printMark Steyn shines on the topic of Arizona, and ventures comments on mass immigration. Perhaps we can expect a more courageous stand on the matter in the future?
“….Almost every claim made for the benefits of mass immigration is false. Europeans were told that they needed immigrants to help prop up their otherwise unaffordable social entitlements: In reality, Turks in Germany have three times the rate of welfare dependency as ethnic Germans, and their average retirement age is 50. Two-thirds of French imams are on the dole.”
Here’s more from STEYN’s “Bigotry label for thee, not me: Liberals bash Arizonans from the back seat of their limos”:
But wait: What about the broader economic benefits? The World Bank calculated that if rich countries increased their work forces by a mere 3 percent by admitting an extra 14 million people from developing countries, it would benefit the populations of those rich countries by $139 billion. Wow.
In his book ‘Reflections on the Revolution In Europe,’ Christopher Caldwell points out, ‘The aggregate gross domestic product of the advanced economies for the year 2008 is estimated by the International Monetary Fund at close to $40 trillion.’ So an extra $139 billion works out to a spectacular 0.0035 percent. Mr. Caldwell compares the World Bank argument to Austin Powers’ nemesis, Dr. Evil, holding the world hostage for 1 million dollars. ‘Sacrificing 0.0035 of your economy would be a pittance to pay for starting to get your country back.’ A dependence on mass immigration is not a gold mine nor an opportunity to flaunt your multicultural bona fides, but a structural weakness, and it should be addressed as such.”
[SNIP]
In case you haven’t, read my “Tell Establishment Media A Dog Died On The Border.”
1. Steyn made a good point about FDR. In fact, very few on the left were upset when that great man ordered American born citizens shipped to what he himself referred to as “concentration camps”. To his credit, Justice Murphy called it “racist” in his dissent in Korematsu v. US (1944).
2. Meanwhile, Linda Greenhouse thinks that Arizona trying to send trespassers back to their own country is like shipping Danish Jews to Auschwitz (Mexico is a death camp!!). So much for realism!
3. The Arizona police can ask questions of those caught drunk driving or “homeless” on the streets such as “where do you live?” (Etc.) and if the people cannot answer questions (this is NOT an issue of having dark skin or an accent), then the police should ascertain legal status. Does anyone think that China allows Koreans to float around their country (or would Mexico allow Americans just to hang out?)?
4. Anyway, we have tens of thousands of walls lining our interstate highways – we could make a 2-layer wall for 2000 miles with acoustic, optical, and seismic sensors and the million/year infiltration rate will be cut to a trickle.
Yeah, but how much do Third World immigrants to the West, especially the US and Canuckistan, benefit from race based programs, initiatives, preferences and set-asides?
Can some epistemologist from the World Bank put pen to paper and tell us how much?
Here in Texas the state spends an estimated $600 million each year on bilingual education alone.
So, $137 billion is like pissing in the ocean.
It feels good, but is meaningless.
At VFR, Lawrence Auster pointed out this part of Steyn’s column: “The majority of Arizona’s schoolchildren are already Hispanic. So, even if you sealed the border today, the state’s future is as a Hispanic society – that’s a given.”
I believe Pat Buchanan said that inevitability is the language of the tyrant. Steyn is great for taking jabs at the left, but I don’t believe he really stands for much of anything.
History has a way of providing disasters and miracles seemingly from thin air. If the nationwide cataclysm that I believe is in the cards comes to pass, all demographic bets are off.
The figures from the world bank sound like so much wildebeest droppings. How can adding 14,000,000 illiterates, not to mention 25 or 30 million, to the welfare rolls help a tax paying population. Not to mention that the current population will be sacrificing quality of life and the fabric of the very nation which is more of a consideration than a mere 0.0035 of the economy. If it can be kept that cheap, which I doubt.
I am glad others are pointing out that importing third world people to save social security is complete bull.
Look at Japan and South Korea. Both have low fertility and face the same social security type trouble that the West does. However, neither have resorted to mass immigration. They still will have to deal with an elderly population being supported by fewer workers, as will the West, however they won’t have to deal with the problem of diversity.