Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

They can allow something like 270,000 "chain immigrants" in per year. I believe they prioritize by closeness of relation so new minor children and spouses can push back siblings, parents, etc.

Parents are added at roughly 175,000 per year. Eliminating them (and you have to if you want to limit chain migration at all) would presumably allow them to slowly move through the list -- probably 15-20 years (which is what it will be -- or longer -- under current law).

[Jeff Buchanan]

Jeff.. when the irish immigrated, they pooled together.. so did Italians. Makes sense you want to go where people can help you, bridge cultural gaps and adjust as you learn the language. I get it. However, the goal was to become Americans or at least for your kids to become Americans.

The US has historically been a stew. You may add new ingredients that initially stick together, but as it is stirred, they become part stew. The new ingredients do change the stew.. yes. But all ingredients end up changing together. What you can't do is have the peas off to the side and then wonder why they don't fit into the bowl. And you can't build other cups on the bowl and call it a stew.

I understand the history, e. My thinking is that there is a trend not to assimilate and I can see it in and all around Atlanta. I'd like to find some studies that support that assimilation into American social and cultural norms is declining but that's not on my agenda for today. Maybe Froot can find some studies that show it isn't a trend.

There are plenty of studies that originate in Europe that have been referenced in articles I've had a look at that show unequivocally that immigrants from Eastern Europe and ME don't assimilate and neither do their second generations. The costs of delayed assimilation to social welfare, healthcare and educational programs can become unsustainable.

I can't beleive those kinds of trends are not happening in the US, Oh, wait, here's something that says they are:

An important concern in immigration research involves the effects of immigration and assimilation on health, education, and social programs, particularly in areas of high immigration concentration. Much folk wisdom has viewed assimilation as a linear process of progressive improvement and adjustment to American society. The general assumption is guided by an implicit deficit model: to advance socially and economically in the United States, immigrants need to "become American" in order to overcome their deficits in the new language and culture. As they shed the old and acquire the new, they acquire skills for working positively and effectively?a process that may not be completed until the second or third generation after entry.

Today's immigration is overwhelmingly composed of newcomers from Asia and Latin America, areas with significantly different languages and cultures than those of previous European immigrants in the late 1800s and earlier decades of the 1900s. Concerns have been raised about the speed and degree to which these immigrants can assimilate?and hence about the social "costs" of these new immigrants?before they begin to produce net benefits to their new society. The traditional assumption is that immigrants have costs to U.S. society in the initial period after arrival, but that the costs decrease and the benefits to society increase as duration of residence increases. It is further assumed that the benefits to society also increase with greater assimilation to American culture. Recent research findings, however, especially in the areas of perinatal health, mental health, and education, raise significant questions about such assumptions. Indeed, some of the findings run precisely opposite to what might be expected from traditional notions and theories of assimilation.

Maybe someone with a strong interest in this area might want to have a look at the entire 91 pages of this document:

https://www.nap.edu/read/4942/chapter/5

[Kapture1]

Doesn't Canada have a merit based system?

[froot loops]

I understand the history, e. My thinking is that there is a trend not to assimilate and I can see it in and all around Atlanta. I'd like to find some studies that support that assimilation into American social and cultural norms is declining but that's not on my agenda for today. Maybe Froot can find some studies that show it isn't a trend.

There are plenty of studies that originate in Europe that have been referenced in articles I've had a look at that show unequivocally that immigrants from Eastern Europe and ME don't assimilate and neither do their second generations. The costs of delayed assimilation to social welfare, healthcare and educational programs can become unsustainable.

I can't beleive those kinds of trends are not happening in the US, Oh, wait, here's something that says they are:

An important concern in immigration research involves the effects of immigration and assimilation on health, education, and social programs, particularly in areas of high immigration concentration. Much folk wisdom has viewed assimilation as a linear process of progressive improvement and adjustment to American society. The general assumption is guided by an implicit deficit model: to advance socially and economically in the United States, immigrants need to "become American" in order to overcome their deficits in the new language and culture. As they shed the old and acquire the new, they acquire skills for working positively and effectively—a process that may not be completed until the second or third generation after entry.

Today's immigration is overwhelmingly composed of newcomers from Asia and Latin America, areas with significantly different languages and cultures than those of previous European immigrants in the late 1800s and earlier decades of the 1900s. Concerns have been raised about the speed and degree to which these immigrants can assimilate—and hence about the social "costs" of these new immigrants—before they begin to produce net benefits to their new society. The traditional assumption is that immigrants have costs to U.S. society in the initial period after arrival, but that the costs decrease and the benefits to society increase as duration of residence increases. It is further assumed that the benefits to society also increase with greater assimilation to American culture. Recent research findings, however, especially in the areas of perinatal health, mental health, and education, raise significant questions about such assumptions. Indeed, some of the findings run precisely opposite to what might be expected from traditional notions and theories of assimilation.

Maybe someone with a strong interest in this area might want to have a look at the entire 91 pages of this document:

https://www.nap.edu/read/4942/chapter/5

I think you are overreaching with snippet in my opinion, I looked through the document. The aim of that document and the workshop was to see where they are missing data, how incomplete it was. There is certainly nothing in there that points to the US immigration assimilation that describes anything resembling the European issues. Chapter 5 seems to confirm the common folk wisdom about assimilation. It is pretty strong on family based reunification, this document is 22 years old so they don't say chain migration. But it doesn't say anything negative about it. To be clear this was workshop on a commission trying to get better statistics to measure this.

[Da Geezer]

Entrpy said:

So I'm open immigration... I just believe you have to have a unifying culture or else you're just a bunch of tribes/cultures/regions loosely bound together.

No offense meant, but why then are you voting for the party that bases its political appeal on interest groups, tribes, regions, religions, and skin color? Why support the political party that consistently wants to change the uniquely American culture?

Previous immigrants wanted to become Americans. My grandparents were from The Netherlands, and the would not allow their children to speak Dutch in the home. They learned English from their kids. Of course, similar people and nationalities like to live together, there is nothing new there. What is new is the disdain for America that the Mexican and Central American illegals (more than 50% of illegals now are from CA and not Mexico) have. What is new is that they (illegals) work in the US and mail money back home. What is new is that they overwhelmingly go on welfare rather than work. What is new is their utter disdain for the laws of the US (how many show up for their hearings?)

In the same vein, and I'm agreeing with Hoss here, Trump has proposed a huuuge expansion in vocational training to prepare the American workforce for the jobs that are being created by his economic program. We all know that we owe it to citizens to train them for a good job. "Americans are Dreamers too." was Trump's way to say that we owe it to Black and Hispanic citizens to prepare them to take jobs. We now have the lowest Black unemployment rate in history, and the lowest Hispanic unemployment rate in history too. Did you see how the Black Caucus scowled and sat on their hands when Trump pointed this out?

Why vote for people who want to divide us?

[froot loops]

Remittance is not new.

And entropy isn't voting for the Democrats as he has explained numerous times, Duh!

[SeattleLionsFan]

1. I think there is a real underlying disconnect between the parties on what constitutes an American. Is it a function of birth or language, or a dedication to more amorphous ideals? Even then, what are those ideals that are fundamental to being "American"? I think those are questions that society has not discussed in a long time and therefore there is little agreement as to the answers.

2. Geezer's crazy thoughts on what immigrants are and so will never cease to amaze me. It's like he's purposefully ignorant.

[THE_WIZARD_]

...as opposed to just being ignorant...like you...

[froot loops]

Detroit style pizza...much like the city...nice around the perimeter of the pie...shithole in the middle...

Many people are saying this, good addition to the discussion as always.

[The Oracle]

2. Geezer's crazy thoughts on what immigrants are and so will never cease to amaze me. It's like he's purposefully ignorant.

A product of rural Michigan, so if there's a better person with experience of being around immigrants and minorities than him, I'd like to see it.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Many people are saying this, good addition to the discussion as always.

I aim to please.

[Wild Hoss]

I aim to please.

Aim for your forehead instead.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I think you are overreaching with snippet in my opinion, I looked through the document. The aim of that document and the workshop was to see where they are missing data, how incomplete it was. There is certainly nothing in there that points to the US immigration assimilation that describes anything resembling the European issues. Chapter 5 seems to confirm the common folk wisdom about assimilation. It is pretty strong on family based reunification, this document is 22 years old so they don't say chain migration. But it doesn't say anything negative about it. To be clear this was workshop on a commission trying to get better statistics to measure this.

Well, that's good. Thanks for reading it. Maybe at some point we'll have some data that says immigrants are or are not assimilating. Admittedly, that was a drive by read on my part.

I just have a view that immigrants to the US aren't assimilating to the degree that they did in the mid 19th to early 20th century. Population trends (movement) and the economy are so different now than then and this is not an area that I have studied, obviously.

But here in Atlanta their is a strong demographic and geographic separation between non-whites and whites. There is, to be fair, continuing discrimination aimed at blacks that is long standing and deep seated. From where I stand, among immigrants that i observe locally, Hispanics are more likely to assimilate than browns from Africa and the ME. Asians tend to migrate to enclaves .... their cultures and traditions are so different from those of Americans but I would say that second gens tend to become very westernized much to the dismay of their parents.

There is a very large SWA immigrant population here and they are, in my estimation, highly educated and come to the US well-off professionals to begin with. But they stick together tending to socialize among themselves. They also tend to move into communities of like race and cultures. But it is true, nothing about my observations in Atlanta can be generalized to the US. So, I'll admit some bias here in my conclusions.

[Kapture1]

[froot loops]

Well, that's good. Thanks for reading it. Maybe at some point we'll have some data that says immigrants are or are not assimilating. Admittedly, that was a drive by read on my part.

I just have a view that immigrants to the US aren't assimilating to the degree that they did in the mid 19th to early 20th century. Population trends (movement) and the economy are so different now than then and this is not an area that I have studied, obviously.

But here in Atlanta their is a strong demographic and geographic separation between non-whites and whites. There is, to be fair, continuing discrimination aimed at blacks that is long standing and deep seated. From where I stand, among immigrants that i observe locally, Hispanics are more likely to assimilate than browns from Africa and the ME. Asians tend to migrate to enclaves .... their cultures and traditions are so different from those of Americans but I would say that second gens tend to become very westernized much to the dismay of their parents.

There is a very large SWA immigrant population here and they are, in my estimation, highly educated and come to the US well-off professionals to begin with. But they stick together tending to socialize among themselves. They also tend to move into communities of like race and cultures. But it is true, nothing about my observations in Atlanta can be generalized to the US. So, I'll admit some bias here in my conclusions.

I'm going by what I've seen in the Metro Detroit area, at one point you had neighborhoods that were heavily concentrated Chaldean communities in the 80s and now it is dispersed.

I guess one thing I would like to see like a definition of assimilation, it's like a rorschach test in my opinion. In my city there is a heavy Indian population, the dad's play a lot of cricket. Their sons and daughters play the normal sports if they play, generally it was the math pentathlon but some play vasketball.