[quote]Headhunter wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
the schools, the intellectual capital of people moving there and wanting to be there - you have to actively try to sandbag a state blessed with so many advantages.
I hope you realize that the intellectual capital of the majority of new immigrants to California is exactly zero. That’s a huge part of California’s problem: a middle class was replaced demographically with a third-world welfare dependent peasant class with no intellectual abilities - at least none proven so far.
Oh well, throw more money at them.
They can vote. That’s why they were brought in.
[/quote]
I agree with you on this, it was more than just cheap labor they wanted. They also get to collect some Social Security without having to pay it out, although I don’t know how much that will be.
The magnitude of impact that illegal immigration has had on California, that is the view. California has between 20-25% of the entire illegal alien population, this is assuming that population is between 12-15 million people. What you might see or read about in your state is nothing remotely close to what we deal with here. [/quote]
You keep making the same stupid mistake over and over. I don’t disagree with any of that. I am not telling you what you say about the effects of illegal immigration on CA is not true.
My view is essentially the same as your view. What exactly are you trying to accomplish?
Between you, PRC, and Bill Roberts, I am simply amazed at your piss-poor reading comprehension and ability to follow a basic argument. You are so emotionally invested in the fight against illegal immigration, you don’t even listen to what other people are saying when you (irrationally) convince yourselves that that someone must be disagreeing with you.
You gave two reasons why certain immigrants are not less inferior, 1) their culture does not make education a priority and 2) their lack of assimilation. Yet I say that these are exactly the reasons why they could be viewed as inferior. If pursuing education and integration of the new culture leads to the path of success and acceptance within a society, then why would you NOT pursue these things? The choice on what to do is entirely individual, and seeing that they are not choosing to learn and assimilate shows their lack of wisdom. I immigrated here, and not from a land right next door. There is no excuse.
I have a suspicion that if one took Orion’s “Dead Zone” post and obtained the data for California, it would be found to be an even worse situation there. Or at least, surely not better.
In other words, California probably has it set up where a given immigrant – let’s say he has no barriers to employment – who say gets an associate’s degree and obtains some job paying $10 or $12 per hour may very likely net LESS money than he makes with his combined under-the-table about-minimum-wage-or-somewhat-under job combined with the various “assistances” the taxpayers of California give him.
Thus creating a situation where there is no financial incentive, or even disincentive, to move up into the middle class.
In California it is not as if that is the ONLY factor – there is also certainly the factor of not being equipped for these jobs and needing years of remedial education to be able to even embark on such a thing.
But if the “dead zone” in California is as bad as in the state Orion posted data for, that would also be a contributing factor to the choice to choose not to learn to do more valuable work.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I have a suspicion that if one took Orion’s “Dead Zone” post and obtained the data for California, it would be found to be an even worse situation there. Or at least, surely not better.
In other words, California probably has it set up where a given immigrant – let’s say he has no barriers to employment – who say gets an associate’s degree and obtains some job paying $10 or $12 per hour may very likely net LESS money than he makes with his combined under-the-table about-minimum-wage-or-somewhat-under job combined with the various “assistances” the taxpayers of California give him.
Thus creating a situation where there is no financial incentive, or even disincentive, to move up into the middle class.
In California it is not as if that is the ONLY factor – there is also certainly the factor of not being equipped for these jobs and needing years of remedial education to be able to even embark on such a thing.
But if the “dead zone” in California is as bad as in the state Orion posted data for, that would also be a contributing factor to the choice to choose not to learn to do more valuable work.[/quote]
I think it’s worse here.
The poverty line for a family of 4 in Los Angeles county is something like $70k/year, but I don’t think federal welfare programs adjust for cost-of-living in various parts of the country. State welfare programs probably do.
I do know that welfare is feeding into the total fertility rate of Mexican immigrants. I’ve heard them talk about having a kid in order to collect more welfare, and the total fertility rate in Mexico is lower than it is in California by 1.2 kids. That’s huge.
The first shows how much money a person ends up with as related to the amount earned. The system is such that until a quite substantial income is reached, earning more does not result in having anything more to show for it: and at many points, earning somewhat more will result in having less due to benefit programs having sudden cutoffs.
The second shows, at each income level, what percent of an additional dollar earned is lost, whether to taxes or to lost benefits. At some income points this “effective marginal tax rate” is over 100%, as earning for example an additional $100 per week might result in having $50 per week less money to show for it. As an illustrative example only.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
The first shows how much money a person ends up with as related to the amount earned. The system is such that until a quite substantial income is reached, earning more does not result in having anything more to show for it: and at many points, earning somewhat more will result in having less due to benefit programs having sudden cutoffs.
The second shows, at each income level, what percent of an additional dollar earned is lost, whether to taxes or to lost benefits. At some income points this “effective marginal tax rate” is over 100%, as earning for example an additional $100 per week might result in having $150 per week less money to show for it. As an illustrative example only.[/quote]
Thanks.
The second chart shows essentially why Californian “middle class” whites have left. Teh implicit marginal tax rate between incomes of 60-100,000 is near 50% and doesn’t start dropping back down until you start making over 100k. None of that marginal tax goes to benefit you - it all goes to benefit the people further left on the chart, which are Hispanics in the case of California. Ethnic cleansing through taxes, essentially.
Given the cost of living in this state (essentially another tax due to unrestrained immigration), it makes more sense to pull up stakes and leave.
[quote]spyoptic wrote:
Anybody wanna guess when the riots will start?[/quote]
Celente has said there will be riots at some point. My guess is in the next year or two.
Make no mistake the Dollar is done, if you think 32% is a big jump just wait till you see next years.
The only good news about all of this is that when 2012 rolls around and its time for a new leader we may actually pick someone who is planning on trying something different. Perhaps following the Constitution.