> [T]he simplest model seriously overstates natives’ political losses for natives. Some of the main reasons:
If I take your reasons as true I see the consequence of Left trying to appeal to those immigrants against native Whites. In non-political every day life you can make reasonable deals, "sure we will allow in some immigrants but they must assimilate, respect (not attack) native Whites and their cultures. And if you do not then you will be deported." Since we can't have such a straight forward solution politically then native Whites will have to setup institutions to enforce their will on the administrative state for attacking them.
I think where Caplan goes wrong - as evidenced by Democrats catering to immigrants and advocating amnesty for them - is the belief that Natives will try to keep the political status quo.
But what about their children? Or their children's children? 'Return to the mean' means that the even the best and smartest African, Latin American and Middle Eastern immigrants will eventually devolve into the average inhabitant of the homeland that they ran away from after a few generations.
You can see this with the current events in France. The older immigrants are indeed there to work and probably are not too troublesome, but their children are the ones spraying holocaust memorials with threats, burning libraries and looting entire cities.
In the US, Hispanic crime rate is much higher than White crime rate, even though the "immigrants commit less crime" idea would lead us to believe that they would commit less crime than Whites, because more Hispanics are immigrants than Whites are immigrants.
"Return to the mean" is not completely true, instead "regression to the mean" is what occurs and only for the first generation.
Still, it's a rightful complaint that second generation immigrants are usually less successful and unlike their parents, they usually aren't grateful for being accepted, but resentful for 'being excluded' (at least that's what they often feel).
It's also not true that no natives are trying to transform the political status quo - Democrats (and progressives in the academia and corporate world) are actively doing that and wanting to give amnesty to immigrants and advantages to their descendants.
Finally, the "stronger opposition to socialism" is only true as long as "natives" are in the majority - once the "pro-welfare immigrant descendants" (+most native blacks+some native whites) become the majority, the whole thing is turned into its head, and it's easy to see how this could occur with the type of complete open borders policy Caplan is advocating.
> [T]he simplest model seriously overstates natives’ political losses for natives. Some of the main reasons:
If I take your reasons as true I see the consequence of Left trying to appeal to those immigrants against native Whites. In non-political every day life you can make reasonable deals, "sure we will allow in some immigrants but they must assimilate, respect (not attack) native Whites and their cultures. And if you do not then you will be deported." Since we can't have such a straight forward solution politically then native Whites will have to setup institutions to enforce their will on the administrative state for attacking them.
I think where Caplan goes wrong - as evidenced by Democrats catering to immigrants and advocating amnesty for them - is the belief that Natives will try to keep the political status quo.
> immigrants commit much less crime than natives
But what about their children? Or their children's children? 'Return to the mean' means that the even the best and smartest African, Latin American and Middle Eastern immigrants will eventually devolve into the average inhabitant of the homeland that they ran away from after a few generations.
You can see this with the current events in France. The older immigrants are indeed there to work and probably are not too troublesome, but their children are the ones spraying holocaust memorials with threats, burning libraries and looting entire cities.
In the US, Hispanic crime rate is much higher than White crime rate, even though the "immigrants commit less crime" idea would lead us to believe that they would commit less crime than Whites, because more Hispanics are immigrants than Whites are immigrants.
"Return to the mean" is not completely true, instead "regression to the mean" is what occurs and only for the first generation.
Still, it's a rightful complaint that second generation immigrants are usually less successful and unlike their parents, they usually aren't grateful for being accepted, but resentful for 'being excluded' (at least that's what they often feel).
It's also not true that no natives are trying to transform the political status quo - Democrats (and progressives in the academia and corporate world) are actively doing that and wanting to give amnesty to immigrants and advantages to their descendants.
Finally, the "stronger opposition to socialism" is only true as long as "natives" are in the majority - once the "pro-welfare immigrant descendants" (+most native blacks+some native whites) become the majority, the whole thing is turned into its head, and it's easy to see how this could occur with the type of complete open borders policy Caplan is advocating.
> Unless, of course, Richard is totally lying to save his career.
that's the big question lol