Lion of the Blogosphere

Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

This op-ed in the LA Times written by a conservative-libertarian (probably anti-Trumper) type asks the right question but reaches the wrong answer.

It is true that California has the highest “supplemental poverty measure” of any U.S. state (according to a chart in a Wikipedia article), but then look at the demographic composition of California, which is only 37.7% non-Hispanic white (according to another Wikipedia article).

Massive immigration of poor Mexicans means you wind up with a lot of poor people living in the state. Poverty in California is not caused by a minimum wage that’s too high or other libertarian nonsense. Washington State has the highest minimum wage of all states, but a relatively low supplemental poverty measure. Washington is 69.5% non-Hispanic white, with 9% of the minority population being Asian.

To lower poverty, we must restrict immigration, deport illegal aliens, require mandatory E-Verify by employers, and build the Wall.

I believe there is only one factor contributing to poverty that libertarians happen to be right about, and that’s land-use and zoning policies that prevent more housing from being built. California has a lot of that. That’s why super-liberal Vermont also has relatively high supplemental poverty measure (although still below the U.S. average) despite being the nation’s second-whitest state. But Vermont also has a shortage of jobs because there are no major cities, and in the modern economy the jobs are migrating to major cities. Vermont is a place where a certain type of relatively affluent white people from the northeast retire.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

Posted in Economics, Immigration

151 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Anyway, we need to define what “poverty” actually means. In today’s United States, poor people generally have plenty to eat; a roof over their head; a cell phone; etc.

    Seems to me that poverty is more of a shorthand way of saying that a group of people are dysfunctional — that they have high rates of single motherhood; teen pregnancy; crime; and various social ills that are closely associated with poverty but strictly speaking are not the same thing.

    So yeah, poverty is going to have a lot to do with demographics as opposed to economic policy.

    fortaleza84

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • That’s a ridiculous comment. Poor people have less of those things that everyone has, and what they do have comes much more from charity and government programs than non poor people. Poverty is very much about how much money you have and how much you consume.

      And then there are many different kinds of poverty. Some of the poorest places in the US are full of orthodox jews, who have a very different kind of poverty than what you describe.

      magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Not “ridiculous” at all, Magnavox. The people you call “poor” consume a lot and have a lot. So what if they’re funded by huge chunks of my own pay check? I don’t have a car, haven’t bought new shoes or clothes in like 2 years, never “eat out” or travel, had to live on my credit card last week because I had no more money in my account. But I’m not “poor” — why? Because I often speak in complex sentences with subordinate clauses and say “please” and “thank you” to strangers when it seems appropriate to do so.

        Garr

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Nonsense. Most of the world is poorer than the US poverty level. Poverty level in many countries is middle class.

        The minimum wages screw up jobs because they’re really maximum wages: you maximum wage is zero in jobs that don’t r produce at the minimum wage level. It is getting traction in states in the NW along with rent control that destroys cheaper housing as a measure to keep Hispanics out and send them south to CA.

        Robert

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • It’s not ridiculous – doesn’t fussel touch on this, that ‘poor people’ used to have ‘middle class values’ but currently the only social strata still living this way are, by and large, the the well off and well educated. Insular religious groups are a very different ball of wax, and some (not just orthodox) are really good at scamming the system such that between community support and state entitlements they amass a standard of living very different from your average single mom in the projects. Muslims in europe/ britain sometimes pull off the same scheme.

        toomanyspiders

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • @Garr

        The Victorians called that “shabby genteel”.

        Richard

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Magnavox is literally contradicting himself in two consecutive sentences: ” Poverty is very much about how much money you have and how much you consume. And then there are many different kinds of poverty..”

        Right now I’m angry about all the anti-white trash there is on Buzzfeed. Just google Buzzfeed and “white people” and you’ll see what I mean.

        gothamette

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • That article is a parody of SJWism.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Many years ago I had a job at a state government agency obtained through the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (one of those do-gooder schemes of the 70s). I was able to get the job because I lived in an area of my city that was covered by CETA. That wasn’t hard to do because almost the entire city was so covered.

        Several months into my tenure a new colleague, female and about my age, was hired. We had lunch soon after and she asked me how I got the job, so I told her. She looked puzzled and asked “Don’t you have to be poor for that?” I pondered that for a moment, and thought well yes indeed I WAS poor. Just because I was white and came from a working class background and didn’t meet the stereotype of ghetto minority I was suspect, but at the time I started I was living in a small apartment with very dilapidated furniture, no phone, no TV, and a bathroom shared with next door neighbor, and I had a grand total of less than $1000 to my name. So Magnavox, don’t be ridiculous when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

        sestamibi

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • There’s poverty itself and then a culture and identity associated with different cultures that exist in that economic state.

        Gothamette: If you read what I said, I didn’t contradict myself. I said that there are different cultures associated with the same economic measures of poverty.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • sestamibi: It’s the other people in the thread saying that you weren’t really poor. We agree. You were poor. You had a different culture and identity than a ghetto black person in the same economic circumstances, but your circumstances as they were mean you were poor.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • +1

        Most people generally don’t consider grad students to be “poor” even though their personal income and consumption is far below the average full time service sector worker.

        Doug

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • If you want to define “poverty” strictly by income and the amount of stuff you have, there’s no point in being concerned about it or alarmed by it. By definition, the bottom 20% of people are the bottom 20% so there was, is, and always will be poverty at a rate of about 20%.

        Concern and alarm about “poverty” is better thought of as concern and alarm about the size of the underclass. i.e. the group of people which constantly engage in various destructive behaviors from generation to generation.

        fortaleza84

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Most people generally don’t consider grad students to be “poor””

        Agreed, and more apropos to this discussion, government programs aimed to fight poverty don’t worry that much about grad students. If a few grad students qualify for food stamps, fine, but that’s a side effect. Grad students aren’t the focus of public policies on poverty and this is not particularly controversial.

        In the end, it’s a matter of semantics. Anyone is free to define “poverty” any way they like but we need to be clear about what we mean. If we think poverty is a bad thing and we are debating whether immigration from poor countries will increase poverty, then obviously we are not using the mathematical definition of poverty in the discussion. We are using the word “poverty” to mean “underclass,” i.e. groups of people with certain types of dysfunctional behaviors.

        fortaleza84

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • A lot of grad students are never going to make any money and are in pretty deep shit. The ones that are going to make money are only regarded as poor because measures of wealth never include a persons individual human capital.

        Poverty is not defined as the bottom x%, it’s defined as not able to support a basic standard of living (which I am aware is a relative concept not entirely divorced from just being in the bottom x percentage).

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • . Grad students aren’t the focus of public policies on poverty and this is not particularly controversial.

        Grad students receive massive government support. You’re right that its not regarded as having anything to do with poverty, and you can be sure if it were they would be getting much much less.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • You all sound like liberals saying poverty is dysfunction and dysfunction is poverty.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • @magnavox,

        I loathe back & forth internet arguments. So just explain to me what this means:

        “Poverty is very much about how much money you have and how much you consume.”

        And reconcile it with this:

        “And then there are many different kinds of poverty.”

        The first to me argues absolute poverty. The second is an argument for relative poverty.

        BTW guys, this is a stupid exchange, because one side is arguing about relative poverty and the other, absolute.

        Me, I agree with Dolly Parton: “One is only poor, if they choose to be.”

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • She meant to say “One is only poor if one chooses to be.”

        Garr

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • gothamette: poverty is an economic measure (that is obviously arbitrary) and then there are all kinds of different cultures and identities of people living in poverty.

        Fortalez’s argument that poverty is defined as certain cultural attributes complete contradicts how the government measures poverty (which is what this whole post is about) and the way the term is commonly understood. These jumos think that just because someone isn’t ghetto that they’re somehow not poor. You can be poor and ghetto, ghetto and rich, poor and not ghetto, rich and not ghetto.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • That’s dissapointing that Dolly Parton would say something so absurdly stupid. I always thought that underneath the clown makeup and ridiculous breasts she had a real dignity and intelligence. That is admittedly based almost entirely on her old interview on late night with Conan O’brien though.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Looking at the context Parton meant in the stoic sense of saying that your experiences can only make you feel good or bad if you let them. Not that anyone can choose to change their material circumstances.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Magnavox,

        I gave you the time of day for a while. No longer. You are just a show off. I am no longer going to try to communicate with you. You are now on ignore. I will not waste my wisdom on someone like you.

        But for the rest…the line from Dolly Parton is from the end of Coat of Many Colors. Dolly wear the coat made of rags that her mom sewed for her and the rest of the kids made fun of it. But she loved the coat and felt rich. The point of the line is that wealth doesn’t depend on material possessions or bling. The truly wealthy person will be able to generate riches from his or her inherent qualities. Which she has proven. She came from dire poverty, amassed enormous wealth because of her talents, which she has maximized. The real clown is someone like Magnvox, who doesn’t understand that, and who doesn’t understand that he continues to contradict himself.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • the point magnavox is making is that “poor” is polysemous, like most words. the two senses here discussed are…

        sense 1: a certain low level of material living standards.

        sense 2: (most common in america) a pejorative, gross, despicable, etc. it is part of the american ideology that whoever lives a shithole life deserves it, and whatever unpleasant traits are associated with the poverty stricken in sense 1 are innate rather than caused by poverty. the just world phenomenon is strongest in the US. it’s very convenient, and pure evil.

        swamp creatures on fire

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • @robert

        that’s right. if your business model requires paying below living wages to your employees, then your business shouldn’t exist.

        swamp creatures on fire

        January 16, 2018 at EDT am

    • yes. in terms of life expectancy blacks have more than halved the gap since the civil rights bill iirc. the gap is now so small that it may be explained entirely by factors other than inequality.

      swamp creatures gone wild

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • of course the libertarians are right about drugs. the costs of their criminalization far exceed those of their de-criminalization. the same is true for gambling and prostitution. and especially true when these are regulated and taxed, which libertarians hate.

        swamp creatures gone wild

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • of course the libertarians are right about drugs. the costs of their criminalization far exceed those of their de-criminalization.

        Not so obvious. People are checking out in pretty large numbers with the current availability.

        I’m not sure you want Walmart and Amazon applying their marketing skill toward mainlining chemicals into the populace.

        bomag

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • hence the “regulated” and taxed like alcohol and tobacco.

        the most common theory as to why so-called “hard drugs” are illegal is that big alcohol and big tobacco have lobbied to keep them illegal. they don’t want the competition.

        prohibition of alcohol was repealed precisely because…

        metaphororically speaking…

        excepting capital gains…

        al capone made more in one year in real $s than anyone ever has…

        about $1.1b.

        how is the current drug war unlike prohibition?

        and btw, i’m not an apologist for vice. i partake only of the EtOH.

        i just see it as a cost benefit calculus with an OBVIOUS answer.

        swamp creatures gone wild

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • regulation

        As if.

        I’ve heard it argued that prohibition worked pretty well when going by public health metrics.

        The addictive nature of modern pharmaceuticals puts them in another category of problem.

        bomag

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Arguments against prohibition are flawed because the tactics used for prohibition are flawed. They’re flawed because people don’t understand economics. You don’t eliminate illegal commerce by focusing on supply. You eliminate it by punishing demand. We could easily end drugs by going after the customers. If customers got a real punishment then they would quit and the supply would dry up. Suppliers only exist because there’s a demand.

        I recommend caning drug users. That’s what they do in SE Asia and it works. Have you ever seen a caning? Those little quivering buttocks look like bloody confetti after they’re done. Believe me, people will quit.

        destructure

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • “Seems to me that poverty is more of a shorthand way of saying that a group of people are dysfunctional — that they have high rates of single motherhood; teen pregnancy; crime; and various social ills that are closely associated with poverty but strictly speaking are not the same thing. ”

      Yes. Wealthy capitalist societies have solved the problem, at least temporarily, of material want.

      The US is unique in that it has a permanently inflamed racial minority, with real and imagined grievances, and a profitable grievance-mongering industry. Add to that a guilt-ridden white majority that is rapidly losing, or has lost, the will to survive. The lower half of this permanently aggrieved minority has literally fallen apart, with no family structure, no skills, no wealth, no prospects. In 50 years, when Hollywood is done with them, what will be?

      gothamette

      January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

  2. To lower poverty, we must restrict immigration, deport illegal aliens, require mandatory E-Verify by employers, and build the Wall. .

    The Wall would just be symbol of a scared and cowering civilization, and would become a symbolic joke the second the inevitable Dem adminstration stops funding the Nightwatch or whatever we are going to call the guards there. If we do the first three things you suggest, we won’t need a wall. Restricting benefits and making illegals ineligible to go to US public schools would also help.

    Peter Akuleyev

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I guess you’re right, without jobs, or education, or healthcare, or anything else, no one would want to live here illegally.

      But the Wall would still keep out drugs and criminal gangs.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • The wall would also help if the political situation in Mexico changed and we started getting political, rather than economic, refugees. But overall the wall really isn’t that important and at this point is primarily a barometer of Trump’s intentions and success.

        magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • good on lion.

        for this reason the wall would be good for mexico too. mexican drug gangs would wither.

        but vincente fox is too stupid to understand this.

        swamp creatures gone wild

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • E-Verify is a practical approach to reducing illegals in the country. I know that a large numbers of illegals in California have forged green cards. E-Verify would eliminate most of that, but it will require a lot of funding and several years to expand it. There is also the question of the error rate with E-Verify. It would have to be reduced.

        There are serious issues with forbidding illegals from getting non-emergency medical services. Illegals are already not eligible for Obama care or Medicaid. If you want to make doctors and hospitals check for illegals, this would be a nightmare. You would have to go through something like E-Verify to see a doctor and it would actually be much more complicated than E-Verify. There are thousands of kinds of special visas. Some of those special visas allow you to work perhaps with restrictions and some do not. People on visas that do not allow them to work are in the country legally and should be allowed to get medical services. E-Verify as currently set up does not handle non-working visas. This is just not workable.

        Forbidding illegals to attend public schools is also bad policy. You would then have large numbers of young children of illegals hanging around unable to attend school and joining gangs.

        I have also heard proposals to require landlord to verify people are in the country legally before renting. This would also be a nightmare, since people who are not allowed to work should also be allowed to rent or even purchase homes.

        E-Verify for all employment would make it much more difficult for illegals to work and significantly reduce the number of illegals here. It will require a lot of funding to expand and improve the system, but it is the practical option.

        The wall would be a giant waste of money and would not stop drugs or gangs.

        MikeCA

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Once you get an accurate database of who has what kind of visa, then determining what they’re legally allowed to do (work, receive medical care, receive welfare, etc) becomes trivial. The difficulty lies in getting the database. So I don’t buy that e-verify should be limited to checking eligibility for just employment because expanding it to other purposes represents some kind of grand technical challenge.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • E-verify can be done and would be if there were a will. Where there’s a will, there’s an uncle – I mean, a way.

        All the other stuff is bullshit. Cops, landlords, hospitals, — no one is going to comply. That’s the real world.

        The wall is a different thing entirely. We need to plug up the holes that transport drugs physically with lava, blast them into smithereens, and put up barriers in certain places.

        gothamette

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • All the other stuff is bullshit. Cops, landlords, hospitals, — no one is going to comply. That’s the real world.

        Resisting illegals is good policy the populace would get behind. If officialdom makes it taboo, it would shrink to a manageable problem rather than the gangrenous cyst we have now.

        bomag

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

    • Trump promised the wall and has to deliver. There is no other option.

      Yakov

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • However, California is one of the 10 states with the highest median household income.

      The states with the lowest are those in the south especially the deep south where there are a lot of blacks.

      NY’s average is probably dragged down by the large contingent of NAMs.

      JS

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Income by itself means nothing, you need to account for cost of houses or rent.

        Hashed

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Perhaps there are rampant Yakov Cheatums in California among the Hispanic demographic. These workers are paid off the books and then underreport their income where they are entitled to welfare.

        JS

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • What perhaps? 100% so.

        Yakov

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • The Wall would just be symbol of a scared and cowering civilization,

      Satan is grateful for your shilling on his behalf to keep his flow of heroin to the millions of addicts in the US uninterrupted across the southern border.

      Andrew E.

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Explain how you think a Wall has any effect on that. You do know that Florida has a coastline?

        Peter Akuleyev

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Explain how you think a Wall has any effect on that. You do know that Florida has a coastline?

        Yeah, and? FL having a coastline is much better than FL having a coastline AND the Southern Border being wide open.

        Andrew E.

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • @ Peter

      Maybe the wall would symbolize a scared and cowering civilization, maybe not. The Great Wall of China was started by Qin She Huangdi, the first emperor to unite most of what we recognize as China. If you read any of his biographical details, it’s hard to imagine him belonging to a scared, cowering civilization.

      Lowe

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Oops, Qin Shi.

        Lowe

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • The Chinese are exactly why Walls symbolize fear to me. The Chinese built a Wall to stop barbarian nomads from raiding their towns and raping their women. And the Great Wall failed, time and time again. Picture a bunch of effeminate powdered Mandarins crying after being manhandled by rough Mongols they are too scared to fight. ‘I know, Let’s build a wall!” one pipes up.

        Notice that Poland is so far controlling immigration pretty well without a wall, or even much in the way of border controls at all. The secret is basically just letting immigrants know they aren’t welcome. That part Trump gets, better than any President in the last century.

        Peter Akuleyev

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Peter, that’s a bad reading of history.
        If you compare with perfection, then yeah, they failed twice.
        But if you compare with all other civilizations who don’t build Great Wall on their frontier, then they pretty much succeed in maintaining and building a lasting civilization.
        The people of the Indus Valley and India didn’t build any wall along their short North-Western border and of course invaders just waltz right in time after time and take over India. The Aryans, the Timurid, the Mughul, … India didn’t repel a single invasion.
        Or take the Celts of Europe, they didn’t build any wall either and so they were pushed by eastern invaders, wave after wave, time after time until they ended up in a corner of Ireland.
        Do you think the Chinese are a bunch of morons? What can they do instead of building a Great Wall? All the advantages belong to the nomads from the wide open Northern frontier. When they’re weak, they retreat to the vast hinterland. When they’re strong, they amassed in single point and overwelmed any possible defenses. You can’t possibly win with a No-Wall defense. Without a wall, there won’t be any Chinese civilization. People would just refuse to settle in the North and instead generation after generation move South… kinda like white people fleeing California and Texas and then Colorado and then finally ended up in Canada and Vermont. For the Chinese farmers, the wall is a psychological clutch, an insurance policy, that helps them stay where they are and not move away to the South. It cements a Chinese civilization.

        Neal

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • The Spartans intentionally never built walls around their hamlets (there was no city of Sparta) to keep themselves armed, trained, vigilant, primed and focused on the true threats to their state: internal strife, either among Spartans or an uprising of the Helots.

      An armed, patriotic, trained and courageous citizenry was far greater protection form outsiders than any wall could provide.

      Daniel

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • But we’re a sea-power like Athens, and Athens had a major wall from Pireaeus (the Harbor) to and around the city itself; the entire population of Attica sheltered behind it throughout the Peloponnesian War. (I’m into the eighth year of the War in my current reading of Thucydides, and so far Athens has been kicking ass. I think that Athens only ends up losing because of the reckless move on Syracuse.)

        Garr

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Rome build walls to keep barbarians out. Walls are good.

        Yakov

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • You could argue, Daniel, that while the Yankees are a sea-power (like Athens) the Rednecks are a land-power (like Sparta). The Redneck Spartans are the ones who want the Wall, though — maybe because they’re subjected to Yankee domination and are therefore unable to deploy their hoplites?

        Garr

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

    • “To lower poverty, we must restrict immigration, deport illegal aliens, require mandatory E-Verify by employers, and build the Wall

      “We are programmed to receive.
      You can check-out any time you like,
      But you can never leave! ”

      Hotel California – The Eagles

      The Eagles were spot on that America was a land of hedonism and excess that never goes cold turkey.

      Any great civilization requires a constant stream of fresh barbarians while the wealthy natives luxuriate to oblivion which attracts these same barbarians in the first place – Ibn Khaldun, 14th Century, Muslim Historian

      JS

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Even the e-verify thing is a bit of a red herring. Large numbers of businesses and households are routinely caught knowingly employing illegals under the table and there rarely seem to be serious consequences. A series of high profile prison sentences for some business owners (preferably at the executive level) and employers of gardeners/cleaners/nannies would do more than “mandatory e-verify.” All you ever hear about now are fines.

      The wall and e-verify are like investing in a rat catching program when people still habitually throw garbage on the streets. Step one is training people to not drop garbage.

      bobbybobbob

      January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

  3. To lower poverty, we must restrict immigration, deport illegal aliens, require mandatory E-Verify by employers, and build the Wall.

    There also need to be substantial payouts to people to renounce their citizenship. Plus a bunch of other reforms not as directly related to immigration, the most important of which is birth control requirements for anyone on means tested programs.

    magnavox

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • “…the most important of which is birth control requirements for anyone on means tested programs.”

      Good luck getting all those anti-abortion Republicans, most of which are also anti-birth control, to approve that.

      MikeCA

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  4. Oh hell they really are coming for him:

    IHTG

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Maybe Miller’s awkwardness and lack of charisma helps him here, since it means Trump is so unlikely to feel threatened by him.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • The media just can’t seem to take Miller seriously the way they did Bannon.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Yeah he’s not going to be threatened by an awkward-looking Jewish millenial the same way he was by an ex-Goldman/Hollywood generational peer.

        IHTG

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Bannon is in his 60s with a full head of hair and a low, youthful hairline.

        Miller is extremely bald for his age.

        Trump is pretty self-conscious about his hair. He had a scalp reduction surgery and takes Propecia.

        Tom

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • “Mr. Trump, if you’re watching today, you know what the right thing is, and just do it.”

      Trump did not get to be a billionaire by taking advice from his competitors.

      Sgt. Joe Friday

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • The very idea of McAuliffe, King of scumbag shyster cockroaches, going after anybody for anything highlights the very weakness of the opposition. If you are known by your enemies, Trump is looking very good indeed.

      Curle

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • They’re trying to play Trump’s ego against him. Trump is very self-conscious about being seen as someone’s pawn. And they know Stephen Miller has a positive influence on the Trump’s immigration policies. So they’re trying to drive a wedge and Turn trump against him. I don’t think it will work. I’m a pretty good judge and Stephen Miller seems very loyal with a subdued ego. He’s not a “yes man” but he is authority driven. He’ll serve Trump to the best of his ability while respectively advancing immigration enforcement. He won’t give Trump any reason to turn on him the way Bannon did.

      destructure

      January 15, 2018 at EDT am

  5. CuckState is talking about how Reagan transcended politics when he talked about immigration.

    Let’s say that Trump fails completely and the Left takes over in 2020 or ever earlier and rules for 1000 years. Trump would have *still* been worth it because he exterminated the TruCons.

    The Left continues to go all in on Stephen Miller. This isn’t just tactics, they really think that Miller is just controlling Trump and that if they get Miller out of the way that Trump will sign off on open borders.

    Otis the Sweaty

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I fear the Left is partially correct. While Trump is inherently anti-immigration because he has 1950s values, without a strong spokesperson in the White House to put Trump’s natural inclination into actual policy, I fear that Trump might be swayed by the open-borders people.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  6. The Left is jizzing their pants over the media “finally” calling Trump racist? Now I thought the media had been doing that forever, but maybe they haven’t actually used the word “racist”, I don’t know.

    Why does the Left think that this is a good thing for them? Because they live in an alternate reality.

    Otis the Sweaty

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  7. Poverty in California is not caused by a minimum wage that’s too high or other libertarian nonsense.

    Their taxes are usually the highest in the country and their business environment is arguably the most regulated in the country.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  8. Quote from Ercuck Ercuckson:

    “So the President would prefer we allow Norwegian socialists with no
    special love of America into the country, but not the Ghanan who will
    work his ass off with a grand appreciation for our free market system
    and raise his kids to be proud Americans.”

    Otis the Sweaty

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • No Ghanan has ever tried to raise his children that way, and even if he did, that wouldn’t stop them from picking up the worst aspects of African American culture from their peers.

      Lowe

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Not to mention, David French, the worst of the lot.

      gothamette

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Kevin Williamson or Bret Stephens is the worst (or Sens. Flake or Sasse counting politicians). French is occasionally reasonable (e.g. on Trump/Russia).

        snorlaxwp

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “Kevin Williamson or Bret Stephens is the worst (or Sens. Flake or Sasse counting politicians). French is occasionally reasonable (e.g. on Trump/Russia).”

        From that list, Bret Stephens is without a doubt the worst of the worst. He’s the guy who wants to deport red state America and thinks that America really belongs to it’s future immigrants, not the people who already live here.

        Mike Street Station

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • They’re terrible. But Williamson is the worst because he is also the worst writer. He is simply a terrible, awful, really bad writer. (Was that clear?)

        He wrote something for NR about Appalachia a few years ago (before his current avatar as paleo-cuck, and before Hillbilly Elegy and the consciousness of the opioid epidemic hit), which was touted as Great Writing by the Conservatism, Inc. I thought it was awful, fake Faulkner. The lede sentence went on for literally ever. I said to myself, “who is this shithead?”

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • ” But Williamson is the worst because he is also the worst writer. He is simply a terrible, awful, really bad writer”

        Williamson may be the worst writer (or in his honor, should I say, “righter?”) but his Appalachia article was pretty good. That was written in a pre Trump era when he had some empathy for the people he was writing about. He would never have written anything like that post Trump. But Williamson is a pretty common type; he’s a guy from nowhere USA who left because he hated it, and now resides in a blue area and will have nothing but contempt for his roots. Stephens to me is a mystery. I have no idea what caused the level of hatred and contempt he has for people like me. If President Hillary ordered red staters into camps for processing, he would be the first person cheering it on. I don’t know what caused that level of hatred.

        Mike Street Station

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • The Appalachia article might have been sympathetic but the writing was so awful I gave up. I cannot abide that sort of writing. It’s the literary form of mumbling.

        I don’t know a lot about Stephens. I just don’t want to waste what little time I have left reading crap. I know that Steve Sailer particularly loathes him. But Sailer twists everything.

        I don’t like Sailer, as you’ve gathered, and I don’t like Sailerism. His takes on various people are flat out ahistorical lies.

        Emma Lazarus is a particular Sailerworld whipping boy/girl. He openly blames the melting pot ideology on her, often citing her poem, The New Colossus, as evidence. That is a flat out lie and I’m sick of it.

        The Lazarus poem was written simply and expressly to be a fund raiser for the Statue of Liberty:

        http://www.independentsentinel.com/emma-lazaruss-fundraising-poem-had-nothing-to-do-with-immigration/

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Colossus

        The phrase “the melting pot,” was coined by Israel Zangwill for the eponymous play. Oh horrors! Right up the alt-right alley.

        Not so fast. “The use of the metaphorical phrase “melting pot” to describe American absorption of immigrants was popularised by Zangwill’s play The Melting Pot,[4] a success in the United States in 1909–10.

        When The Melting Pot opened in Washington D.C. on 5 October 1909, former President Theodore Roosevelt leaned over the edge of his box and shouted, “That’s a great play, Mr. Zangwill, that’s a great play.”[5]

        TR loved the play? TR? The arch WASP imperialist who exhorted every white American to have six children?

        Yes.

        Mike, all I know about Stephens is what I read on Sailer. It has convinced me of two things. One, I disagree with Stephens on practically everything. Two, he might not be the twisted hater Sailer makes him out to be. He might just be a clueless asshole.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Mike, all I know about Stephens is what I read on Sailer. It has convinced me of two things. One, I disagree with Stephens on practically everything. Two, he might not be the twisted hater Sailer makes him out to be. He might just be a clueless asshole.”

        Well I’m basing my opinion on actually reading Stephens, not reading what Sailer has written about him, and he is far more the twisted hater than clueless asshole.

        Mike Street Station

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • The Lazarus poem was written simply and expressly to be a fund raiser for the Statue of Liberty:

        Lazarus was referring to white European immigrants because she wrote New Colossus during the 1880s. In the 1880s only whites were allowed to immigrate.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I understand that, TuJ, just pointing out the fact that the poem was written to raise $ for the Statue.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • One, I disagree with Stephens on practically everything. Two, he might not be the twisted hater Sailer makes him out to be. He might just be a clueless asshole.

        Stephens like all secular Jews is writing out of Northern class bias that has existed since the Civil War, not racial bias. Secular Jews like him get along fine with elite white gentiles and intermarry with them at a rate over 75%. If Jews like him were racially biased they wouldn’t socialize with elite gentiles either. In Stephens’ case he’s working against his own racial interests because Jews suffered the effects of immigration long before anything aside from the old-white-black split (with the occasional Indian reservation) was noticeable in the heartland. Turning Stuy into an Asian ghetto was a disaster for middle class Jews in New York.

        All elite gentiles in America and Europe have the same class bias against the “wrong type of whites”.

        Among the right type of whites with comparable socioeconomic backgrounds, all liberal whites including secular Jews there is no lack of cooperation.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I believe Lion is the class-warfare expert here.

        Is Stephens class biased or racially biased?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I don’t know who he is.

        Please stop talking about Jews on posts that have nothing to do with Jews.

        Don’t force me to delete more comments.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • All elite gentiles in America and Europe have the same class bias against the “wrong type of whites”.

        For some reason certain antisemites are very good at ignoring the fact elite white gentiles think the same as elite Jews.

        It’s almost as if certain quarters have a negro-esque need to lie and blame an outside group for their group’s failures.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald

        He has been accused of misrepresenting the sources he uses in that regard. For example, Barry Mehler, an educator at Ferris State University, noted that MacDonald had claimed that “Jewish opposition to the 1921 and 1924 legislation (to limit immigration) was motivated less by a desire for higher levels of Jewish immigration than by opposition to the implicit theory that America should be dominated by individuals with northern and western European ancestry.” MacDonald based this on a dissertation entitled “American Jewry and United States immigration policy, 1881–1953” by Sheldon Morris Neuringer. Nueringer’s thesis posited that Jewish opposition in 1921 and 1924 to the anti-immigration legislation at the time was due more to it having the “taint of discrimination and anti-Semitism” as opposed to how it would limit Jewish immigration. Mehler stated “It seems to me Mr. MacDonald is misrepresenting Mr. Neuringer in this case and I posted my query hoping that a historian familiar with the literature might have a judgment on MacDonald’s use of the historical data.”‘[37]

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • My comments about Stephens had nothing to do with his Jewishness. I agree with Lion that everything shouldn’t come down to that, the way it does on Sailer’s blog.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I didn’t think it did, but someone else had to bring it up.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Well, that is part of his moniker.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I call him “fattened gelding Erick Erickson.”

      snorlaxwp

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I don’t want either one.

      sestamibi

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  9. The entire quasi-intellectual universe in the US is built around the notion of explaining the world in non-HBD terms. Legitimacy is premised on whether the exercise props up or undermines this one over-riding dogma. .

    Curle

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • There is always an official religion or an official unofficial religion.

      Andrew E.

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • And the quasi intellectual universe of HBD is built around ignoring history, and the vast changes in the relative development of different groups over time.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • You don’t have a sufficient understanding of history to make that claim as you’ve demonstrated time and again.

        Curle

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • You only need the barest, most basic understanding of world history. That’s what makes HBD people look so dumb.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Could you please change quasi-intellectual to pseudo-intellectual? Thanks.

      gothamette

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  10. I think a big factor contributing to poverty in California is the large agricultural sector. Agricultural jobs are among the lowest paying in the U.S. and California is the top food producer in the U.S. Even within California, the biggest agriculture producing region is San Joaquin Valley. It is also the poorest area of the state.

    Messing around with the minimum wage obviously isn’t going to change the nature of these jobs.

    Alex

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Messing around the the minimum wage wont’ change the the nature of the lowest paying jobs? Come again….

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • OK good point. That was poorly phrased. I suppose increasing the minimum wage enough with strong enforcement could change things. But its always going to be unskilled seasonal work. When workers are getting paid in cash daily they’re subject to all kinds of exploitation, and potentially making less than minimum wage if they’re working long hours.

        But the point I was trying to make was that I can’t see how lowering the minimum wage would increase investment or economic activity in the agricultural sector.

        Alex

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • He’s saying it’s not going to make their essential nature less disgusting & physically taxing.

        gothamette

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  11. Are Indians considered NAMs? I ask as in most of Canada, the moniker Asian is used specifically to refer only to East Asians like Chinese or Koreans.

    Roli

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • There’s so few relatively that people don’t think about them anymore. Native American characters used to be common in Westerns and their physical skills celebrated in sports, e.g. the Chiefs, but they’ve faded into obscurity.

      In HBD terms they’d be grouped under NAM.

      JW Bell

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • East Indians aren’t NAM, they’re grouped with Asians.

        JW Bell

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I was referring to indians from India, which I’m still 90% sure Roli was referring to.

        Magnavox

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • WHether asians includes Indians is ambiguous. But they’re definitely NAMs since they’re not white and very wealthy.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I think you stated it backwards. In addition to being arguably “asian”, East Indians are model minorities– so they are clearly not NAMs. NAMs are the non-Asian under-performers.

        anon

        January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Indians are not very wealthy Magna. Stop spreading silly rumours. Middle class surely but hardly wealthy.

        mpt

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Yeah I meant that they’re not NAMs. The double negatives confused me.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I call them South Asians which includes Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Afghans and Nepalese. The last 2 are not common as the first 2 in the New World. Some Nepalese look like hybrids of South and East Asian.

      JS

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  12. Can you start a thread to discuss the woman who just destroyed the career of Anziz? I am going to refrain from praising this young woman, or praising Aziz or denigrating either. Let’s get beyond that. Assume that going forward, if a woman has a sexual experience that does not make her happy, she has the ability to destroy the career of the man involved. What are the larger implications for society? I for one think we may have a much better society, where men insist on a few dates before sex, and men make certain that both sides consent in writing before sex. I think this may lead to a better society

    Smitty

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • He kind of got what he deserved honestly since he’s been advancing his career by taking the side of women like this.

      Alex

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I guess it could be sort of fun for some couples to write out an elaborate contract before having sex. That sounds like the kind of thing that the kids over at SlateStarCodex might be into.

      Garr

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Aziz Ansari is a simpering weirdo whose show is like a narcissistic daydream he once had, vaguely similar to Girls but about a tenth as subtle. It is the height of irony, and poetic justice, that a preening, anti-white bootlicker like him would be brought down by sexual harassment charges. We can only hope.

      Lowe

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • There’s been a bit of a backlash from liberal women about the Aziz story. Bari Weiss, who writes for the NYT, said it shouldn’t have been published at all, and others have been tossing rocks at it. I guess they’re not thrilled with the implications.

      In related news, Margaret Atwood of “The Handmaid’s Tale” has fallen afoul of the #MeToo speech codes.

      https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/margaret-atwood-takes-to-twitter-to-respond-to-criticism-of-metoo-globe-op-ed/article37599626/

      Richard

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Bari Weis?
        The walrus of love?

        Dr Hook

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Assume that going forward, if a woman has a sexual experience that does not make her happy, she has the ability to destroy the career of the man involved.”

        It has zero real life implications. This is strictly a Hollywood phenomenon, and is generating a backlash. Catherine Deneuve, once the most beautiful woman in the world — for real, not People magazine bullshit — has denounced it along with a group of other French women. There was an op-ed by Daphe Merkin in the NY times. It will abate.

        I’m of two minds about this Ansari thing. OTOH, he is a creep, as pointed out by comments here. OTOH, he did nothing bad.

        A lot of #Metoo is girls who do things formerly reserved for prostitutes to be cool girls, and afterwards as normal women they feel bad about it, and then blame the man. The anonymous coward accusing Ansari propositioned him, which is what the man should have done, went down on him and got orally serviced by him. She hated the whole thing, and fabricated a sexual assault where there was none.

        Right now it’s our duty to point out the truth, so that some good can come of this.

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

    • Is better defined as “More tyrannical”?

      Panther of the Blogocube

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  13. California is worst in the country not in the overall poverty rate but in the supplemental poverty rate. This rate takes the cost of living into account and is boosted by the Golden State’s high costs, especially for housing.

    It’s unreasonable to blame California poverty on Mexicans. There have been Mexicans in the state for generations, and many of them are quite well-off.

    Peter

    ironrailsironweights

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Peter, I know a lot of rich Californians and not a single one is a dark mestizo. Not one.

      The rich darker skinned Californians you may encounter are typically Persian, old Portuguese families, and middle eastern Christians. Blacks much more rarely, but certainly a few.

      Possibly the reason is the extreme bottleneck from the crossing into the Western Hemisphere reduced genetic diversity such that both IQ and personality type variations in native american populations is very low compared to any of the old world races. Wealth from extreme IQ, drive, or creative talent is not something that happens in these populations, even if their averages are higher than africans, MENAS, and South Asians.

      Pop

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Well-off Mexican synonymous with a White Hispanic type or a Mestizo with more Caucasoid admixture.

      JS

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  14. Who leaked Trump’s shithole comment? #shitholegate

    gothamette

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • How about we not put the words “leak” and “shithole” in the same sentence, okay, gothamest? That’s just gross.

      Garr

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Whatever. Who leaked?

        gothamette

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Whatever” is something that mean girls say. They go, “You stink, loser — is your shithole leaking again?” And then as the loser begins to stammer his reply they’re like, “WhatEVERRR!”

        Garr

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Durbin was the leaker.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

  15. The reason California is so bad on the “supplemental poverty measure” is the cost of living is so high. Mostly this is because housing costs are so high. On the normal poverty measure, California is average.

    MikeCA

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • The normal poverty measure makes about as much sense as setting a global poverty line and seeing which American fall below it.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  16. How an earth does preventing more housing contribute to poverty? Surely it increases home values and drives the rifraf out. Housing is so expensive in California that even the middle class cant afford to move there, that is the main reason I myself wont move to California.

    DataExplorer

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  17. If GOP ever gets immigration under control they should focus on eliminating local zoning to make house as cheap as possible for married couples.

    As Steve Sailer discovered: if you make it cheaper to start a family more people will start families and those people vote for the GOP.

    Jimi

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • People should be given more, not less control over what happens in their neighborhood. There are other, much better ways to accomplish what you’re talking about. You’re falling into the classic republican trap of assuming that any measure that improves the lives of actual republican voters must also contain some giant giveaway to business.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  18. All these comments and no one “got it”?

    Its because rich progressives turned it into a shithole by importing poverty from the shitholes to the south in attempt to feed the greed and the need of the rich progressives living in their secure little enclaves.

    gda

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • A lot of these rich enclaves have homeless people camped out of peoples houses and bussiness and illegal immigrants shooting white girls and getting off scot free. These people really hate white people and are much more willing to put up with discomfort to reify that hatred politically than conservatives give them credit for.

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

  19. Zoning keeps my neighborhood in CA 97% white/asian, school district good, steet parking plentiful, traffic reasonable, parks pleasant and uncrowded, and has resulted in me making about $800,000 in real estate capital gains. Most of my neighbors too. Libertarians can bite my ass.

    Pop

    January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

    • People living among the kinds of people they want to and being able to send their kids to a school that lets them develop to their fullest potential are good things for a society. High real estate prices are a terrible thing. Though the people that want to drive real estate prices down with giveaways to developers are economic cucks (and yes removing regulations that account for negative externalities are a GIANT giveaway).

      Magnavox

      January 14, 2018 at EDT pm

      • we would barely have to grapple with the problem of high real estate prices in most places if we restricted immigration and cracked down on foreign buyers. japanese real estate is becoming very inexpensive, to the extent that tokyo now has house prices (on an income to price ratio basis) lower than my home town of 40,000 people.

        james n.s.w

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • In the US, in order to reduce crime, the chance of negative equity destroying neighborhood transformations, and to get a good school, theres incredible pressure to buy a house in the nicest neighborhood you can afford to price out dysfunctional native and foreign born populations. The smart thing would just be to let people choose their neighbors and childrens schoolmates democratically and then just heavily tax real estate above a certain threshold.

        It may be different in Australia.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • In a Libertarian society you can have all the white neighborhoods you want. There would be more neighborhoods like yours if we could freely associate.

      ttgy1

      January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • My millionth comment on the petulant and petty nature of Americans, better known as prole behavior — I wish not to associate with most Americans.

        In a globalize world, I would rather speak English to an Euro who understands it.

        JS

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I don’t know if I buy that. What’s the libertarian solution? Restrictive covenants? That’s just about the dumbest way to do it. People should be able to live according to their own prejudices and preferences, not be locked into those of a bunch of long dead people that owned the houses before them. The smart way is to do it through democratic, government processes, which isn’t libertarian.

        Magnavox

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

    • Zoning keeps my neighborhood in CA [full of good things]

      That is little consolation if the surrounding neighborhoods are being burned down in the name of California social justice.

      How long can you hold out until the flames get to you?

      bomag

      January 15, 2018 at EDT am

  20. “That’s why super-liberal Vermont also has relatively high supplemental poverty measure”

    Lion, this is confusing. Are you saying Vermont has land use and zoning policies preventing people from building cheap housing? I don’t think that is the case. Northern Vermont and Maine suffer from the same problem as upstate New York – they are cold, far from major cities and industry, not great farmland, and not on any major trade route.

    Peter Akuleyev

    January 15, 2018 at EDT am

    • Housing in upstate New York is cheap, very different than Vermont.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • The real estate market capitalizes on the status of Vermont as a retiree haven, thus inflating the home values and rental prices in a region that shows remarkable similarity to non-industrial regions of Upstate NY.

        JS

        January 15, 2018 at EDT am

      • Now, why isn’t Florida on the same page with Vermont when it comes to real estate for retirees?

        I could only think of its demographics and a different set of clientele. The analogy is that junk food chains would shut their doors if the price of a 99 cent burger is increased significantly despite its demand.

        JS

        January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

  21. Another way to lower poverty would be to restrict immigration to the very wealthy…but somehow I feel that you “alt-right” bums would feel “economic anxiety” if rich people of the wrong religion, ethnicity, or race started moving in.

    SC

    January 15, 2018 at EDT am

    • Not if the very wealthy get very wealthy by exploiting other people and continue that practice in their new country.

      Magnavox

      January 15, 2018 at EDT pm

  22. 100 years from now, people will look back on our times and will be amazed at our devastating land use and zoning policies (particularly in places like California and the Northeast).

    GondwanaMan

    January 16, 2018 at EDT pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: