Comments on: Should Freedom-Loving Americans Fear the Mexican Voter?

By: Links to other blogs to make you taller, happier, smarter

Links to other blogs to make you taller, happier, smarter — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:38:43 +0000

[...] Wilkinson is rare non-hysterical voice on whether Mexican immigrants are altering our culture (on development-relevant [...]

By: TGGP

TGGP — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:22:30 +0000

There is indeed little reason to lay off blaming previous immigrants to the U.S. My ancestors, for example, came from Ireland and while they were being ruled by the English at the time, the moment they achieved any rule for themselves they demonstrated their incompetence in self-governance (this has changed recently, but it took quite a while). To my mind it is not at all conclusive that native-born Americans and their descendants benefited from Irish immigration.

The people who are leaving seek better economic opportunities, but that doesn't indicate that they don't support the policies that led to reduced economic opportunities. In relatively democratic countries policies, perhaps even especially the worst policies, are broadly popular. Refuseniks/dissidents/refugees might be a different story, but that does not describe most of our immigrants. Even in that case, I think it was our misfortune to take in the “Forty-Eighters” from Germany in the 19th century.

By: shecky

shecky — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:47:32 +0000

It seems silly to blame the the woes of the motherland on people who are leaving. Why does this standard not apply to everyone who emigrated to the US in the past 200+ years? After all, how many folks came to the US because things were going so well in the Old Country? Can I blame you for the crappy state the US is in, since collective punishment seems widely accepted even among critics of redistribution-friendly furriners?

By: TGGP

TGGP — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:46:43 +0000

Actually, Cuba was run pretty well before Castro took over. It had a positive rate of immigration even from Europe back then. Both Batista and Castro were dictators, so it makes less sense to credit Cubans with the performance of either. Perhaps we might fault them for having a society that only produced dictatorship. I am willing to blame Mexicans and many other poor countries for their bad public policies.

By: TGGP

TGGP — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:22:30 +0000

By: shecky

shecky — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:47:32 +0000

By: TGGP

TGGP — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:46:43 +0000

By: shecky

shecky — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:40:15 +0000

Mexicans probably do a better job than Cubans. Yet the average Cuban faces fewer immigration hurdles from the US government.

Then again, Mexican immigrants are not likely to have ever been involved in running Mexico. Does that count for or against their favor?

By: uknowbetter

uknowbetter — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:07:25 +0000

Let's make this simpler. How well have Mexicans done at running a country?

I would say not very well.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:38:18 +0000

US, Regarding a) I was just pointing out that Denmark's economy is freer than the US's on most dimensions of economic freedom. I don't mean to minimize the importance of tax rates and size of government. And I don't think the indices minimize them (if anything, they're counting the same thing more than once.) That's why Denmark rightly ranks below the U.S. and Canada.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:34:09 +0000

No. I said preferences for redistribution don't map on cleanly to preferences for freedom generally or economic freedom in particular. Denmark was probably a confusing example. So just take Canada and don't ignore taxes and size of government. Canadians have significantly stronger pro-redistribution preferences than Americans', and stronger than Mexicans', but their economy overall is as free or freer that the U.S.'s.

By: Arne

Arne — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:14:06 +0000

what he said

By: US

US — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:31:42 +0000

a) The trick of ignoring both the very big government and the very high taxes in order to conclude that “Denmark is all in all a very free country”, is one we see a lot (I'm a Dane). It's a load of horse****. Ignoring government size and taxation in the case of Denmark is like ignoring Gulag and the show-trials when evaluating Russia under Stalin. It doesn't make any sense.

b) The reasons why most Americans who know anything about this subject know that they need not fear anything from Danish immigrants regarding redistribution is a) It's the highly educated Danes who get fleeced by the government that flee to America, not the poor redistributionists living off the welfare state, and b) Denmark isn't very big, so there's no way for you to ever import enough of us to make any noticeable difference either way.

By: TGGP

TGGP — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:36:50 +0000

So immigrant preferences for redistribution are irrelevant if we ignore taxation and the size of government? I don't quite get the point. Did I overlook data showing immigrants favored Danish levels of regulation and free trade?

Craig, speaking of that the Inductivist has a recent post on preferences among blacks, whites & hispanics for preferential hiring.

By: Craig McGillivary

Craig McGillivary — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:25:59 +0000

I think part of the idea of ending racism is that even if it would benefit you in the moment you shouldn't be given a job over a well qualified person of a different race simply because of your race. Even if you can show that America would be more free if we exclude Mexicans, or send all our Blacks to Nigeria, it doesn't make it not racism.