5 ms·

> I've always heard this explained as a sort of "selection bias". Since immigration to the US (particularly for university education) is often seen as desirable

> I've always heard this explained as a sort of "selection bias". Since immigration to the US (particularly for university education) is often seen as desirable, the people who manage to pull it off tend to be above the mean. I think this is an explanation that could only be come up with by the descendants of those who have emigrated. Thinking here in Scotland, the people who emigrated were not necessarily the most able or genetically superior somehow. Often, they were simply the most desperate. People who were cleared off their farms by landowners, people who had no other options available to them but to roll the dice and go abroad to Canada or Australia or the USA. Most folk don't want to emigrate, certainly not in the 19th century. It is a last resort that you do if you are out of options. But perhaps the most capable and able have other options to take advantage of?

ArkyBeagle 10y ago
It's not clear that capability was that much of a factor. As the scion of Scots emigrants from the 19th Century, at least the 20h century version of my family was made up of bright capable people but hardly brilliant.
- arethuza 10y ago
  It's pretty awful to read how people regarded the Highland Clearances, like this from the Scotsman: "Collective emigration is, therefore, the removal of a diseased and damaged part of our population. It is a relief to the rest of the population to be rid of this part." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances
  - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
    DNA has made for the possibility of a much less nasty world.
kaitai 10y ago
We no longer think of people whose ancestors showed up in the 19th century as immigrants, unless we're trying to make a point about indigenous peoples' rights. In 2005, 22% of immigrants to the US came in on an employment-related visa; the only larger category was family reunification. Immigration patterns "back then" are very different than they are now.
johncolanduoni 10y ago
I'm talking about contemporary migration mostly; although IIRC some migration waves in the 20th century were more about perceived opportunity as opposed to desperation.

ArkyBeagle 10y ago

It's not clear that capability was that much of a factor. As the scion of Scots emigrants from the 19th Century, at least the 20h century version of my family was made up of bright capable people but hardly brilliant.

arethuza 10y ago
It's pretty awful to read how people regarded the Highland Clearances, like this from the Scotsman: "Collective emigration is, therefore, the removal of a diseased and damaged part of our population. It is a relief to the rest of the population to be rid of this part." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  DNA has made for the possibility of a much less nasty world.

kaitai 10y ago

We no longer think of people whose ancestors showed up in the 19th century as immigrants, unless we're trying to make a point about indigenous peoples' rights. In 2005, 22% of immigrants to the US came in on an employment-related visa; the only larger category was family reunification. Immigration patterns "back then" are very different than they are now.

johncolanduoni 10y ago

I'm talking about contemporary migration mostly; although IIRC some migration waves in the 20th century were more about perceived opportunity as opposed to desperation.