Immigrants a boon to Florida
A new study by FIU dispels many of the myths about immigrants. Researchers say that foreign-born Floridians are more entreprenurial than the native-born and they also receive fewer government handouts etc.
Do you think that will change any beliefs? The immigration debate is like abortion, and facts and figures don't seem to matter.
Do you think that will change any beliefs? The immigration debate is like abortion, and facts and figures don't seem to matter.
posted by Ana Veciana-Suarez at 8:36 AM
Get our feeds
25 Comments:
The debate centers around illegal immigration yet, "The FIU study did not distinguish between undocumented immigrants and those legally living in the United States.".
The other major flaw is that costs in emergency medical care, education and incarceration were ignored. "The FIU study did not specifically mention some of those categories.". One estimate puts that at well over 1 billion dollars for the State of Florida.
This study did nothing to dispell any thing about illegal aliens living in the USA. The only myth I know of is this assumption that all immigrates are the same whether they are legal or illegal.
Why don't you ask the couple hundred thousand families that have left - actually fled - their long-time homes in South Florida over the past 40 years, my family included, whether or not they believe the immigration flood from the third world has been a "benefit?"
No study can count the financial and emotional cost borne by people were forced, thanks to government-imposed cultural replacement, to leave their life's accomplishments behind and forego their future dreams in order to spare their children from being forced to assimilate to alien cultures by hordes of often ungrateful - and usually quite clueless about real Americanism - "new Americans."
I seriously doubt there is a soul left in Dade County who could possibly be fully assimilated to America: Who has been left there in recent years with the understanding of this nation's heritage legacy to provide them with correct information? They've all been run off by the implementers of the Banana Republic of Miami, soon to be joined by the Banana Republic of Ft. Lauderdale, the Banana Republic of West Palm Beach, etc.
If this amnesty becomes law, the folks in the heartland are in for a real shock. Howdy! Welcome to post-American America! Now about that english language of yours...it has got to go!
What we have here is yet another study that proves there is no rational or scientific basis for "immigration reform" in this country. All of the illegal immigration hysteria is really pandering to an inherently racist American heartland by a Machiavellian Republican Party machine. Katie's Dad's posting makes me ponder why the USA in 2007 is still inherently racist? The answer lies in its origins. Read Miguel Bretos OpED article in last Sunday's Herald for a clue. Bottom line: Hispanics were here first. St. Augustine was founded decades before Jamestown and Plymouth. It is a matter of public record that the first school ever founded by Europeans in this country was founded by Spaniards in St. Augustine, FL in the 1560s and in it Spanish, Native American and free Negro children sat side by side. When privateer (fancy English word for pirate) Sir Francis Drake sacked St. Augustine in the late 1600s the orderly Spanish city fell under English rule. One of the first official acts by the civilized English conquerors in St. Augustine was to “cast out the Negroes and the savages” from the school and make it for “whites only”.
You mean the Spanish were here first. There is a difference between someone from Spain and someone hispanic.
Note that the study is flawed. Note the name calling. Note the lack of concern or focus on what is best for the US as a nation.
i think the article made great points: immigrants, whether legal or illegal can be productive members of this country which many people in the debate doubt. additionally, it shows that we (i am an immigrant..a us citizen for all of those out there who will think i am saying this because I am illegal) are here to work, are here to get educated, and basically are here to make the most out of a country that can give us that. for that blogger who says he is being driven out like thousands because of the flood, I think that is pure ignorance. I am sure you would also be leaving because you only want to be with people like you and trust me i think that has more to do with the class, not race of the people you live with. because if there was a sudden influx of poor, under educated white (this is an assumption)americans, you would leave too, regardless of whether they spoke english or spanish or creole.
Re. the Spanish. Absolutely correct..the term Hispanic covers a heck of a lot of different people--whites, blacks, American Indians (you'll find out, as more aborigines from Oaxaca, Mexico arrive on your shores in the coming years), different types of Asians--loosely tied by language, although even that is questionable (a great number of Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans and others speak English only).
Those who oppose "illegal immigration" often don't know anything about immigration law. They didn't cross through Mexico in the dead of night. Some overstayed their visas, some may have been here legally and were suddenly fired and unable to find another job.
According to current immigration laws, if someone fails notify the USCIS of a CHange of Address within 10 calendar days, they are deportable. It's outrageous. The laws need changing.
"Katie's Dad's posting makes me ponder why the USA in 2007 is still inherently racist?"
Funny, my experience living and working in Miami in 1990 too often made me wonder why so many of these people who came here from chronically failing and failed regimes were so antagonistic to their derisively, racialistically-labeled "anglo" hosts. It quickly became tiresome listening to people so nostalgic for the supposed "greatness" of their native country cultures that, had they really ever been all that, would not have compelled their flight to this country.
Was it wrong that I recoiled from the too oft repeated refrain, "before we came here, Miami was nothing!?" My multi-generation farmer friends formerly from Perrine and family business owners formerly from Coral Gables would have had something to say about that to the contrary. Was I mistaken in thinking that the people in my building who consistently switched languages - from clearly spoken english to spanish - every time I entered the elevator were not being ethnically bigoted? I'd only moved from Broward when I arrived on a required-to-live-there work assignment, so I hadn't developed any preconceptions or suspicions. It was the preening, superior attitude I got from so many with whom I came in contact that soon soured me on my initial premise that assimilation to America can actually work for all people and all cultures.
After comparing notes with my many friends who left South Florida before me, I know that my feelings are not unique, but prevalent. When my family and I started discussing leaving a few years ago, I contacted several old friends who had left for "other reasons," a new job, needing to be with aging parents, etc. I sought their counsel on how to handle uprooting my family; what amazed me was that every time I scratched the surface, I found that every single former resident of South Florida I called - some that I had known for as long as 40 years - left the area to get away from the "joys" of the new and monumentally stupid impositions they felt came as a result of our being compassionate with people who needed help. When my usually staid and non-intervening in-laws piped up and said, "if we didn't have too much invested here so close to retirement, we'd go with you," then started sharing their own culture-clash experiences with me, I knew our decision to leave was in the best interests of my family.
As far as the "I am sure you would also be leaving because you only want to be with people like you" line is concerned: I want to be with people who at the very least respect the achievements of my ancestors whose blood sacrifice made such an attractive place for you and your families to seek refuge. I want to be with people who don't put a hyphen before the "American." And, quite frankly, I want to be with people whose ancestors that when faced with totalitarian impositions put their lives on the line, fought, bled, buried sons and eventually won freedom instead of high-tailing it away to impose their shortcomings on some other nation.
With all due respect katie's Dad, what exactly do you mean by "respect the achievements of my ancestors"? If by immigrants utilizing the American way of life and its benefits, which might I add benefit America as a whole, is not respecting it, then I don't know what you would like us to do. Yes, we will forever remember our home country because unfortunately we live in a day in age where we can't just stay and fight and shed our blood against our governments as needed because we too have families that we have to put first, and yes I will put my family first before I put a country first. Perhaps that is not the correct way, but I am sure that is what your anscestors were thinking when they left England to come to the New World. They didn't stay in England and fight the king; they fought the king once they came to their new land to start a new life. They didn't come here and try to assimilate into the lives and country, if you will, of the aboriginals, but they just made the land what they wanted. So please don't sit there and tell us that somehow your country, which is my country, also didn't somehow make their lives here in the same way immigrants are trying to make their life here today. How easily everyone forgets how America came to be. Again, it wasn't just the English who were here. The french were here, the Spanish were here. Perhaps the country wasn't named in Spanish or French, but it was a pluristic effort to make this country what it is. There never was and never will be just one group of people that you could look at and say "Yep, those are Americans. the one and only" because it never was like that and never will be.
I'm all for immigration. My family were immigrants themselves who legally applied for visas and were granted access to the US. They have been here over 50 years. My siblings and I were born here. We have worked and contributed our share of taxes without complaint. I have started businesses and carnally speaking, been very successful. I even served in the Marines for six years. As far as I can tell, no one is debating America's greatest strenght is our diversity of cultures...which has become our culture. The debate is over illegal immigrants and their impact on society. Contrary to studies that attempt to blur the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants are ILLEGAL. They cannot be expected to uphold the law, for they broke the law when it was to their interest to get here. They don't pay taxes. With these proposed amnesty bills we could, with the signing of a pen, add 20 million (by the way, no one knows the exact number) more to an already bankrupt social security system. The only issue Congress should be debating today is border security. Marines have a saying, "restore the breathing, stop the bleeding, treat for shock..." We have brought breath into this issue, now we must stop the bleeding by securing our borders. Then we can treat for shock.
Ricard I agree with you. It is an issue of illegal verse legal immigration. But I was just referring to what I think Katie's Dad is really speaking to and I don't think it has anything to do with legal verse illegal.
With all due respect katie's Dad, what exactly do you mean by "respect the achievements of my ancestors"?
I appreciate the respect. I do. It is all too rare in this discourse. And had it been shown to my family over the last 40 years by people we helped when they were in need, we'd still be in South Florida.
Two things on this: One, my appeal for respect for my ancestors' achievements was specifically aimed at the anonymous poster who, in the process of calling me "racist," posited his own racist ramblings about how his ancestors were here "first" and then tarred mine with the same racist drivel. Cries of racism and bigotry have acted as an intellectual truncheon to beat back dissent over the fact that our national cultural legacy is being buried by an exponentially unprecedented level of mass immigration. I'm tired of it. My extended family is sick of it. My friends in the immigration restriction movement are distressed by it and we will not simply shut up anymore when someone pulls out the race card, particularly when he's standing in his own racial or ethnic-loving posture when he does it.
Secondly, if there had been a reasonable level of decorum, any fitting and proper homage, shown in South Florida by our modern immigrants and their kids for the works and deeds of those whose families go back to the colonists and founding generations of this nation, there would not have been such a massive evacuation of those who resided in Miami when our federal government decided to make it a sanctuary. Now the same thing is going on in Broward. The fact is, thousands upon thousands of people are removing their families from the "joys of diversity." Had the Americans whose families did build the original modern infrastructure had their compassionate treatment for refugees properly acknowledged, there would not have been this massive, slow-bleed evacuation.
There is a lot of sugar-coating it and denial going on about this: More that a lot of Americans have left and are leaving South Florida because they cannot stand to be there any more. You can call them bigots and racists all you like for not wanting to assimilate, even a little bit, to alien cultures, it will not make it true. You can call us angry, disappointed, put upon, fed-up, feeling used and intolerant of imposed change and you'd be right. But we did not sign up for having our livelihoods taken away because we are not of your culture and do not share your languages, but for many of us our careers were impeded and dreams shoved roughly aside for that very reason. We could not allow our kids to be forced into schools that are failing in large part because they have to deal with 128 languages. Many of us have family traditions of handing down heritage and legacy and past achievements; we refuse to let our kids have that watered down by those who insist Jose Marti be taught along side John Adams. We don't see that as a reasonable request.
So please don't sit there and tell us that somehow your country, which is my country, also didn't somehow make their lives here in the same way immigrants are trying to make their life here today.
Yes, I will. Those who came as colonists had an idea that was beyond "getting away from something." John Winthrop, who came to Salem with the Massachusetts Bay Company Charter in 1629, and was handed power by my direct ancestor, Governor Endecott, had a vision shared by his fellow colonists who came the year before. Winthrop and his party did not "flee" anything. It was he who foresaw the "Citee on the hill." He was not talking about building a beacon for others to come; rather, he was talking about creating and setting an example for others to follow in their homelands. He was articulating the concept that became known as "American Exceptionalism." Your comparing the two migrations is absurd, and probably insulting. But I don't think you understand the context of these things from a traditional American perspective to have meant it as such.
There never was and never will be just one group of people that you could look at and say "Yep, those are Americans. the one and only" because it never was like that and never will be.
Now that is an insult. And it is exemplar of the sort of attitude that you folks strutted and imposed upon us that we find to be so disgusting, so vile and so base that we had to evacuate so our children would not be infected by it! And you wonder stupidly why so many of us are sure that assimilation has failed where Diaspora has taken root...
"So there is one kind of person that you can point to and say 'that's an American'? Please, do share."
If you'd asked that question before we got so incredibly stupid with our immigration policy in 1965, that would have been easier to answer. A simple check of census demographics before and after is informative.
"This belonged to the Native Americans and the colonists in no way tried to assimilate themselves. Rather, they slaughtered the Native Americans, used Africans as slave labor, and imposed their will on the peoples of the new world."
Watched a few too many spaghetti westerns as a kid, did we? Exactly what did those "native Americans" who were here when the first colonists arrived do to those they came upon for ages before European exploration? Why, they fought, killed and enslaved others. How "human" of them! But let's not discuss that...it wouldn't fit our intent to impose bias, right?
And, really, what would be of slavery in the world today were it not for the ideas first discussed during the founding of America that it was wrong? It surely would be practiced in more places than it is.
If you can't take off your contemporary and judgmental lens through which you view it, then every bit of the history of God's earth can be painted as evil or irrelevant. Finally, your pointing out the foibles of the families of those who were apparently so stupid in granting your family sanctuary is another reason why so many of us don't like being around people who think like you do. You dig?
So I see that you sidestepped my points by talking about the Native Americans fighting amongst themselves and enslaving their captured enemies. Your point does nothing to refute my argument. My argument essentially is that you have a warped understanding of assimilation. The fact of the matter is that immigrants have helped to shape and reshape this great country. Everyone brings something to the table. This country is constantly changing. Italian cuisine has deeply permeated American cuisine, hamburgers came from Germany, Mexican food is quickly becoming embedded in American cuisine, Chinese food is doing the same. Traditions from the old country suddenly become popular here. You have Americans who speak no Spaish dancing to salsa tunes, etc. The "American" is constantly evolving.
You're dead wrong about the "American" look. The history of immigration in this country shows the diversity of his great nation. The first wave of immigrants naturally came from Britain (along with African slaves). The next wave came from northern and western Europe (Sweden, Germany, etc.). The wave after that came from southern and eastern Europe (Italy, Poland, Russia, to name a few). Immigrants from China were sprinkled in with the second and third waves - which lead to the first ever restriction on immigration in the Chinese Exclusion Act. Finallly, the new wave of immigrants come from all over the world, but principally Latin America and Asia.
Those different peoples look different. There has never been a true "American" look, except for what you saw in print, on tv, etc., which happened to be wrong.
It is clear that you are an incredibly racist person. The immigration laws prior to 1965 were based on the National Origins Act, which limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, according to the Census of 1890. The vast majority of immigrants already living in the United States in 1890 were form northern and western Europe.
The National Origins Act was explicitly designed to limit immigration from Asia and southern and Eastern Europe. It was designed to keep the Italians, Russians, Polacks out of this country.
The strongest supporters of the National Origins Act happen to be eugenicists and advocates of the racial hygiene theory. Are you a eugenicist and do you advocate the racial hygiene theory?
Ironically, and this shows what an idiot you are, the National Origins Act set no limits on the number of immigrants from Latin America. It wasn't until 1965 that the number of immigrants from Latin America was capped.
If we reverted to the pre-1965 immigration laws nearly every Latin American in this country today would suddenly become legalized.
Let's do it.
Oh yes, diversity. (Bleeechh!)
Name one Diaspora from outside what we call Western Civilization has successfully immigrated and assimilated to this nation. One. There is none. And don't try to tell me that any who have arrived in the last 40 years count - the jury is still out on that idea, big time. The mechanism for assimilation was shut off with the Hart-Cellar Act. The comments in this thread are all the verification I need that this is so.
There is no proof that what we have done of late and what is proposed in the Senate today will not be the disaster most of us fear; if you get out into the American heartland, this is incontravertable fact. Since what is being proposed represents potentially the most radical change ever legislated against the traditions and culture of the United States, the burden of proof must be placed in the court of those who propose it. If they can offer no iron-clad proof that this will do no harm to our cultural and societal goods, then they should not bring it up.
As far as the Johnson-Reed act is concerned, your straw-man about its support from eugenecists is weak. The vast majority of Americans citizens wanted that legislation; many did for the very reasons I oppose this multicultural garbage being shoved down our throats today. Of course, you, on the other hand are immune from being linked to Latino Nazis like your friends at LaRaza and MALDEF, who very well could have written what you just did, right?
I have several questions for you:
1) Please explain your definition of assimilation.
2) What culture and traditions of the United States are you referring to?
3) What societal and cultural goods are you referring to?
4) Why did most Americans support the National Origins Act?
Our assumptions may be too different to reconcile. If you think America ought to always be lilly white then we're never going to agree on any of this. My view of an American and your view of an American may be incompatible.
Another quick thing, it is interesting that you didn't respond to my comment that if we reverted to the pre-1965 immigration system Latin Americans currently in this country illegally would all be legalized.
And you clearly didn't understand my point about the eugenicists. I was stating a fact: many of those that supported the National Origins Quota were eugenicists. I then asked you if you were one. I didn't assume that you were; I was just asking a question.
You are correct that our view is incompatible. But not for the reasons you think. In short, because I tire of debating with the extreme minority on this issue, it all boils down to this: There is a rank antipathy that many if not most immigrants from outside Western Civilization have for the ideals, deeds and dreams of those who started the things that became American traditions.
To paraphrase something I wrote to someone who contacted me this morning on this very issue. If, when you think about the people that founded this nation, your minds-eye concept considers them as "their founding fathers," then you aren't going to understand me. Ever. It's part and parcel of the package carted around by the poorly assimilated that there is not, and never was, a unique American culture. It's derisive of this nation's heritage and gives legitimacy to the concerns of many about the wisdom of a policy based on the questionable notion that all people and all cultures are capable of temperate liberty or maintaining republican democracy.
That's a traditional American concern. Even Jefferson expressed it: See Notes On Virginia, Query 8.
As far as your position on Johnson-Reed not abandoning the "good neighbor" policy. Yes, I'd love to return to the act's intent, which was to severely limit immigration for quite some time; there was zero net immigration from the western hemisphere at that time and there had never been much. If you want to re-enact legislation, you must look at its intent. If the same bill were passed today, it would open the door to all from Western Civilization and slam the door on the fingers of those coming from other nations in this hemisphere, particularly those from the third world.
I'd support that wholeheartedly!
I'm done here.
"There is a rank antipathy that many if not most immigrants from outside Western Civilization have for the ideals, deeds and dreams of those who started the things that became American traditions."
This is where I am confused. What ideals, deeds and dreams do you speak of? I honestly want an answer. Most of what you spew out is pure garbage because you use such vague and general terms that I have no idea what you're talking about.
I do agree that there is an American "culture." It is the culture of entrepreneurism, capitalism, hard work, democracy, meritocracy, etc. When I think of America I think of all those things, and many other positive attributes. For me, America is about values, not how you look, the color of your skin, where your parents come from, or other equally stupid things.
I think when you see America you see someone who looks like you.
We're fundamentally different and will never agree.
memo you say it best. America is about ideals, values, and ideas...not what language we speak, what we look like or where we come from. and just a note, I was pretty sure that one of the reasons the English came to the Americas was to seek refuge from religious persecution Katie's Dad. I don't deny there were those who believed in "American Exceptionalism: but I don't believe this was the only group who came to the New world and definately not for just that reason.
I am an immigrant myself, but I understand Katie's dad position. I have assimilated into this country. What do I mean by that? I bought a house and there is only one family living in my house. I'd hate it if three ***** (don't want to mention any nationality) families move next door with ten children. I'd hate it if a new neighbor wants to sell cars from his driveway instead of paying to have his own dealership. I'd hate it if the new neighbor plays his music loud. Those are some of the things Americans hate about hispanics. Plus the fact that most of the time we speak Spanish in front of them even though we know how to speak English. Let's face it. Latinos complain wheh Hatians speak Creole in front of them. And let's face it, latinos do not like it when they see more Hatians coming to America. Are they racists. You make the call.
So Katie's Dad, what will you do if Katie wants to date or marry a law-abiding, morally upstanding doctor/lawyer/MBA named Jose, Alphonse, Tyrese, Chang-Mai or Mahatma, will you oppose that relationship? That's the real test of a bigot.
Slam the door on the fingers of the third world? I guess Jesus Christ Himself wouldn't be welcome in your America, KD.
Post a Comment
<< Home