China demographics thread.

[broadsword]

The US has always been a nation of immigrants.

Why does this matter? Go calculate group-specific numbers using 2020 CDC data

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yeah, mostly a sleight of hand based on how Hispanics are classified.

Okay? It's not significant. It literally doesn't matter.

So they do not have to institute birth incentives as China does. As to whether they work, just watch the effect unfold. The government will fine-tune as and when necessary.

 

[Overbom]

Yep. China spends so much money and it's free for the United States.

As i told you the previous time, SleepyStudent, it might be free in the economic space but it definetely isnt free on the politics. Trump and the other Republicans are now the result of such immigration (among other causes ofc).

So the US isnt paying directly, but it is paying indirectly by electing these clowns.

 

[broadsword]

The 1965 Immigration Act hasn't been revised in 5 decades. It works beautifully

I was referring to the Chinese birth incentive policies. And free for the US to what extent?

 

[sinophilia]

How does it matter? Even if you are a white supremacist, the "white" number is easily changeable if you classify multiracial people as "white" or simply use "Hispanic white" instead of "Nonhispanic white". Racial tensions are small in the United States when it comes to Hispanics and 2nd gen Hispanics do just as well on incomes as compared to their white counterparts. There is substantial benefit

You know every time you just openly lie about something so incredibly untrue it proves not only how scummy you are but also how incompetent you must be. I don't get why you are even here...

Anyone would know, by instinct alone, this is obviously untrue.

If you think that non-white immigration is going to be socially unstable, I ask you to point me to the destabilizing racial tension in California, New York, Texas, Illinois, or Florida. Just one. Instead, in all those states, even the poorest minorities have higher per capita incomes than Pudong.

Look up this thing called "minimum wage" and maybe "higher wages for the same job productivity in more developed nations".

The US has always been a nation of immigrants.

A nation of.... White immigrants.

If you think that non-white immigration is going to be socially unstable / There is substantial benefit / Blah blah blah racial diversity is good yadda yadda

Name one country not of European or East Asian ancestry that would be considered advanced, wealthy, developed, smart, etc. not including countries which make their wealth from either natural resources or tourism.

Go on, I'll wait.

 

[sinophilia]

It's in fact, true per econometric data. Yes, 1st gen Hispanics are generally poorer from the selection effects.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yea you're wrong and hilariously so. 2nd generation effects are a one time thing but it doesn't close the gap, not even close for women. And 3rd and 4th generation effects don't even exist. There is a one time effect from learning English then *nothing* for centuries. New Mexico 'Old Hispanics' (been in New Mexico for 400 years) are proof of that.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I know about both Baumol's "disease" and the "minimum wage". But even if you add price effects to Pudong and isolate it as its own country, its GDPPC doesn't go anywhere near even AIAN GDPPCs from places such as Menominee County, Wisconsin.

Who cares? Isolate those people and put them in a country, then they are called "Nigeria" and "Guatemala" and "India" and "Iraq". Does China do better than those people?

White is arbitrary. Italians and Irish weren't considered "white" before the 1920 Census. Not that it matters.

Bullshit. Another leftist trope to make yourself feel better about the fact that Europeans and Whites have almost always been synonymous terms. Silly anecdotal evidence you can find in the terabytes worth of recorded history doesn't matter for anything other than your feel good attempt at dividing them because their potential unity infuriates your sensibilities (presumably because you'd be excluded from their countries, something that East Asians like Chinese people never have to worry about because they are more than capable of creating amazing nations). Racial hierarchies *within* Whites used to exist, but they still considered all of them to be Whites.

But hey, show me the interracial marriage laws banning Italians and Irish from marrying the 'Whites'? Did even the Southern Slave states ever do such a thing? How about laws banning them from voting? Were they forcibly segregated against? Were they prevented from serving in World War 1? World War 2?

More Indian bullshit propaganda and a well-read person like me will always be able to deconstruct a silly person like you.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Chile and Uruguay are generally considered fairly well managed & successful LatAm countries. Mauritius in Africa (somewhat). Plus, the point was whether multiethnic countries, ipso facto, could be successful. There are many examples of this: New Zealand (Maori), Singapore (Malaysians and Asians), Switzerland, Belgium etc.

So your only examples are two of the three/four countries in Latin America that are still predominantly White. So you don't have any examples and had to desperately point out countries whose populations are still predominantly of European ancestry. Good job.

And no, it's not about whether multiethnic countries can be successful. Plenty of examples of it being true when the different ethnic groups are high-scoring and high-achieving groups.

Again, show me a country that is not of predominantly European or East Asian ancestry that is considered advanced, wealthy, has a reputation for being a country of smart and technologically advanced people, produces world class products, etc.

The only countries you can ever find that fulfill even *one* of these criteria (and the easiest one at that, being high-income) are resource-rich nations who aren't even capable of extracting said resources, needing East Asians or Whites to do that work for them, or the small island-nation type which take advantage of simple services usually set up by the same aforementioned racial groups, focusing on tourism, being a tax haven, etc.

 

[broadsword]

USCIS is a self-funding agency paid for with fees paid by immigrants for various services all the while immigrants have to pay taxes. The main way the US raises birth rates - immigration - costs the US Treasury $0.00, but in fact, benefits the US since immigrants pay taxes and don't decrease local wages

Yet China has been growing faster than the US, after all has been distilled.

 

[broadsword]

China could also grow faster with immigration but it's beside the point. China has good institutions and it's a largely poor country and thus growth mainly comes from capital formation and capital deepening. US TFP led growth is going to be slower just because TFP grows slower than capital formation at the catch-up phase of growth. All the Tigers slowed and now generally grow at/around US growth levels.

No, China could grow faster with less immigration than the US. There is no way China will have greater immigration than the US for the next thirty years. Despite that, China could grow faster organically due to, yea, a low base, but also due to its own technological dividend. The semiconductor sector is one sector that will grow by leaps thanks to US policies.

 

[sinophilia]

Yeah, the 2nd generation converges and thus the 3rd generation doesn't have anything left to converge to. It's also EPI so unsurprisingly, they in bad faith, don't adjust for educational effects & sector. The gap has remained large because 1st gen Hispanics tend to come without college degrees. And even if you use "New Mexico" as evidence, use New Mexico Hispanics such as those in Bernalillo County or Santa Fe County has given that AIAN incomes in New Mexico are substantially lower.

Why would you adjust for anything dummy? You clearly stated 2nd gen Hispanics have the same level of income as Whites. This is clearly untrue. Not similar incomes, not similar levels of anything really. The differences in any form of actual achievement are greater still.

Irrelevant. The point was whether immigration was bad for the United States. They clearly are not, otherwise, their GDPPCs would not be as high as they are.

Immigrants that are low-achieving, low-scoring, more corrupt, more violent, etc. are bad, immigrants that are high-achieving, high-scoring, have high levels of out-group trust, exercise high impulse control, are non-clannish, high work-ethic etc etc etc are good.

It's not hard to understand. Except for you.

Yeah, the common white identity really prevented those European wars.

Random obfuscation. Way to go refuting anything I said. What a stupid statement.

Yeah, because those practices and customs faded out before the 1920s and the discrimination was in the Northern states. The Irish mainly worked for the NYPD because there wasn't any other place they could work. Italians are clustered in Staten Island because there was nowhere else they could live.

I asked you to prove that there were anti-miscegenation laws. Or segregation laws, in the armed forces, in high levels of office, etc. This was your response. You really are incapable of refuting anything.

Cite an anti-miscegenation law, cite a source which said they were preventing Irish or Italians from serving in all-White units, in WW1 or WW2. You can't, because you know you're a clown who makes stuff up.

This is quite stupid and circular given that every time you

LOL, for the record this is your response to me challenging you to give one example of advanced and smart nations that aren't East Asian or White (excluding resource-rich or tax-haven/tourist island-states), and me laughing at you for giving examples of two countries (of 3-4 in LatAm) that are still predominantly White.

And that above was your response. I won't assume in good faith that your response was cut-off, likely you were too embarrassed to continue and hoped I'd ignore that line of questioning.

Your point is simple: because the migrants to the United States are non-white, they ipso facto can't be successful. This is empirically wrong.

And you're really too stupid for this conversation. Why don't we all just start making up false premises.

I shall now refute your belief that slavery is legal in the US.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[broadsword]

Agreed though not what I was saying. I was saying that with immigration, you grow faster than without immigration, cet. par. That's it.
On tech, I agree there. China has both fast TFP pre-2008 (it's very slow now) but any growth decomposition shows the main source of growth is capital formation in the post-1978 period

True, but that's not necessary with the rate China is growing. If it slows down to the level of US', then maybe. And then China will have to contend with the side effects. Immigration from overseas Chinese and the return of students will slow down the migration to foreign countries like the US and Australia. Even more Taiwanese will find China attractive.

 

[broadsword]

Higher growth is always better

As I wrote, there is always two sides to coin. Growth depending on immigrants has its side effects. In China's case, it's in a strong position to replace immigrants not of Chinese ethnicity with AI to a certain extent . So, unless you are an expert in some fields like in the semiconductor industry or basic sciences, you're less needed.