Thursday, January 02, 2014

The 41 nations more migrant than this 'nation of immigrants'

Since the phrase "nation of immigrants" was first used in reference to the United States 80 years ago, it's regularly been invoked by politicians, chambers of commerce, journalists, charities, and ethnic activist groups as the most vitally important aspect of our collective national character.

Here is a list of countries who put us to shame by outdoing America and its Dreamers by boasting higher shares of immigrants in their contemporary populations than we do: Andorra, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Monaco, Kuwait, Macau, Palestine, Singapore, Hong Kong, Bahrain, Jordan, Nauru, Israel, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Brunei, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Switzerland, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Latvia, Canada, Gabon, Lebanon, Kazakhstan, the Cook Islands, New Zealand, Gambia, Estonia, Belize, Palau, Austria, the Ukraine, Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Norway, the Ivory Coast, and Moldova.

I wonder if Bryan Caplan is more troubled by how far down we are on this list or how far down we are in the PISA rankings, because going up in one means going down in the other. As the economist well knows, life is about trade offs, after all.

7 comments:

Dan said...

What I wonder is, whether the United Arab Emirates maintains their nationhood long term. They have something like 5-10 expat workers for every Emirati, depending on the principality. But the expats don't get permanent residency or citizenship. So far, so good for the Emiratis, which shows what is possible with a king.

Anonymous said...

Let me solve the mystery.

Our elites mean HARM.

The New Deal succeeded despite all flaws because they meant to do GOOD, and found their way to it. Also they were pro-majority.

The Great Society failed because they meant to do HARM. And very very Anti-Majority. They quite HATE us.

Now since Clinton government service has been all about PROFIT. HARM was already baked in...he just made it profitable and delivery more efficient with privatization.

GOOD replaced by HARM for PROFIT.

All this numbers crunching. Haiku or a nursery rhyme covers it...

VXXC

Anonymous said...

GOOD replaced by HARM for HATE and PROFIT.

I was distracted by your Turing Test below...if I'm a Robot how can I prove this to myself...to begin with?

Audacious Epigone said...

VXXC,

Unfortunately without captcha, comment sections get flooded with spam if the site turns up near the top of any google searches.

Anonymous said...

These numbers almost certainly combine the numbers of temporary migrants with permanent resident migrants. The Gulf Nation migrant numbers, for example, are skewed overwhelmingly toward TEMPORARY migrants. Migration to the United States, by contrast, is generally PERMANENT.

The latter has, by far, a more pernicious impact on national sovereignty, national wealth, etc. I would be surprised if more than a handful of other nations were as stupid as the United States on this. Those that are, are probably in the Anglosphere.

Matthew said...

"Now since Clinton government service has been all about PROFIT. HARM was already baked in...he just made it profitable and delivery more efficient with privatization."

No lie there.

Take Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Tony Blair (please). Three close political allies, none of whom had much private sector experience before entering office. Al Gore is now worth an estimated $200 million. Bill Clinton has earned over $150 million from his book deals and speaking fees. Clinton's personal travel expenses in 2011 alone were over $1 million. And Tony Blair, who left office only in 2007, is now worth over $110 million.

Politics has now become a conspiracy of the corrupt. Our countries and their economies are now so huge that the money to be made from corruption is too great a temptation for many to pass up.

Matthew said...

"So far, so good for the Emiratis, which shows what is possible with a king."

And with machine guns, F-16s, and other heavy ordnance. The firepower gap between governor and governed has never, ever been larger.

The fact is that probably every country above Switzerland (and maybe even Australia) should be marked with an asterisk. Those migrants are all guestworkers, or not subject to jus soli citizenship, or they are playgrounds for the rich (Monaco). At the very least, the imported people are not racially/linguistically/religiously distinct from the receiving country.

Comprise a list of countries by migrants who are: a) permanent; b) whose children get birthright citizenship; c) are racially, religiously, and/or linguistically distinct from the native population. What you will get is a list dominated by Anglosphere countries.