It’s Important To Invest In The Coming Latino Majority

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

The Los Angeles Daily News reports Mar. 31, 2015:

While their growth has slowed in recent decades, Latinos will likely be the majority in Los Angeles County by 2020, experts say.

And since 2001, more than 60 percent of babies born in L.A. County have been Latino compared with more than 50 percent in the state. This generation is the future of California and thus it’s important to invest in it, said David Hayes-Bautista, professor of medicine and director of the Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture at UCLA’s School of Medicine.

“Their educational levels and their employment opportunities set the economic tone for this region,” Hayes-Bautista said. “If they do well, we all do well. If they do poorly, we all do poorly.”

And the disparities are clear. Nearly 11 percent of Latino adults in California ages 25 or older have earned at least a bachelor’s degree compared with 30 percent of all Californians, 39 percent of whites, 23 percent of African-Americans and about 48 percent of Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, according to 2011 U.S. Census Bureau data.

The Latino post-millennial demographic, which will soon be of voting age, has also been offended by anti-Latino and anti-immigrant sentiments espoused by some political groups and would likely express their opinions at the ballot box, Hayes-Bautista said.

Steve Sailer writes in 2005:

Everyone across the political spectrum admits that the white-black test score gap is a major social problem, but nobody is thinking about the white-Hispanic test score gap, even though we have much more influence through immigration policy over whether Hispanics will be a large or huge proportion of the American population in the future. Fortunately, the facts are available, but they take a lot of digging to uncover.

Here’s the best estimate I’ve yet seen: A 2001 meta-analysis of 39 studies covering a total 5,696,519 individuals in America (aged 14 and above) came up with an overall difference of 0.72 standard deviations in g (the “general factor” in cognitive ability) between “Anglo” whites and Hispanics. The 95% confidence range of the studies ran from .60 to .88 standard deviations, so there’s not a huge amount of disagreement among the studies.

One standard deviation equals 15 IQ points, so that’s a gap of 10.8 IQ points, or an IQ of 89 on the Lynn-Vanhanen scale where white Americans equal 100. That would imply the average Hispanic would fall at the 24th percentile of the white IQ distribution. This inequality gets worse at higher IQs Assuming a normal distribution, 4.8% of whites would fall above 125 IQ versus only 0.9% of Hispanics, which explains why Hispanics are given ethnic preferences in prestige college admissions.

In contrast, 105 studies of 6,246,729 individuals found an overall white-black gap of 1.10 standard deviations, or 16.5 points. (I typically round this down to 1.0 standard deviation and 15 points). So, the white-Hispanic gap appears to be about 65% as large as the notoriously depressing white-black gap. (Warning: this 65% number does not come from a perfect apples to apples comparison because more studies are used in calculating the white-black difference than the white-Hispanic difference.)

Source: Roth, P. L., Bevier, C. A., Bobko, P., Switzer III, F. S. & Tyler, P. (2001) “ Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: a meta-analysis.” Personnel Psychology 54, 297–330.

This fits well with lots of other data. For example, Hispanics generally do almost as badly on the National Assessment of Educational Progress school achievement tests as blacks, but that average is dragged down by immigrant kids who have problems adjusting to English. The last time the NAEP asked about where the child was born was 1992, and Dr. Stefan Thernstrom of Harvard kindly provided me with the data from that examination. For foreign-born Hispanics, the typical gap versus non-Hispanic whites was 1.14 times as large as the black-white gap. But for American-born Hispanics, the gap between non-Hispanic whites and American-born Hispanics was 0.67 times as large as the gap between non-Hispanic whites and blacks, very similar to the 0.65 difference seen in the meta-analysis of IQs.

Steve Sailer writes in 2013: From the New York Times:

Paper on Immigrant I.Q. Dogs Critic of Overhaul

Brendan Hoffman for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The revelation that a co-author of a Heritage Foundation study critical of the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal had recently argued that Hispanic immigrants are less intelligent than white Americans touched off a furor on Wednesday, undercutting the conservative foundation’s attempt to become a major force in the immigration debate.

In a 2009 dissertation for a public-policy doctorate at Harvard University, Jason Richwine, the co-author, wrote that Hispanic immigrants generally had an I.Q. that was “substantially lower than that of the white native population” — and that the lower intelligence of immigrants should be considered when drafting immigration policy. 

“Immigrants living in the U.S. today do not have the same level of cognitive ability as natives,” wrote Dr. Richwine, who is a senior policy analyst at Heritage. “No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach I.Q. parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-I.Q. children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against.” …

In response, the New York Times counter-argued: “… [cough] … [cricket chirp].” Oh, well, I guess it is difficult to argue against. But it’s easy to point-and-sputter:

“Whether you agree or disagree with the Heritage study, what their co-author believes is downright insulting and shameful,” said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a group that has mobilized support for the bill. “Heritage has really become an outlier. The rest of the country is having a 21st-century conversation about immigration reform, and Heritage is caught in 1800. I really think their entire credibility is in question.”

The disclosure of the dissertation written by Dr. Richwine, who could not be reached for comment, threatened to undermine Heritage’s push for influence even as the foundation distanced itself from Dr. Richwine’s outside writing.

You can read Dr. Richwine’s Harvard Ph.D. dissertation, IQ and Immigration Policy, for yourself.
The three Harvard scholars who signed off on it are:

– George Borjas is the leading immigration economist. His Harvard Kennedy school bio reads:

George J. Borjas is the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy. He received his PhD in economics from Columbia. His teaching and research interests focus on the impact of government regulations on labor markets, with an emphasis on the economic impact of immigration. He is the author of Wage Policy in the Federal Bureaucracy; Friends or Strangers: The Impact of Immigrants on the U.S. Economy; Heaven’s Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy; and the textbook Labor Economics. He also edited Immigration and the Work Force; Issues in the Economics of Immigration; and Poverty, International Migration and Asylum. 

– Richard J. Zeckhauser, whose Kennedy School of Government bio reads:

Richard Zeckhauser is the Frank P. Ramsey Professor of Political Economy. Much of his conceptual research examines possibilities for democratic, decentralized allocation procedures. … He has been elected as a fellow of the Econometric Society and the American Academy of Sciences and as a member of the Institute of Medicine (National Academy of Sciences). … He serves as a Trustee for The Commonwealth School and as a member of NBER, the Russell Sage Roundtable in Behavioral Economics, the Academic Advisory Committee, American Enterprise Institute, and the OECD High Level Advisory Board on Large-Scale Catastrophes. …  He holds a BA (summa cum laude) and a PhD in economics from Harvard University.

– Christopher Jencks, who has been perhaps the leading left-of-center social scientist of his era. My first published work was a letter-to-the-editor that appeared in National Review over 40 years ago making a joke about Jencks’ meta-analysis of the Coleman Report, his 1972 book Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America. Jencks characterized himself in that books as a “socialist.” Jencks has contributed two dozen pieces to the New York Review of Books since 1964. Jencks’ book The Black-White Test Score Gap was the most scholarly left-of-center response to The Bell Curve.

In other words, these three guys are social science heavyweights. Jencks, for example, knows vastly more about IQ than everybody screaming at Richwine put together.

This is an example of how the Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill is a trap for all but the most politically correct, for anybody with a sense of realism. When Dave Leonhardt of the New York Times, who is really a pretty good guy (he publicized the Hoxby-Avery study, for example), writes about “Hispanics, the New Italians,” he’s probably not being intentionally disingenuous, he’s just being East Coast ignorant. From his bio:

Mr. Leonhardt studied applied mathematics at Yale.  He is a third-generation native of New York.

What does a third-generation native of New York who studied applied math at Yale know from Mexican-Americans? Nothing.

On the other hand, if you are from L.A., like me, it’s hard not to notice that there is, on average, an IQ gap and that it doesn’t go away, and that has all sorts of implications for education, real estate, immigration, mortgages, and so forth and so on.

One of the goals the Democrats have in inviting in more illegal immigrants by amnestying the ones already here is to rub the noses of more white people in the facts of diversity, so that they have to choose between being Evil or being Complicit.

And nobody hates us Evil folks like the Complicit.

For data from Generations of Exclusion on Hispanic educational attainment through five generations of assimilation within families, click here.

For data from Roth et al on test score gaps between whites and Hispanics, click here.

Posted in IQ, Latino, Los Angeles, Mexicans | Comments Off on It’s Important To Invest In The Coming Latino Majority

Caring About White People Is Apparently A Bad Thing

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Mike Fleming writes for Deadline.com: “Deadline ran an article last week that generated controversy and hurt feelings. An unfortunate headline–Pilots 2015: The Year of Ethnic Castings – About Time or Too Much of Good Thing?—created a context from which no article could recover. My co-editor-in-chief Nellie Andreeva’s goal was to convey that there was such an uptick of TV pilot casting of people of color that it pinched white actors who’ve historically gotten most of the jobs, and to question if this could last if it was being treated as a fad. All this was undermined by that headline (which we changed after the fact) and a repetition of the word “ethnic” that came off cold and insensitive.”

Posted in Whites | Comments Off on Caring About White People Is Apparently A Bad Thing

Hawthorne Mayor Chris Brown faces second eviction for not paying rent

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

AR-150329399

What kind of guy refuses to pay the rent? That’s unfathomable to my way of thinking.

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on Hawthorne Mayor Chris Brown faces second eviction for not paying rent

Apple Bashes Indiana – But Promotes Business in Countries That Execute Gays

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Gateway Pundit: Cook may believe Indiana’s new law is very dangerous towards gays…
But it’s not as dangerous as the several countries Apple does business with where they execute gays.

Four of the ten countries where they kill gays are on this Apple list:
– Uganda
– Nigeria
– Qatar
– Saudi Arabia

If Tim Cook really wanted to help gays, he might want to focus on the Apple customers who execute them.

Posted in Apple, Homosexuality | Comments Off on Apple Bashes Indiana – But Promotes Business in Countries That Execute Gays

Is Iran Mankind’s Enemy?

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes: Iran today is America’s greatest enemy, Israel’s greatest enemy, the Jewish people’s greatest enemy and the greatest enemy of moral civilization.
There is, apparently, no evil that the Iranian Islamic regime will not engage in to further its ends.
It is one of the only countries in the world that supports North Korea, the most monstrous regime (in terms of how it mistreats its own citizens). North Korea is effectively the world’s largest prison, run by a sick and diabolic cult for whom the starvation of its own citizens is as little concern as it was to Mao Zedong, who inflicted death by starvation on upward of 60 million Chinese, selling the food they produced to the Soviets for industrial and military goods.
Most of the world has ostracized North Korea, but not Iran, which has signed military agreements with the North Korean regime. It is one of the ways (we do not know all of them) by which Iran can circumvent any agreements it signs with the West in order to avoid sanctions.
As the Christian Science Monitor reported on Sept. 20, 2012:
“North Korea and Iran appear to be increasing their dealings in nuclear technology and missiles with each other under a breakthrough agreement reached between the two nations in Tehran three weeks ago. ‘It’s likely the tempo of shipments of technology to Iran has increased,’ says Bruce Bechtol, a former United States intelligence official and author of two books and other studies on North Korea’s military buildup. ‘We have seen a large number of North Korean scientists visiting Iran.’
“At the heart of this catchall listing, in the view of analysts here, lies a commitment for North Korea to step up shipments of missiles and other arms to Iran, along with technology.
“North Korean scientists were providing the technology and Iran the cash for building the nuclear reactor in Syria that Israeli planes bombed in September 2007.
“ ‘North Korea is the seller, not the buyer,’ he [Bechtol] says, and in that role ‘continues to assist Iran in its highly enriched uranium program by providing scientists, centrifuge technology, and even raw materials.’ North Korea, he notes, is rich in raw uranium and other natural resources.”
It gets worse:
As reported by the Jerusalem Post this week:
“A senior German defense figure said in a report this week that Iran may be significantly further ahead in its nuclear weapons program than public intelligence assessments have so far suggested. Hans Ruhle, who directed the planning department of the German Defense Ministry from 1982 to 1988, argued that Iran may have been involved in the detonation of an experimental uranium nuclear bomb in North Korea in 2010.”
Iran’s intimate relations with North Korea reveal two things about Iran. One is that it is hell bent on producing nuclear weapons. The other is that it has no compunctions about supporting a sociopathic dictatorship that enslaves all its people and tortures and kills many of them. In other words, Iran is led by vile men who seek nuclear weapons above all else.
That President Barack Obama and the Europeans think they can negotiate a deal with Iran that would halt that country’s movement toward nuclear weapons is breathtaking in its naivete and self-deceit.

Posted in Dennis Prager, Iran | Comments Off on Is Iran Mankind’s Enemy?

Dennis Prager Loses Hope For Peace With The Palestinians

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes: …Palestinian men reflected two characteristics of the Arab world and parts of the larger Muslim world: one is the lack of acknowledgement that Muslims are committing atrocities; the other is the prevalence of conspiratorial theories to explain many major events. Not only is Islamic State an Israeli and American operation, so was Sept. 11. Likewise, AIDS in Egypt is popularly blamed on Israeli prostitutes. And almost all Egyptians, including the Egyptian government, deny despite overwhelming evidence from the cockpit voice recorder that the Egyptian co-pilot deliberately crashed Egypt Air Flight 990 into the ocean in 1999. Egyptians blame it on Boeing.
My respondents live in the conspiratorial fantasy world that exists in much of the Arab world. Peace simply cannot be made with people who deny reality. Just as World War II was rendered inevitable because of the fantasy world that Germans lived in after their defeat in World War I.
To the question of whether peace is possible, all three said it is — provided Jews, Christians and Palestinians live together . . . under Muslim rule. One of them described such a society; it was exactly as outlined in the Quran and medieval Muslim theology. Muslims and Christians would be allowed have their own communities and pay the jizya. He actually used the word jizya, which refers to the tax that the Quran demands dhimmi (Jews and Christians) pay.
As is written in the Quran (9.29): “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture — [fight] until they give the jizya willingly while they are humbled.”
Another one of the men spoke eloquently about all people getting along irrespective of religious identity, and no one imposing their specific religious practices on anyone else. And then he added that, after all, “You are a Muslim; everyone who submits to God is a Muslim.”
When added to everything else the three Palestinians told me, and to what the chief spokesman for the Palestinian Authority told me three years ago in Ramallah — that there is no such thing as the Jewish people, only the Jewish religion — it is close to impossible to imagine Palestinians accepting a Jewish state.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Dennis Prager Loses Hope For Peace With The Palestinians

Still Keen On President Obama?

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes: 1. President Obama refuses to identify the greatest world evil since Nazism and communism. We all know it is a variation on Islam, whether it is called “radical Islam,” “Islamism,” “Muslim extremism” or “jihadis.” But the president, his administration, and the State Department all refuse to use any of those terms. Instead, the only term permitted is “violent extremism.”
This past week, President Obama convened an international summit in Washington, D.C., which he called “Countering Violent Extremism.” Not once in his description of the event did he use any word related to Islam. Not “Muslim,” or “Islamic,” or “jihadist” or “Islamist,” or “radical Islamist” or anything else identifying the fact that virtually all the “violent extremism” in the world to today is carried out by Muslims.
2. President Obama removed American troops from Iraq, enabling Islamic State to conquer about one-third of Iraq, and a similarly large portion of Syria. The president and his defenders blame then-president of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, for excluding Iraq’s Sunnis from power sharing and blame former President George W. Bush for invading Iraq in the first place. But whatever one thinks of Maliki or of the original decision to invade, the reason Islamic State took over much of Iraq was Obama’s insistence on abandoning Iraq.
3. On Feb. 10, President Obama described the murderers of Jews in the Parisian kosher grocery as “a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.” For some reason, in that interview, he couldn’t mention that they were Jews, murdered because they were Jews.
4. President Obama was asked by the left-wing Internet site Vox, “Do you think the media sometimes overstates the level of alarm people should have about terrorism and this kind of chaos, as opposed to a longer-term problem of climate change and epidemic disease?”
The president’s response: “Absolutely.”
5. Many tens of thousands of people have been killed by radical Muslims; Boko Haram now controls an area in West Africa the size of Belgium; Islamist butchers compete with one another over who can engage in the greater atrocity, European terror is becoming routine; Al-Shabaab calls on American Muslims to murder people in the Mall of America; vast numbers of girls are kidnapped and sold as sex slaves; and the president of the United States thinks the press overstates the threat of Islamist terror while understating the threat of climate change.
6. In that interview, President Obama entertained the possibility that in Iran, “according to their Supreme Leader, it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon.”
How deep does the president’s naiveté about evil go?

Posted in Barack Obama, Dennis Prager | Comments Off on Still Keen On President Obama?

From Ferguson to Netanyahu

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes: Remember the “Hands up, don’t shoot” narrative that dominated American media and all of the protests against a white officer’s shooting of Michael Brown, a Black teenager in Ferguson, Mo.?
It was all a lie.
Never happened.
Yet, media personalities, NFL players, and even congressional representatives employed the arms-up gesture and recited the mantra “Hands up, don’t shoot” for the television cameras. And even after the Justice Department released a report thoroughly refuting both the lie and Brown’s victim status, President Barack Obama has made multiple references to Ferguson in his speech commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Selma march — as if there were all sorts of moral parallels.
That lie ruined a city’s economy, not to mention the livelihood and life of an innocent policeman. And, of course, it gave those Black Americans resentful toward America another reason to express anger at white America.
But that hysteria is small scale compared to the hysteria fomented against Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s voters for his having won an election he was supposed to lose.
This hysteria — whipped up by the (Jewish as much as non-Jewish) left and especially by the president of the United States — has allowed this president to weaken the bonds between America and Israel more than at any time in the 66 years of Israel’s existence.
The vitriol directed against Netanyahu and Israel is allegedly based on two comments Netanyahu made in Israel shortly before the election.
One was about a Palestinian state:
“The right-wing rule is in danger. The Arab voters are coming in great numbers to the polling stations. The left-wing nonprofit organizations are bringing them in buses. Go out to the polling stations, bring your friends and family, and vote Mahal [Likud] in order to close the gap between us and the Labor Party.”
The president of the United States and most if not all of America’s and Israel’s left repeatedly describe this as “racist” and
anti-democratic.
That is a lie.
There is nothing racist or anti-democratic about the comment.
If “racist” actually means something — other than being useful as a left-wing epithet with which to regularly describe right-wingers (in America as well as Israel) — there is not a hint of racism in the comment. How exactly are Arab Israelis depicted negatively in this comment? Do not Democrats in America regularly inveigh against “old white males”?
Nor is there a hint of disenfranchising Arab Israelis. The message to Netanyahu’s followers was simply an appeal to get to the polls because his political opponents appeared to be ensuring that as many Arab voters as possible got to the polls where they were expected to vote against him and his party.
Yet, not only is the accusation false, the comment on which it is based is almost universally mistranslated. Almost all citations of the phrase use the term “in droves” or, less frequently, “hordes of.” Both terms are far more derogatory than what Netanyahu actually said — “in great numbers” (kamuyot adirot). But because “great numbers” of Arab voters sounds considerably less disrespectful, the Western press prefers “in droves” and “hordes.” That’s how they can charge Netanyahu with “racism” never implied in the original Hebrew — by manipulating his words in translation.
On the day of the Israeli election, March 17, The New York Times correctly translated Netanyahu: “Right-wing rule is in danger. Arab voters are streaming in huge quantities to the polling stations.” But it has since joined the other mainstream media in using the inaccurate and loaded translation, “in droves.”

Posted in Dennis Prager | Comments Off on From Ferguson to Netanyahu

Social Shaming

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Social media is a powerful tool.
One reason the Left is winning is the Right doesn’t fight out of fear.

On Facebook all my lefty friends and family use their real names as they spew SJW crap and call everybody racist, sexist, homophobic scum. They don’t seem the slightest bit worried about their jobs being threatened.

My righty friends and family mostly keep quiet on Facebook. Terrified of saying the wrong thing.

But abandoning the battlefield guarantees victory for the other side. 90% of success is showing up. The Left shows up in the daily Facebook/Twitter wars.

* He knew that the information people would concentrate on is the fact that the has three children to support. The apology was a means to convey that information to the public. And it worked.

I, and every other adult male I know, make sexual (and sometimes sexist) jokes all the time. Especially during boring conferences. I also have three children. I am not a developer, but when I read the article I thought “It could have been me.”

Adria Richards is a nasty woman who eavesdrops on other people’s private conversations, then goes public about what she heard, even publishing pictures, to do MAXIMUM HARM to others. She had no second thoughts about ruining the life of a guy she didn’t even know. Who would want to work with such a person? I wouldn’t. Because she’s dangerous.

I guess that most female developers understood the message: “If you want to work with men, don’t be dangerous for them.”

* I see this kind of short sightedness mostly on the left because they are so convinced that they are totally right and that they will alway be in power because history is on their side or something.

You saw that in Richards who felt confident lashing out but was totally blindsided and amazed when the blowback came.

You see that in the Senate where Reid changed centuries old rules regarding the filibuster in order to achieve short term advantage, with no concern about what that would mean for Democrats in the distant future once they were again in the minority (which turned out to be a whole two years later).

It does not seem to occur to them that establishing the principle that it is OK to cause people who hold opinions or sing songs or tell jokes that you find disagreeable to lose their jobs, be expelled from college, etc. might someday come back to bite them.

Everything that they believe in is right, so how could you ever be punished for holding a correct opinion? And why should people of good conscience be made to feel unsafe in their school or workplace by having to tolerate those whose views are just plain wrong?

It never occurs to them that they could end up being on the other side of this equation as the ones considered “wrong”, because clearly (in their heads) they are and always will be right. If their views weren’t correct, they wouldn’t have them in the first place.

* The Greek-English idea was that argument should be a sport. They did pretty well for themselves out of it.

Posted in Race | Comments Off on Social Shaming

Why Not A White House At USC?

Posted on March 31, 2015 by Luke Ford

USC has Jewish groups and black groups. Will it get a safe place for white people to hang out?

From The Los Angeles Times:

When some USC student government leaders voiced support for creating a cultural house for black students, Ama Amoafo-Yeboah thought that she and other undergraduates were closer to having a space where they could hang out and hold events.

But before a vote was held, word spread that the house could be located on the Row, USC’s two-block stretch of fraternities and sororities near 28th and Figueroa streets. Social media lit up.

“Why would they open a prison on the Row?” one user asked on Yik Yak, a popular social media app that allows anonymous comments from users within a 1.5-mile radius.

* How would you like an African American heritage house on your block? As opposed to a Jewish/Chinese/Korean/Latino/Islamic heritage house?

Friend: “Saw a bunch a black people turning a historic house into a mosque the other day though.”

Susan: How would you like an Aussie moving in to your neighbourhood and setting up a humpy?

* After congratulating the Mexican for the second time today on Cesar Chavez day, I told him that I considered him white and he gave me a strange look because he evidently considered himself Mexican and not white, even though he looks white and he sounds white and acts white. I thought I was giving him a compliment but I don’t want to commit cultural genocide.

Posted in Blacks, Whites | Comments Off on Why Not A White House At USC?