Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Immigrants Vary by Nationality When It Comes to Assimilation

A study by the Manhattan Institute reveals immigrants vary by nationality when it comes to assimilation.

Practically American Canadians, pro-democracy Cubans, and Filipinos with some historical ties to the United States lead the way in the race towards the giant melting pot. These groups vary among native language but all ethnicities are known for a hard work ethic and popular strains in support for democracy.

The two main groups of immigrants not assimilating are Indians and Mexicans. The reasons for this are varied. Many Indians come here thinking they will only stay a short time, some resist because of their old age, while others have a similar to Western life style already. Mexicans resist because of geography and demographics. Mexico is so close and the Mexican community in America is so large that the need to assimilate is much lower.

The good news is that the various communities are still becoming Americans. Diversity is a strength but unity is a must. As the motto on the Great Seal of the United States goes E pluribus unum!


charlie said...

I love reading this crap on the same day I had to field eight calls from national news organization on rumors about Bobby Jindal (an Indian American) becoming the republican VP pick.

I'll go on a limb and say the author made the classic mistake of including H1b workers in the Indian pool. H1B is a NON-IMMIGRANT visa. Some end up getting an immigrant visa, and many don't. Including them in the "immigration" pool changes things dramatically.

He also finds Indians lacking in the "cultural" aspect which I find suspect. Cultural measures are english usage, intermarriage, # of children and martial status.

English language usage among Indians in the US is over 90%. What he is really tracking is that Indian men tend marry Indian women. That is as much for religious reasons as cultural, but what he is missing is the 30-40% interracial marriage rates among Indians born in the US.

Catholicgauze said...

I did not include H1B aliens. As for Indian culture, it has some similarities but there is much more to culture than language (Kenya speaks English but that does not mean it has a similar culture). Clusterization, ties back to the old country, and much more play a role.

Eight calls, eh? You must be a very popular person. Did any of these national news organizations quote you?

charlie said...

read the report -- it uses the ACS numbers, which do include the h1b populations. It really changes the figures -- for one, 75% of the H1b workers are single and male. RE: culture -- I was using it in the sense of how the report defined it. Clearly anyone who's been to Calle Ocho would realize that Cuban Americans are not the most "integrated" into the US.

I could make some noise about the split in the Indian community about the rich and poor -- but the h1b workers are doing OK. Bigger problem is the split between Indians from India and Indians from the Caribbean; again ACS doesn't really track that.

And no, Bobbytalk was all on background. Bobby is clearly pushing hard on this but McCain should be wiser than to pick a guy who does his own exorcisms.

Ali said...

As the richest minority in the country we Indians don't need to integrate. We're doing just fine doing what we're doing right now.

Catholicgauze said...

You have a point Ali

charlie said...

Ali, Indians are far from the "richest" ethnic group in the country.

On census data, they do score very high on household income. I think that of all the racial subground (white, black, hispanic, 10 different types of asian, hispanic origin) they are the highest.

But that is measuring HOUSEHOLD income. It largely reflects that other demographic curves -- that you are dealing with a middle-aged community that is married with extremely high female work rates.

It doesn't measure WEALTH, in terms of assets. Indians are behind the curve on that, even with the un-granluar census data.

And you are comparing apples and oranges with census data. Indians vs. whites. 1.5 milion vs. 200 million. When you break whites into subgrounds, Indians quickly fall behind in household income -- and that is still factoring in more married families in the household parts (ndians don't divorce as much)

When you compare it that way, you find Indians are only slightly better off than Methodists. Episcopalians and Jews are far far higher. And in terms of wealth (which the census doesn't measure ) again there is no comparison.

End result: Indian American are just averaging as members of the middle class. There are a few pockets of high INCOME people, but still not many indicators of wealth. Anecdotal evidence has it there are 250K indian american millionaires, but I think that number is too high -- basically it would represent head of household of every Indian family.

Anonymous said...

Being an Indian, I know first hand the progress we have made in this country. I have read different articles regarding the economic status of Indians. They are up there as a minority when you look at races. They make more money than whites, Blacks,......etc. They might be more rich than Jews or they might not. I have seen numbers supporting both sides. The point is, there are a plethora of reasons for Indians being so high on the income bracket.

Ali, We do need to integrate with other communities. Yes we are doing fine financially, there is no doubt about that. But I also know many Indians who are very prejudice towards other people and their own kind. Integrating is not only about economics but is also about various cultures, accepting different people, tolerating others, etc.

As per my knowledge, I am ashamed of many Indians who are simply ignorant towards other races, castes, religions, etc. If we integrate, we have much to gain by associating and learning with different people. Integration should be part of everyone no matter whether you make 10K or 200K. It only makes a person better. So, yeah, Integrate damn it! :-)

Anonymous said...

Hi Ali. That's a very arrogant comment.