficits of collectivism. Secondly, research shows that culture can be reconfigured to serve alternative aims. So, although Confucianism promotes conformity, it emphasises human capital accumulation so East Asians during their modernization period adjusted their culture to reflect global trends.
I think your point is well taken. That is also my understanding of East Asian societies.
Read Edward Dutton, making sense of race.
I've been reading Ed Dutton's books for many years. Exactly what bit of his ideas about race are you referring to?
Almost 50% households headed by Jamaican or Ghanaian IN LONDON. Check the study you cite before publishing.
That will be rectified. Neither did I state that almost half of those immigrants were in public housing in the UK. Omitting London was the error. This omission, however does not refute the argument.
I’m in agreement with most of the comments posted here; it’s comforting to interact with others who are indeed educated. However , this is not the case with the current influx of illegal aliens. The liberals have an agenda that is in their best interests; NOT the interests of the American people. This is horrible.
The U.S. government is inviting unknown aliens into our presence. This invites conditions that most law abiding citizens are not familiar. I surmise they are not “cream of the crop,” but rather the dregs of their country. This is not absolute, surely there is a minority of people that may contribute a sample of ingenuity. Again, note that these people are not Europeans, these opportunists are on the other side of the spectrum, those that are “on the take.” These aliens will fail to impart a positive impact on our society as the liberals say. If they were indeed productive citizens they would have remained in their country of origin instead of coming here to take advantage.
This Country has witnessed already a massive surge in crime brought to us by these people. Drugs, courtesy of the cartels (aliens) have killed thousands of Americans; by design of course. This organized crime from abroad is not welcome here.. Social problems will continue to skyrocket along with our national debt. Many of these lower IQ races will displace our children from their schools. Appalling .
No, this conservative Southerner is not in agreement with the current administration with regard to the invasion of millions of illegal aliens. I believe that this will support a decay of this great Republic.
Again, the impact on the economy of non European migrants, even if very beneficial, doesn't matter. They aren't us and they are replacing us.
If your child was kidnapped would you happily accept a replacement child from another family? Why not? Because they're not your kin and humans aren't interchangeable. Common sense and ancient wisdom is eradicated by academic "analysis".
"Asserting that European immigrants, rather than immigrants in general, have a disproportionately positive impact can be risky indeed."
Indeed, speaking truth to dogma can be risky. But people of integrity should always speak the truth.
A very good informative article. It should be intuitive that immigrants from non-developed countries will bring little benefit to developed countries. If they had the ability, they would have excelled in their home country
Yes, but what about the fact that there are lots of crappy, low-skill jobs that somebody needs to do? Where is the disadvantage in letting low-skill foreigners do this work?
Those “crappy, low skilled jobs” are suitable for the low skilled workers in this Country who pay taxes and are responsible citizens. These illegals are called “illegal aliens” because they are here illegally; they don’t pay taxes and don’t contribute anything to the Country. They are here “on the take.” Also consider the crimes they commit here.