4 ms·

Because the US didn't have a giant welfare system when the 'floodgates' were open. Immigrants moved to New York or other places, and worked exceptionally hard

by 0xy 5y ago

Because the US didn't have a giant welfare system when the 'floodgates' were open. Immigrants moved to New York or other places, and worked exceptionally hard to provide for themselves or were forced to return home. Now, they can move to San Francisco and have the city spend thousands of dollars on them for free. It's nearly impossible to starve on US streets today, because there's free food on nearly every street. This fact naturally attracts low intelligence economic migrants who don't have the conscientiousness or work ethic of early New York immigrants. We've seen it in Europe. The vast majority of the migrants (who settled in the places with the best welfare systems, not the closest safe country) do not work and do not contribute to society. There's also evidence they push crime up, as well as having values that are fundamentally illiberal (for example, wanting to criminalize homosexuality and supporting terrorist groups).

vagrantJin 5y ago
This is a hilarious comment. Granted this forum has an over-abundance of the so-called academic elite and so phrases like "low intelligence" and "work ethic" can be passed around with impunity. But what I cant look past is the audacity to suggest and eveb imply that historical migrants from Europe(mostly) worked hard and had some magically higher IQ. What? If even the academic elite, who pride themselves in their rational objectivity, can whitewash history to that extent - it is worrisome. Truly frightening. Just chalk it up to being the worlds pop cultural, economic center - and deal with it. People have always migrated to the country/state where the opportunity to prosper is greatest. It's osmosis and you can't really stop it until and unless the US becomes a third world country devoid of wealth, freedom and opportunity.
- 0xy 5y ago
  Europeans do have a higher average IQ than places like Sudan which has an average IQ in the 70 range. To put this in perspective, the US Army generally doesn't accept people below 85 IQ because they are ineffective in any position (yes, they are considered inadequate to be a janitor). You also didn't address my point about values or crime, both of which are proven. Particularly, some immigrant groups have huge portions of support for groups like ISIS. [1] That's before we get into the homophobia and abuse of women. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/09/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/09/muslims-and...
  - vagrantJin 5y ago
    Does the IQ test cater to Sudanese or Europeans? See, heres the thing: some countries really have no implicit interest in [copying] or attempting to define themselves by European standards. Does that make sense? So things like western education (countries like S.Korea, Japan, India and China being the exceptional European standard [chasers?]) Will always score not western countries lower because the west is the defacto standard due to colonization and globalization. To put it in simpler terms, we can't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees as the adage goes. Which is interesting because sone countries overall growth and development strategy is based on copying verbatim the trajectory of 20th century Europe/US and offering no alternative. This is a false suggestion that European standards are the end all, the pinnacle of human progress. Just a though dear fellow. Just a thought.
tsimionescu 5y ago
Migrants everywhere are, as a group, net contributors to welfare programs. You're living in propaganda land if you actually believe the myth of immigrants coming to get welfare: immigrants come to work.
- 0xy 5y ago
  This is a myth based on skewed data, by the way. This "net contributor" figure was reached by combining the wealthy Luxembourgian bankers who sometimes immigrate to countries with the thousands of people they offset. If there were no welfare, the Luxembourgian banker would still be able to immigrate. As would lower and middle class people who work. The only people you're defending at that point is the people who refuse to work (a significant portion of the migrants during the EU migrant crisis still do not work). A "safety net" is not supposed to be used so you never have to work. It's supposed to be a temporary cushion if you are in a bad spot. Not 2, 3, 4, 5 years (which you spend not integrating into your host country at all). Integration is a major problem, and migrants have created enclaves in Sweden, Germany and the UK with rules that do not match the host country.
- settrans 5y ago
  In 2012, 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) reported that they used at least one welfare program during the year, compared to 30 percent of native households. Welfare in this study includes Medicaid and cash, food, and housing programs. https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Hous... The average household headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits, which is 41 percent higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household. https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native...

by 0xy 5y ago

vagrantJin 5y ago

This is a hilarious comment. Granted this forum has an over-abundance of the so-called academic elite and so phrases like "low intelligence" and "work ethic" can be passed around with impunity. But what I cant look past is the audacity to suggest and eveb imply that historical migrants from Europe(mostly) worked hard and had some magically higher IQ. What? If even the academic elite, who pride themselves in their rational objectivity, can whitewash history to that extent - it is worrisome. Truly frightening. Just chalk it up to being the worlds pop cultural, economic center - and deal with it. People have always migrated to the country/state where the opportunity to prosper is greatest. It's osmosis and you can't really stop it until and unless the US becomes a third world country devoid of wealth, freedom and opportunity.

0xy 5y ago
Europeans do have a higher average IQ than places like Sudan which has an average IQ in the 70 range. To put this in perspective, the US Army generally doesn't accept people below 85 IQ because they are ineffective in any position (yes, they are considered inadequate to be a janitor). You also didn't address my point about values or crime, both of which are proven. Particularly, some immigrant groups have huge portions of support for groups like ISIS. [1] That's before we get into the homophobia and abuse of women. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/09/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/09/muslims-and...
- vagrantJin 5y ago
  Does the IQ test cater to Sudanese or Europeans? See, heres the thing: some countries really have no implicit interest in [copying] or attempting to define themselves by European standards. Does that make sense? So things like western education (countries like S.Korea, Japan, India and China being the exceptional European standard [chasers?]) Will always score not western countries lower because the west is the defacto standard due to colonization and globalization. To put it in simpler terms, we can't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees as the adage goes. Which is interesting because sone countries overall growth and development strategy is based on copying verbatim the trajectory of 20th century Europe/US and offering no alternative. This is a false suggestion that European standards are the end all, the pinnacle of human progress. Just a though dear fellow. Just a thought.

tsimionescu 5y ago

Migrants everywhere are, as a group, net contributors to welfare programs. You're living in propaganda land if you actually believe the myth of immigrants coming to get welfare: immigrants come to work.

0xy 5y ago
This is a myth based on skewed data, by the way. This "net contributor" figure was reached by combining the wealthy Luxembourgian bankers who sometimes immigrate to countries with the thousands of people they offset. If there were no welfare, the Luxembourgian banker would still be able to immigrate. As would lower and middle class people who work. The only people you're defending at that point is the people who refuse to work (a significant portion of the migrants during the EU migrant crisis still do not work). A "safety net" is not supposed to be used so you never have to work. It's supposed to be a temporary cushion if you are in a bad spot. Not 2, 3, 4, 5 years (which you spend not integrating into your host country at all). Integration is a major problem, and migrants have created enclaves in Sweden, Germany and the UK with rules that do not match the host country.
settrans 5y ago
In 2012, 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) reported that they used at least one welfare program during the year, compared to 30 percent of native households. Welfare in this study includes Medicaid and cash, food, and housing programs. https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Hous... The average household headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits, which is 41 percent higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household. https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native...