…receive some sort of state assistance / welfare today. That surprisingly high number (well, to me anyway) is from a recently published report by the Center for Immigration Studies that’s sure to generate some interesting (and perhaps heated) discussion.
Households with children with the highest welfare use rates are those headed by immigrants from the Dominican Republic (82 percent), Mexico and Guatemala (75 percent), and Ecuador (70 percent). Those with the lowest use rates are from the United Kingdom (7 percent), India (19 percent), Canada (23 percent), and Korea (25 percent).
While 19% “feels” higher than I’d expect, it’s still a little less than half the rate of “native households with children” (39%). And, the Indian number is positive relative to those hordes of poor, illiterate, malnourished, Americans-of-Canadian-descent (23%) and is the lowest rate of use of any of the Asian communities identified. A model minority?
Interestingly, I’ve always generally assumed that immigration patterns from India vs. Pakistan into the US were basically the same. However, the Pakistani-household rate of assistance – 32.8% – is substantially higher than the Indian one and on par with the rate for Chinese families – 32.7%.
CIS’s intro to their study notes the issues being raised and points out that the data collected is primarily self-reported (with all the issues/concerns entailed) –
Concern that immigrants may become a burden on society has been a long-standing issue in the United States. As far back as colonial times there were restrictions on the arrival of people who might become a burden on the community. This report analyzes survey data collected by the Census Bureau from 2002 to 2009 to examine use of welfare programs by immigrant and native households, particularly those with children. The Current Population Survey (CPS) asks respondents about their use of welfare programs in the year prior to the survey,1 so we are examining self-reported welfare use rates from 2001 to 2009.
Any mutineers have insight into these differences?
Holy Crap! Why are we taking any immigrants from some of these groups with dependency %’s over 25%? That’s whack. Why not just send $$ to random foreign addresses. . . .
Higher Pak rate is likely linked to unpleasant historical facts like who converted to Islam and why during the medieval/early modern period.
asian groups’ dependency rates are often elevated by older parents, who lack a pension and such. they’re brought over by their adult children, and they transition into the welfare system.
I’ve heard about welfare abuses amongst Indo-Americans. I’ve heard about a did who in middle school was on subsidized lunch program, but his mom would pick him up in a late model SUV. I wonder if unemployment insurance counts as welfare? I would think that ~5% of all Indians are on this.
Razibs point is very correct. I’ve noticed this as well.
I am very surprised that so many Latinos are on welfare! I thought that they were budget neutral in the USA.
As a DBD, I’m more ashamed by Desi tax evaders than welfare dependencies.
Oh, please continue….
Anyway the Indian VS. Pak statistic doesn’t surprise me, because based on purely anecdotal observations, Indians (especially South Indians) seem to be a well-educated and high-earning bunch here, compared with Paki’s. I also think they’re more likely to pursue lucrative fields. Almost every single South Indian I’ve met in college seems to be pursuing a lucrative field like engineering or business for example. Recently I passed what appeared to be a tamil cultural event and it was a meeting of the pre dental society… 😛
You must’ve grown up around more polite folks than I did. Growing up in an uber WASPy town, I often did hear people make remarks about how Mexicans come to this country to use our welfare blahblah
Same, especially considering what Razib said about Asian immigrants supporting parents.
I think that pursuing a field an being a participant in that field are two very different things, especially if you’re a desi. I know of desis majoring in finance to get a job on wall street, but they settle with being a loan officer (or a 401K specialist making $40K/year). Desi have to aim HIGH, too high , some times. Medicine is a non-image driven field (unlike consulting or a REAL job in the capital markets), at the managerial level, that is non-gimmicky, and “yes” it’s financially secure. I think that many folks resent that we go into this field.
I’m quite impressed that Our rates are so low in spite of discrimination at the institutional level. Lastly, it’s surprising that in spite of our wealth and educational achievements, there are no schools, parks, community centers, scholarships, or hospitals started by Indian americans.
I think I can answer that, Boston.
There is a fair amount of low-profile social activity, or donation.
Another style is to be a secondary service center, i.e., donate to another organization, which then gets a name.
Still another style is to donate to causes in India, rather than causes in the US itself.
Pakistani and Bangladeshi first generation immigrants are generally unskilled and poor. They drive taxis and are cashiers.
Pakistani and Bangladeshis are also newer immigrants and need more help like food stamps and vouchers, which is what this study is noticing. The welfare is mostly for families with children, with one person in the household working.
The bulk of desi immigrants to US has been Indians since 1967. They have had more time to establish themselves and do not need as much assistance. Skilled labor for immigrants was also enforced more harshly until 1980s.
Most first generation immigrants to US are poor or unskilled. It would be more interesting to see numbers of second generation desis on welfare.
I don’t know much about this center for immigration studies, but these numbers are suspect to me.
How is welfare to refugees the same or less than that to Mexican immigrants?
Refugees come to the US with nothing. They are usually women and children. For example, the latest round of refugees to the US are Iraqis and Afghani. Almost all of the ones I have met while volunteering are widows with young children. They don’t even own a second article of clothing. Everything, including toilet paper, is donated to help them. Many of these women get jobs washing dishes in restaurants, but that’s minimum wage. They don’t speak a word of English. Many have severe PTSD.
I would imagine the cases were similar with Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees. Many of them left from refugee camps in Thailand malnourished and completely emaciated and incapable of working.
I would guess the same for refugees from Sudan and other war-torn African nations. Men are allowed in from those countries but it is still mostly women and children and mostly widows.
The numbers then don’t make sense. Their welfare numbers should be in the 90% or higher.
Oh, please continue….
Smarter ppl. were disproportionately likely to flee south and east, rather than stay behind to get converted. This is even attested to in the invaders’ texts, which lament the removal of science “out of their reach.”
Thanks Appalled….I didn’t know about that at all. But tbh, I don’t think it’s a good explanation at all; you’re essentially saying Paki’s are dumber cause the Northwest had a brain-drain when the Muslims arrived from the West. But that is not reflected in IQ differences between Pakistan/India (not that I put too much stock in IQ tests, but what I’m saying is the average Indian doesn’t seem to be significantly smarter than the average Paki). I think Fajita’s explanation holds more merit, and I’m not just sayin’ that cause I’m a dumb Pashtun 😉
I wish I had a good answer to your question but idk….I mean we all know we need people doing menial labor jobs for low wages to keep our country running, but I’m still really surprised at these statistics. I second whomever said they want to see stats for 2nd gen Americans.
Alina, Right, I’m not trying to say Pakistanis are dumb–that’s why I said these are “unpleasant historical facts.” Your IQ point is well-taken. Pakistan seems to do a better job taking care of the poor than India, so India’s equivalence could be a combination of better genes but worse environment. The fleeing point does come up over and over again in the texts but its effect on modern outcomes could be modest–not sure. Heh, and no my family is not from extreme south-eastern India either!
Most Indian Immigration is either family based (in which case, the sponsor has to show proof that they can provide for the immigrant) or employment (which is generally skilled). If anyone is on the dole, it is either an immigrant who’s gotten a greencard (5-10 year process) and then got stuck in the 5-7 year eco-bust cycle thats common these days, or is from the previous wave of Indian immigrants who run cabs, motels and 7-11s, or is faking it.
If India shared a border with the US, things would look a lot different.
Alina, the better point would be, of course, that the immigrants from both Pakistan and India are coming from the right-side of the distribution of IQ. So, what the ‘average’ (mean) is may not matter much. So, yeah, my “brain-drain” point is worth thinking about. Only the more elite elements would have moved–not farmers. It’s not so far-fetched–look at the great boom in American science that followed displacements in Central and Eastern Europe in the 20th Century!
@Appalled – I’m not trying to dismiss your point or say it lacks any merit. I just don’t think the brain drain that occurred as a result of Muslim invaders would have had such a significant impact on the region, unless I’m severely underestimating the number of people who migrated – I’ll google it later cause I’m curious now. But I really do think Fajita’s point about Pakis/Bengali’s being mostly unskilled workers compared to Indian immigrants who are generally more educated would be a better explanation – and I promise I’m not saying that to be PC or something
Also, I think the boom in American science mid-20th century was mostly a result of our Government pumping a shit ton of money into NASA and science research to compete with the Soviets in the cold war….although I imagine the large influx of Jewish/Eastern Euro immigrants had a pretty big impact on our culture too.
Consider the source. You will find that Center for Immigration Studies is closely linked to FAIR and other organizations that have not historically supported the improvement of the immigration system for immigrants’ sake.
I invite you to take a look at this NY Times article from a few weeks ago which details the origin of CIS and other organizations that were formed to limit immigration.
Thanks for the link, Priya. I roamed around CIS for a few minutes after finding the numbers completely unconvincing based on both my knowledge of immigration studies in sociology and refugees to US, and it was pretty clear how “fair and balanced” the site is.
The nytimes article confirms my suspicions. That and the fact that in the “About us” page, every politician listed as praising CIS’s “data” is a republican from an immigration-heavy state.
But, regardless, I am sure Appalled is correct — it’s all the Muslim invaders’ fault. “It” being all of the world’s problems.
Forgot to attach the article: http://nyti.ms/hwF2NN
But I really do think Fajita’s point about Pakis/Bengali’s being mostly unskilled workers compared to Indian immigrants who are generally more educated
Right, but then the question is, why the discrepancy? Why is the Indian quota filled w/ professionals, but the Pakistani quota, while it includes some professionals, leaving room for unskilled? This is where brain-drain comes in. (And, of course, it’s a relative point–my father had surgery done by a Pakistani-American even though he believes in “brain-drain”).
The head guy at CIS has written a book called The New Case Against Immigration. Sounds fair and balanced to me.
I really don’t know, but I would be interested in finding out and I’m curious to read what everyone else will say. Indian immigrants to the US are unusual though in that capacity (being relatively educated and skilled) because for centuries, most immigrants who came to the US have been from low income backgrounds with modest (or no) educational backgrounds – Pakistan and Afghanistan certainly aren’t exceptions. For example, my Grandma came here from Afghanistan decades back, and although she was about middle class in Afghanistan, she was dirt-poor by American means (she eventually went to Nursing school here and worked for years, which wasn’t possible for her in Afghanistan). You have to understand that in countries like Afghanistan, the educational opportunities (especially for women) are nowhere near the level of India’s. From what I have observed personally here in America, I also think Indians place slightly more value on education and finding a prosperous job than Paki or Afghani cultures. Again, this is purely anecdotal.
Alina, That’s a nice point–Pakistan seems to do better by its poor than India, but opportunities for women are better in India, on average. It’s a regular multi-dimensional puzzle–frustratingly, perhaps not enough date points to really disentangle. Nonetheless, certain rules of thumb do seem to emerge, fair or not.
an interesting map which illustrates where muslims drove all the smart people! interesting that those stout punjabis stood their smart ground, but all the geniuses fled the indo-gangetic plain! 🙂
, most immigrants who came to the US have been from low income backgrounds with modest (or no) educational backgrounds –
this is somewhat a myth. first, let’s distinguish settler and immigrant. settler pre-dates 1776. there are several streams of migration here, but here are the big ones:
the puritan migration to new england. mostly from east anglia, with many from london and puritan coastal towns elsewhere. these people created the world’s first universal literacy society. they colonial authorities also prevented the migration of the lower classes, as well as the titled nobility. the former through fiat, the latter through rejection of their demands for transfer of their hereditary privileges over the water.
the middle colonies. all sorts. from wealth quakers like the family of william penn, to poor artisans from the north of england, etc.
the upland south. these were the scotch-irish “crackers.” very poor, semi-literate. enormous numbers which fill the stereotype portrayed in emma lazarus’ poem
the lowland south. mostly the gentry of southwest england, and a host of indentured servants from the same area. so somewhat filling the stereotype, but topped off by the younger sons of the british nobility as their ruling caste
after independence most growth in the early decades was due to endogenous population growth. but then came the catholic irish and germans. these are two very different waves. the catholic irish were fitting lazarus’ stereotype. the germans were more diverse, and many were rather well educated and from bourgeois backgrounds. the protestants quickly integrated into the WASP culture (and allied with new england yankees in anti-slavery sentiments). german america also had their own intellgenesia due to fleeing the 1848 revolutions in europe.
the late 19th century had different streams too. scandinavians arrived sometimes as whole villages, and just recreated their agrarian lifestyle in the upper midwest. jews may have been technically illiterate because of lack of english, but almost all were literate in a european language. they often came with skills too. it is true that the most prosperous european jews tended to stay in europe, but after their liberation in a given european country they tended to become middle class very quick, so the “losers” weren’t that shabby. slavic and southern european immigrants fit the stereotype though.
an interesting map which illustrates where muslims drove all the smart people! interesting that those stout punjabis stood their smart ground, but all the geniuses fled the indo-gangetic plain
To the extent some groups stood their ground, you had less of a brain-drain. The invaders flooded the indo-gangestic plain (taking over Bengal, for example). So the geniuses went to the south. Look at the map again.
I think this whole brain-drain/Muslim invaders theory is connecting dots that can’t be connected.
The assumption that smart people ran away and dumb people stayed around would argue that:
1.) People with higher levels of education and/or resources are inherently and genetically more intelligent. 2.) Poor people are poor because they are stupid (also genetic).
Where did this leap to conclusions come from?
In reality, in situations like this, people who are more economically mobile (either have lots of money/resources or have a job that can easily be moved elsewhere) can more easily pack up and move, whereas people without savings/resources or people who do jobs that are not easy to move (say, moving far away half way through your plant growing season where you just invested all your time energy and money on your crops) end up getting stuck. This doesn’t automatically mean that the people who stayed are less intelligent (assuming that this is even the pattern of who stayed and who left), just that they have less resources/are less mobile.
1.) People with higher levels of education and/or resources are inherently and genetically more intelligent.
Seriously, you deny this? You are a brain-washing victim. Educate yourself!
A “report” from the Center for Immigration Studies? How reliable could that be? But amidst all the junk there is some mirth to be had, like this bland statement, Moreover, those who receive welfare tend to pay little or no income tax. Of course the authors could not have been referring to the taxpayer subsidized banks, the Oil Giants and the likes of GE, the corporate welfare subsidized behemoths that have paid little or no corporation tax this year!
“The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing. “
I think they forgot to include Medicare and Social Security to the list of government aid programs. My, that would futher ballooned the percentages in this obviously unbiased “study.”
As the former employee of a social services provider in the SF Bay Area, these statistics seem pretty accurate. In terms of South Asian clients, most seemed to be Bangladeshi or Pakistani, and the Indians were mostly Muslim. That is not to say that there were no Hindu Indians who required assistance, but they were definitely the minority. Another thing I noticed was the Hindu Indians who required assistance were often educated and many of them had previously held a decent paying job, but were laid off. One gentleman I remember even had his own business, but went bankrupt in the down economy (that was in 2009).
Dismissing other people’s reasoning as “brain washing” doesn’t make you appear particularly educated. There are a myriad of factors behind the amount of educated and resources one receives in a society; economic, sociological, medical, etc – especially since we are referring to history; things were hardly more equal in the past. The amount of education one received had mostly to do with the class the person was born into; e.g if you’re living in medieval India and your parents are farmers, you will likely be trained to be a farmer and continue that profession, whereas if you were wealthy then you would be probably be educated, intelligent or not. Social mobility wasn’t what it is today. Women were often outright denied education (or offered basic education but primarily raised to be good mothers/wives) in many societies all over the world for thousands of years. Equal education across gender and socioeconomic class is a relatively modern idea for many (most?) global cultures. So to say that in the past, Indians who had received better education and had more resources were inherently genetically more intelligent and dismiss any other alternatives as “brain washing” frankly seems ignorant to me. Perhaps you should educate yourself? 😉
Probably because of religion; Islam encourages charity, but some other Islamic beliefs (or at least what extremist fundies in Afghanistan have twisted into “Islamic” beliefs) often discriminate against women.
Find me a human society where IQ is not positively correlated with levels of education/resources. You can’t just conjure arguments out of thin air. Sure, lots of things matter, but this is a solid trans-cultural fact.
You misunderstand my point: I strongly agree that IQ correlates with levels of education/resources, because I believe that IQ is essentially not much more than a reflection of one’s education/resources. Why else do you think that in both India and Pakistan, the average IQ is about 81? If we go by your reasoning, we would conclude that South Asians must be a pretty stupid bunch, their stupidity is reflected in their IQ, and consequently their lack of education/resources are simply a reflection of how stupid they are. But when you delve into all the factors why you could attribute the low IQ to lack of adequate nutrition, education, and medical care. Meaning the lack of education/resources is what contributes to the low IQ, and not necessarily the other way around. Why do you think most psychologists believe IQ exams are valid when given to young children? Because at that stage education/resources has not made as much of a difference (although even so, studies show kids who go to preschool where they’re mentally stimulated more have higher IQ’s on average). Again, not trying to dismiss your Invader-brain-drain theory, I just think Lindsay made some valid points and you dismissed them all as “brain washing” and implied she wasn’t educated.
Also, do you have any idea roughly how many people fled from Northwest India when the invaders came? I’m curious but haven’t been able to find it online.
I definitely agree that the 81 Pak/Indian IQ is depressed by environmental factors. But what basis other than faith do we have for saying either or both will go to 100 in a good environment? There is plenty of evidence that IQ has a genetic/hereditable element.
I don’t have the numbers who fled. You do pick it up in the various chronicles of the time. I’m sure it was a small %, but that doesn’t mean not significant. A lot of the people who lived in Sindh/Punjab before the Islamic invasion were Buddhist–they relocated with some success to places like Nalanda but then got wiped out by later invasions. It is a very sad tale. Of course, whatever the history, people today need to get along, not re-fight the battles of the past. So don’t mistake my points with any hostility towards you (and I don’t think you do, I’m glad you are interested in the topic).
I think what is being completely dismissed here is what is known as the cycle of poverty. Contributing factors to poverty generally have nothing to do with intelligence– but rather a myriad of other factors:
discrimination: many groups are refused access to information and mobility for generations, leaving them no other opportunities except menial jobs at low wages.
lack of food: lack of food doesn’t make you stupid exactly– but I don’t know how any people have tried to study on an empty growling stomach. It’s rather difficult to concentrate. Which leads to the topic of food security– many poor in the world do not have food security– i.e. they do not have the resources to stock up on basic food supplies, so each day that they work they are earning enough money to eat on that day only.
child labor: issues like food security are often reasons that parents send their children to work instead of school– many parents choose between sending a child to school and the whole family going hungry (and possibly not surviving) or sending a child to work and having food for another day. Child labor has also been shown to NOT teach children any skills, the more education a child gets, the higher wages they will be able to earn as an adult. Also, child laborers are more likely to work in unsafe conditions that are dangerous to health, meaning they will probably not be healthy enough to work as adults, and therefore have to send their children to work, continuing the cycle of poverty (Weiner, Burra, Bajpai; 2006).
lack of quality free universal education: without quality free schools, many families who want to send their children to school just cannot afford it, or send them and find out the teachers don’t teach. Therefore they chose to send them to work instead, with at least a small benefit to the family.
lack of health care and health education: sick people can’t work as much. health care and treatment often costs more than the poor can afford– making them live chronically ill and die young. Lack of health education means they don’t have means to plan their families (and probably not the resources to purchase family planning items like birth control) as easily. . It also means they may not have the knowledge to prevent common but problematic illnesses (and also perhaps not the supplies, i.e. water filter, mosquito net)
lack of parental help: U.S. educational studies have shown that child of highly educated parents come into kindergarten with a much larger vocabulary than children from less educated parents. This is just one of the many ways that parent education level can effect a child– In my family my parents read to me, taught me the joy of discovering what is in books, taught me to hold a pencil and draw and write my name, just for starters. Illiterate parents can’t do that. They also can’t help with homework, and are probably unfamiliar with the education system and therefore can’t advocate for their child in times of need like more educated parents. Poor children will start off behind compared to their peers from educated/well-off backgrounds.
In situations where children are given the nutrition, health care and academic support they need, they can do just as well as any other child. In addition to all this academic info, I can share my own anecdotal “evidence”– Just ask Khayrunnesha http://community.liftone.org/_Khayrunnesha-DP-02-4-2011jpg/photo/13665523/121091.html — she started school late because her widowed mother couldn’t afford to send her (her family lives in a mud and brick home in a village outside of Kolkata, are Muslim and earn only about $43 a month), but now she is in 10th grade and excelling– plans on doing her BA and B.ed in the future. This happened because she had a non-profit taking care of her health and basic educational needs, and someone encouraging her and now (since she needs to be competitive for schools) helping provide tuitions and text books and supplies she needs as she advances.
Of course, not every poor child is going to excel in school, but every rich child is not going to either.
“Dismissing other people’s reasoning as “brain washing” doesn’t make you appear particularly educated. There are a myriad of factors behind the amount of educated and resources one receives in a society; economic, sociological, medical, etc – especially since we are referring to history; things were hardly more equal in the past. The amount of education one received had mostly to do with the class the person was born into; e.g if you’re living in medieval India and your parents are farmers, you will likely be trained to be a farmer and continue that profession, whereas if you were wealthy then you would be probably be educated, intelligent or not………..Equal education across gender and socioeconomic class is a relatively modern idea for many (most?) global cultures. So to say that in the past, Indians who had received better education and had more resources were inherently genetically more intelligent and dismiss any other alternatives as “brain washing” frankly seems ignorant to me. Perhaps you should educate yourself? ;)”
Well said Alina.
Appalled sounds like those Tamil Brahmins who have somehow convinced themselves that they are the most superior intellects in all of south asia, being descended from the small fraction of north Indian brahmins who were “intelligent” enough to escape the Muslim invaders by migrating to south India.
Unfortunately for his self-delusions the northwest corner of India still looks better off than the South even after the very recent IT growth in the latter. Punjabis have produced more than their share of Nobel laureates, billionaires, poets, intellectuals etc.
LOL at introducing caste into this discussion. The organization of the Sikhs helped preserver some intelligence in the north-west in spite of the invasions, yes. Many other ‘brights’ fled south. This is not a caste thing, but a reason why Pakistan today cannot fill its immigration quotas with professionals, and has to send taxi-drivers.
“I think what is being completely dismissed here is what is known as the cycle of poverty. Contributing factors to poverty generally have nothing to do with intelligence– but rather a myriad of other factors:
discrimination: many groups are refused access to information and mobility for generations, leaving them no other opportunities except menial jobs at low wages.”
This is especially the case in the Hindu casteist society. Which is why it is so obscene to see caste obsessed elitists act all pretentious, as if it is genes rather than an unfair screwed up socio-economic system that explains their status in such a culture. A circular self-serving argument.
There are dalits, liberated from the oppressive Hindu system, who are today working as neurosurgeons, scientists, intellectuals etc today. Meanwhile the majority of Brahmins are living in grinding poverty working as domestic servants, janitors etc.
SS=Prema=I can’t say it becoz the mods would delete this comment.
It’s v.interesting how the most successful former scheduled caste folks have been invariably the ones who broke away from Ambedkar. Notable examples include athletes like Baloo Palwankar and his brother both of whom worked for the Congress, or Babu Jagjivan Ram who never collaborated with Ambedkar – his daughter Ms. Meira Kumar is today the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. Since the majority of the Brahmans are living in grinding poverty especially in a state like UP, politicians like Nitish Kumar and Mayavati have reached out to them and given them a say in the government. Everyone should prosper. Nothing makes me happier than to see candidates from the scheduled castes prosper within a generation. This shows that neither does ancestry matter in India nor is there any institutionalised discrimination. In other words try as Prema might, she can’t churn out anything that rises above the nonsensical. True to form. Yaaaaawn!!!
“Since the majority of the Brahmans are living in grinding poverty especially in a state like UP”
UP which is by far the most populous indian state also has by far the most Brahmins proportionally, something like 12% of it’s population. But it is not just the majority of UP Brahmins who are not educated enough or “intelligent” enough to succeed in the current economic climate. In Karnataka in south India according to a report the Christians enjoy a per capita income that is multiple times that of Brahmins whose most common profession is domestic servant/cook. Nice reward for being descended from the genetic geniuses who escaped the Muslim invasion of north India. 🙂
Who is to say that these Christians’ ancestors didn’t also escape? You are confusing the issue by introducing caste.
“Why is the Indian quota filled w/ professionals”
It is kind of ridiculous to see Indians endlessly boasting about this brain drain that comes at the expense of a desperately poor and backward India that needs the services of these professionals far far more than America.
Is this really something to be so proud about?
” Appalled | April 26, 2011 12:19 AM | Who is to say that these Christians’ ancestors didn’t also escape? You are confusing the issue by introducing caste.”
Where is your evidence that Christians in Karnataka are descended from escapees from north India?
Explain why they have much higher per capita incomes than the Brahmins? Is it because they are genetically superior?
In terms of South Asian clients, most seemed to be Bangladeshi or Pakistani, and the Indians were mostly Muslim.
Looks like the result of institutionalized discrimination against Muslims both here and in their native countries.
Looks like the result of institutionalized discrimination against Muslims both here and in their native countries.
I assume you’re being sarcastic! Well-done! If not, yes, Muslims do poorly as minorities and as controlling majorities because they are always victims, not because they are backwards in terms of dealing with the modern world!
You know, I actually respected your contributions and was interested in learning more about what you had to say before you resorted to comments about Paki cab drivers and Muslims being backwards and incapable of dealing with the modern world…
I mean I could literally write an entire article crammed with petty negative stereotypes about South Indians that Pakis/North Indians harbor, but I have a lot more respect for the readers and contributors of this blog than that. So no hostility meant, but please don’t address me in future.
Come on now guys, settle down there. I’ve liked reading all of the comments so far until Appalled decided to go muslim-bashing. Your credibility just plummets when you can actually believe that belonging to a given religion is enough to make an individual incapable of dealing with the modern world. For your information I’ve found that many upper middle class professional type(doctors,engineers, professors) Pakistanis/Bangladeshis are often more devoutly religious than your Paki/Bangladeshi cab drivers. Now,how does that jive with what you were saying? That being said I have been intrigued by the rest of what Appalled has been saying on this thread so far. Please do elaborate some more on your thoughts.
I’ve also wondered why it is that Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are really the ones driving the taxis or working as menial laborers in restaurants,etc(though the latter is much less common since less lucrative). There are large numbers of professionals in these communities too but Indian immigrants are nearly always upper middle class. The least well off Indians still earn an above average salary and work their way up over the years owning businesses,etc. To be fair in the general American context being a taxi driver or owning a gas station is still a solidly middle class position(especially since most of these guys are cheating on taxes) but compared to the average Indian American it is a significant step downward. If we extend our view to the American context as a whole the fact that all South Asians(including taxi drivers, cell phone store owners,etc.) rarely have divorce and form two parent stable families is enough to qualify them for the middle class. Still though why is it that we don’t see parallel communities of Indians of a similar socioeconomic stratum as Bangladeshis/Pakistanis? The only Indians I’ve seen driving taxis are Sikhs and even then only a few(They also seem to be the ones owning gas stations).
Referring to Kerala, the literature I’ve read posits that most Syrian Christians are Nambudri Brahmin converts.
Malik: The only Indians I’ve seen driving taxis are Sikhs and even then only a few(They also seem to be the ones owning gas stations). Referring to Kerala, the literature I’ve read posits that most Syrian Christians are Nambudri Brahmin converts.”
I know of many Indian-owned entities that give you gas, such as Desi Dhaba and Rani’s and even Punjab Palace all here in Boston.
There were no Nambudiri Brahmins in S. India in those days. Syrian Christians were originally Indian Jews, or so they claim. It’d be interesting to conduct a genetic study on them.
Moreover, there was no Malayalam language at that point. They were speaking a dialect of Tamil. Eventually their dialect gave rise to Malayalam around 9th C.AD – 14th C.AD.
Well, Prema, you’ve been writing in the same vein for a few years now. Do write more about yourself, and where you’re coming from. What demographic group do you belong to? Why are your grievances not yet solved?
Sure, if they work for free. But the reason talented people leave India is because India doesn’t allow them to fully realize their potential. They wouldn’t BE as good as they are if they were still there. It’s not their fault that India’s sclerotic bureaucracy is designed to frustrate and stymie attempts to improve the lot of its poor.
“Muslims do poorly as minorities and as controlling majorities because they are always victims”
The level of stupidity and ignorance here is beyond ridiculous. You are too deluded to even realize how stupid a Hindu looks mocking Muslim socio-economic status. Most Muslim nations are far better off than India. Hindus as a group are by far the worst off people on the planet by most objective measures.
Gets popcorn
Begun, this flame war has.
The funniest part is that the same arguments that Hindu Desi’s and Muslim Desi’s launch against one another in a desperate bid to prove who is superior are the same arguments that you’ll hear White supremacists all over the world use to “prove” why they think South Asians in general are “inferior”…
Passes samosas and chutney
That is a difficult argument to make. I’m not saying you are flat out wrong, but it is pretty close. The populations of the Muslim majority nations that are poorer than India (in terms of per capita GDP-PPP) is more than 650,000,000. Then throw in India’s 160 million plus Muslims who are mostly poorer than their Hindu counterparts (if there was a Hindu per capita GDP-PPP it would be higher than the national number). Plus, consider that in most developed nations with Hindus and Muslims like the US, Canada and UK, Hindus are better off. The same is true for many developing nations like Kenya, South Africa, Mauritius, and Trinidad and Tobago.
SS said: “Where is your evidence that Christians in Karnataka are descended from escapees from north India?”
I don’t know if you are baiting people here, but reading about Goud or Chitrapur Saraswat Brahmins and Roman Catholic Brahmins might clear some doubts. Many Goan/Mangalorean Catholics do have roots from Brahmins whose recent ancestry (~500 yrs) is Goan, but carry the oral history of migrating from Punjab/Kashmir during Muslim invasions.
Anecdotal evidence: when I worked in Bangalore, I had a colleague at work who was Catholic, but whose family tree had been traced back from Gujarat –> Goa –> Mangalore, with her ancestor’s conversion happening in the 16th century in Mangalore. Also look up author Richard Crasta/Avatar Prabhu — I don’t remember whether it was a book or an article he wrote, but he did some research into his family’s oral history of conversion from Hinduism.
None of my statements are meant to cast any kind of light on supposed superiority of genes, or who wronged who, and what not. History is what it is, at least read up on it before making trollish statements.
“I don’t know if you are baiting people here, but reading about Goud or Chitrapur Saraswat Brahmins and Roman Catholic Brahmins might clear some doubts. Many Goan/Mangalorean Catholics do have roots from Brahmins “
This is like talking to irrational illiterates. How “many” of the over 2 million christians of Karnataka are converted brahmins? Your “anecdotal evidence” doesn’t mean much at all.
Why did the christians and Muslims of Karnataka have higher per capita incomes than the brahmins who are being touted as genetic elites for escaping the Muslim invasion of northern India?
“The populations of the Muslim majority nations that are poorer than India (in terms of per capita GDP-PPP) is more than 650,000,000. Then throw in India’s 160 million plus Muslims who are mostly poorer than their Hindu counterparts”
Where did you pull these numbers out of? Here is a list of nations by per capita income. India is ranked #129; Nepal is ranked #161. Practically the entire heartland of Islam, the middle-east and north africa region, is ranked well above India. As is Indonesia the most populous muslim nation. There are 17 muslim nations in the top 100, 8 in the top 50, 4 in the top 20, 3 in the top 10, and the #1 ranked nation is muslim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
When you look at the poorest of the poor, the hungriest and most hapless people, hindus dominate both proportionally and in absolute terms.
Here is the list of nations ranked by Human Development Index. India is ranked at #119, below Equatorial Guinea. Nepal at #138, below Papua New Guinea. There are 4 muslim nations ranked among the developed nations with Very High HDI. There are 13 muslim nations ranked among those with High HDI. There are 9 more muslim nations ranked above India making it a total of 26 muslim nations ranked above India.
Within America, the President Barack Hussein Obama, had a muslim Kenyan father, and the most iconic entrepreneur/technologist, Steve Jobs, had a muslim arab biological father. And America has for long been allied with muslim nations like Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan, to the detriment of India. So all this ridiculous boastfulness that indians have become notorious for only serves to make you look stupid and delusional.
Yes, there are Muslim countries richer than India no doubt, but there are not many people living in those countries. The 650 million comes from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Niger, Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Mali, Yemen, and the list goes on. Many of these countries have a GDP per capita FAR lower than India, especially the African ones. Although the “Muslim heartland” is relatively well off, that is not where the majority of Muslims live.
By richer I meant in terms of GDP-PPP per capita.
the reason talented people leave India is because India doesn’t allow them to fully realize their potential. They wouldn’t BE as good as they are if they were still there. It’s not their fault that India’s sclerotic bureaucracy is designed to frustrate and stymie attempts to improve the lot of its poor.”
And who do you blame for this cluelessness, corruption and callousness? The British? The Muslims? The Dalits?
The loathsome Indian bureaucracy has been dominated by brahmins since independence, hasn’t it?
There’s a reason why it is tagged anecdotal evidence, and not Spamnun’s Nobel-worthy Research into the Brahminical Descent of Karnataka’s Christians.
“How “many” of the over 2 million christians of Karnataka are converted brahmins?” Unless there is some extensive DNA analysis, comparing GSBs to RC bammans (maybe it’s a project for Razib), we’ll never know one way or another (which is another way of saying you can’t make any tall claims either). Also I’m talking about descendants, not new Brahmin converts among the current Christian population of Karnataka. St. Thomas’ initial Christian converts included 8 namboodiris. Who knows how many of Kerala’s Christians are their direct descendants?
For now, I’m done. Yoga Fire, please to pass some popcorn on the left hand side.
I would like to see another statistic-the percentage of Indians who leave money on the table. A lot of Indian workers come to united states on work visas such as H1-B. These workers pay social security taxes just like any other workers. But a lot of these guys end up going back after working here for a few years dude to visa retrogression and other reasons. But they don’t end up seeing a single dime of that social security pot into which they put money for a long period of time (sometimes a decade or so!). I think these workers more than compensate for the senior benefits some people avail.
I find it surprising to see that we are dissing our immigrants even when they are among the most self reliant demographics. I guess some people can never be pleased.
And dont be too ashamed of tax evaders. Those guys got nothing on the corporations (hint GE)
I too am confused as to where the 650,000,000 number comes from. However, I don’t think it’s that far-fetched. SS, your list is obfuscating the issue because it is based on per capita income. All of the Muslim countries dominating in per capita income have very low populations and their economies are heavily dependent on oil. Hence they are not considered to be developed despite their high standard of living. In absolute terms taking all of the majority Muslim African countries, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the 160 million strong Muslim population of India itself, there are quite a lot of Muslims who are poorer than the Hindu population of India. On a global scale India’s vast population of 1.2 billion is as large as the population of all of Southeast Asia(including Muslim Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei), the Middle East(expanded definition including countries like Somalia, Mauritania, Turkey and Iran in addition to the Arab world) and Central Asia(all the -stans) combined!
A correction I would like to make is that many of the Pakistani/Bangladeshi taxi drivers are not filling an immigration quota but are illegal immigrants who have overstayed their visas and these are the only occupations they can secure. Even so I’ve always wondered why we don’t see the Indians who fit this profile also immigrating illegally to the West but only Paks/Bangladeshis. What keeps them home in India?
“A correction I would like to make is that many of the Pakistani/Bangladeshi taxi drivers are not filling an immigration quota but are illegal immigrants who have overstayed their visas and these are the only occupations they can secure. Even so I’ve always wondered why we don’t see the Indians who fit this profile also immigrating illegally to the West but only Paks/Bangladeshis. What keeps them home in India?”
I have always found that to be a strength that Pakistanis want to constantly migrate; its why we have a great Diaspora. If anything I think migration is a good thing, in search of better opportunities whereever possible.
Actually, there are far more Indian illegal immigrants in the USA than Paks/Bengladeshis. According to Wikipedia, Indians made up the 6th largest group of illegal immigrants to the US in 2009 (most illegals are from Hispanic countries): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States I imagine it’s because India’s population is so massive compared to its neighbors.
I don’t see anyone dissing Indian immigrants here; most of us are the children or grandchildren of immigrants, or immigrants ourselves. Most of the derogatory comments have been directed towards Paks and Muslims in general.
i cant believe a hardcore racist anti-immigrant groups like cis’ study is being debated here..
“Yes, there are Muslim countries richer than India no doubt, but there are not many people living in those countries. The 650 million comes from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Niger, Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Mali, Yemen, and the list goes on. Many of these countries have a GDP per capita FAR lower than India, especially the African ones. Although the “Muslim heartland” is relatively well off, that is not where the majority of Muslims live.”
The usual ignorance:
Indonesia has over 230 million citizens, it is the 4th most populated nation in the world. Egypt has over 80 million. Iran and Turkey ~ 75 million each. Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia combined are almost 80 million more. The total population of the middle east and north Africa region is well over 500 million. Then there is Indonesia, Malaysia, Albania, Bosnia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan. The large Muslim minority in Russia. The millions of Muslims in China. Unlike half the Hindu children these people are not starving.
Half of Nigeria and 30% of Sudan is non-Muslim.
The combined GDP of just 3 Muslim nations: Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia is larger than that of India which has more than 6 times their total population.
SS, I don’t know what you are rambling about. I didn’t deny they were Muslim countries richer than India. I did say that most Muslims do not live in what you described as the “Muslim heartland” where the most wealthy Muslim nations are. Anyway, there is no point in having a conversation with you, but over time things will become more clear as India continues to grow, Muslims continue to kill themselves in civil wars, the world starts using things other than oil for energy, and the only educated and secular Muslims that emerge come from the Hindu/Indian system which you so despise. Good luck to you.
“the castes that converted to islam were not the higher IQ castes.”
India’s top rocket scientist Abul Kalam is Muslim. Of the 5 desis to win Nobel Prizes in the sciences one was a Muslim. For much of the time since independence Pakistan had a higher per capita income than India. Even today India looks more shockingly impoverished than Pakistan, with rampant starvation, beggary, homelessness, open filth, people defecating everywhere and so on.
If caste is correlated to IQ why is the highest Hindu caste the brahmins working so often as domestic servants and other low IQ jobs? Why are the states with the highest concentration of Brahmins the most backward and impoverished? Why are institutions dominated by brahmins such as the universally reviled Indian bureaucracy so corrupt and incompetent?
“Muslims, including desi Muslims are essentially absent in stuff like Intel Science Talent, Math Counts, Math Olympiad, National Merit Semifinalists, Spelling bee.”
The usual ignorant BS. In international academic competitions muslims tend to outperform hindus. For example the International math Olympiad, which is usually dominated by China, was won by the Islamic Republic of Iran once. By hindu majority India, never. Here is the official list of cumulative gold medals in the Math Olympiad won by each participating nation:
China: 113 Vietnam: 45 Iran: 31 Turkey: 11 Kazakhstan: 11 India; 8
Maybe you should double check your own IQ? For it is certainly not the mark of intelligence to get all arrogant and boastful when the reality warrants humility and shame.