2004 December 10 Friday
Steve Sailer: Immigration Restriction Will Move Hispanics Toward GOP

Steve says if the flow of illegal immigrants who drive down wages at the bottom is cut off then the resulting rise in wages at the bottom will cause more Hispanics to decide they can afford to not vote for the Democrats.

The simplest model of white, Hispanic, and black voting behavior is that voters (at least those who are less than well-to-do and are family-oriented) are on average torn between the Democrats' tax-and-spend policies and the Republicans' family values stances. The poorest ethnic group of voters, blacks, feels they can't afford to waste their vote on semi-symbolic family values issues when they need direct help on bread-and-butter issues. In contrast, the wealthiest ethnic group of voters, whites, can afford to vote for Republicansóboth because some are so wealthy that GOP policies like eliminating the inheritance tax are in their self-interest; and because, for the majority, they can afford to vote for family values.

Hispanic voters fall in the middle. Hispanics, overall, are quite poor. But those who are citizens and regular voters tend to be a little better off than blacks, and somewhat more upwardly mobile. They are tempted by the GOP's family values rhetoric. But a large majority feel their pocketbooks demand they vote Democratic.

This suggests that Hispanics are most likely to become Republican voters when, on average, they aren't so poor. The most straightforward way to raise Hispanic average incomes is to stop taking in so many extremely poor Hispanics from south of the border.

Rather than try to cater to Hispanics already in the US by letting in more of the same instead stop the flow in order to stop the growth of the lower class.

This argument really builds on Steve's previous argument that higher levels of inequality are found in the states that the Democratic Party dominates.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2004 December 10 03:27 AM  Immigration Politics


Comments
noone said at December 10, 2004 4:39 AM:

We no longer have an idustrial economy that provides upward mobility for semi-skilled workers.Wages at the bottom won't rise much,low/unskilled work will be exported or eliminated(4 janitors instead of 6).Randall has posted the academic stats on latinos here,they aren;t moving up and are assimilating,in so far as they do assimilate,to the worst aspects of black culture and white pop-culture.
Sailor is right that values have never stopped blacks from voting for the party of abortion and gay sex.I suspect that latinos,like blacks,see these as "white issues",consider the "down low" phenomenon among blacks("I'm not gay,I just have sex with other men,but I'm *not* gay).Recent attempts to introduce GLBT themes into chicano studies courses went over like a lead balloon,it's just not an issue of interest.Not surprising when you consider the faces of both feminism and gay rights are young,white and upscale.Free housing,free health care and free education are issues of interest.
It's time to accept that we have evolved into 3 distinct "nations",white,black,brown. within 1 political state.Competion for resources and incompatible goals lead to conflict.

It's time to discuss how to handle the conflict.

Invisible Scientist said at December 10, 2004 2:35 PM:


Randall Parker wrote:
"This suggests that Hispanics are most likely to become Republican voters when, on average, they aren't so poor. The most straightforward way to raise Hispanic average incomes is to stop taking in so many extremely poor Hispanics from south of the border.
Rather than try to cater to Hispanics already in the US by letting in more of the same instead stop the flow in order to stop the growth of the lower class."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


But note that if the salaries start going up due to the reduction of Hispanic immigration in the USA, then the jobs themselves
will start "immigrating" to Brazil, Mexico and China, ultimately causing the same reduction of salaries in the US as a backlash.
This is because the forces of the free market will make the decision making business elite to sent the jobs abroad. But then
the Americans will have less money to buy these goods made abroad, and hence it follows that the US government will have to
increase the deficit spending even more in order to compensate for the inability of the majority to live beyond its means.
Sounds complicated?
Not that complicated, as there are some countries who are self-sufficient and who are able to maintain a high level of
productitivity and life-standard without lowering salaries too much. The solution to this nightmare of competition is to
to become genetically more competitive, by having more intelligent children, who will be able to compete better in this world.
This would raise the standard of living even for the underprivileged people, since the ability of the uper 50 % to support the
lower 50 % of the population would increase exponentially... There must be a national policy to encourage intelligent parents
to have more children.

Randall Parker said at December 10, 2004 3:13 PM:

I.S.,

A lot of service jobs can't be moved abroad. Deport all the illegals and there will still be demand for people to collect trash, build roads, wash dishes in restaurants, and so on.

John S Bolton said at December 11, 2004 12:10 AM:

There are several labor-economic difficulties here. One is the effect of mass immigration of menials on rents, another is the seasonalization and casualization of many categories of employment. The effect on median wages is too obvious to dwell upon. Take away employers chance to seasonalize or casualize jobs by harsh, unrelenting restriction of immigration, and the situation for many latinos would be akin to that of WW1 & WW2, wages go way up, year-round employment is the rule, not the exception, and rents go down (in relative terms) in the affected areas. Here is a circumstance where the advocates of labor will not, and cannot, do what is necessary to improve the position of their following. The right, however, is too blinded by propaganda to realize that they have high cards in this regard, which they are not playing. Admittedly, the racial prestige consideration is paramount to the primitive mind, as a policy which says your people are undesirable, riles many who could gain greatly by restrictionism of immigration, and this is what as every cynical wardheeler type is well aware of. Even so,
those who have such primordial feelings are extremely unlikely to vote for the right in any case, if they are disadvantaged minorities; therefore it is the remainder, who are susceptible to an appeal based on economic reality, who are potentially a swing vote that might be appealed to.

gcochran said at December 14, 2004 11:20 AM:


There hasn't been much recent immigration to New Mexico: most of the Hispanics here have been US citizens for six generations.


They don't vote Republican yet. So we might take that as a guide to the time scale of such shifts.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©