Ugh. More problems.
I am all for helping refugees, and for taking in Haitians.
But no muslims—not now, while islam is at war with us.
“”Explaining the reason of resettling Somalis to the US, Katura said Somali refugees have failed to integrate with other refugee groups living in Nakivale and with the local communities because of their unique language and culture.””
Heh, the US of course has no culture so there will be no problem integrating. When will they read Greg Clarks’ comments regarding his book ‘A Farewell to Alms’?
“McCloskey citing the review of the book by Robert Solow, argues that the experience of countries like India and China recently, and of immigrants to the US, shows that the idea that there are deep seated cultural or genetic differences in peoples ability to succeed economically, which stem from the long histories of these societies, is unsupportable.
On the contrary, I think that there is a lot of modern evidence that is supportive of this possibility. What is emphasized in A Farewell to Alms is that the processes identified for England occurred in all settled pre-industrial agrarian societies, though perhaps with different force. That suggests that if we want to find the maximum possible cultural and genetic difference between groups in the modern world we should contrast the people from long settled agrarian societies with those from hunter-gatherer societies that never experienced settled institutionally stable agricultural systems. Can McCloskey point to a single hunter-gatherer group that has successfully and quickly adapted to modern capitalist economies? Australian Aboriginals? The Hmong here in the USA?
Also can he explain why when Chinese and Indian indentured laborers were exported to various parts of South America, Africa, South East Asia and the Pacific in the colonial period they have tended to do very well economically? Unlike white settlers, these were unskilled laborers with no capital and no political advantage as the overlords of these societies. Yet in societies like Fiji, Mauritius, Kenya, Uganda, the Philippines, Peru, and Suriname they have succeeded economically much better than the indigenous population.
Why are there persistent income gaps between the indigenous population in most countries of the Americas and immigrants from Europe or Asia? Why is income per capita in the Americas in part predictable from the share of the population which is indigenous? Why do indigenous groups emigrating to the US from Mexico and Gautemala tend to do poorly economically?
Clearly the long histories of societies are not the only thing influencing current income levels and growth rates. But I think there is absolutely no cause to be confident that these things do not