Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With the increase in the numbers of hispanics in the U.S we hear about how they will change America. But how exactly?
I'm of the view that the increase in hispanic numbers is still playing itself out as far as its impact. I also wonder how impactful the increase in hispanics will be since hispanics aren't a single group of people but are made up of various people of different nationalities,cultures and races. This to me indicates that the Latino impact may vary and be more spread out.
The Latino impact/influence seems like it would be more clear if Latinos were actually a single group instead of being spread out among many different peoples because what may be more relevant to one group as far as consumer marketing,politics and other issues might not be as relevant to another. So how do you see the increase in hispanics affecting change in the U.S?
The majority of Latinos in the US are Mexican. Any change will quite likely have a skew toward the Mexican side outside of the northeast and Florida. Spanish will become a more widely used language than it already is. Mexicans, more than most other Latinos seem rather resistant to becoming completely Anglicized.
I agree with Antonio. It isn't an increase in Latino influence, but Mexican influence.
Depends on where. Most Hispanics in the Northeast and Florida aren't Mexican. And they don't have a small hispanic population there, either. New York is #3 in hispanic population, Florida #4, New Jersey not far behind.
Most of the Latino growth was fueled by immigration and most of that was basically Mexican immigration. Right now Mexican immigration is at an all time low point, so whatever growth of the Hispanic population will be natural growth. The meaning of this is that the newer Latino generations will be much more americanized than many people are anticipating and the actual Latino influence on the US culture will be less than what most people fear it will be.
This will happen as long as Mexican migration doesn't picks up again. If Mexican migration does picks up, then Latino influence will essentially be Mexican influence. Greater Mexican influence and power at all levels of US society.
Ok, ignore my post, this makes a bit more sense. However I will add that in areas with large Mexican populations, many second and third gens are still quite Latino because they can be.
Mexicans, more than most other Latinos seem rather resistant to becoming completely Anglicized.
Except 25% of Hispanics marry non-hispanics, and the numbers are higher once you look at US-born Hispanics, which suggests some integration. Blacks marry out far less, in comparison.
I have a set of World Book encyclopedias from 1987. In the section on Mexican-Americans they have them and not 'Latinos' mentioned as the second largest minority group behind black-Americans at that time. I wonder at what point did the wording or description go from Mexican-Americans being the second largest minority to the use of the word Latino?
Latino has always been used but is a catch all for all. Even if you broke Latino down, Mexican-Americans were still the second largest group after blacks.
Except 25% of Hispanics marry non-hispanics, and the numbers are higher once you look at US-born Hispanics, which suggests some integration. Blacks marry out far less, in comparison.
Forgive me. my perspective is skewed at the moment because I am currently 5 miles from the border. The grocery store I shop at is a Mexican store. 1/4 of the license plates some days are Baja California.
I have a set of World Book encyclopedias from 1987. In the section on Mexican-Americans they have them and not 'Latinos' mentioned as the second largest minority group behind black-Americans at that time. I wonder at what point did the wording or description go from Mexican-Americans being the second largest minority to the use of the word Latino?
It used be here that Puerto Rican was used as a synonym for Latino not Mexican, even into the 80s. I looked through old census documents of the Northeast for 1960 and they'd ask if someone was of Puerto Rican origin. Same line existed in the West but read "Mexican".
Forgive me. my perspective is skewed at the moment because I am currently 5 miles from the border. The grocery store I shop at is a Mexican store. 1/4 of the license plates some days are Baja California.
Are you serious? Or is your location not the Pacific Northwest [I did notice the Mexican population there, found some good at a few stores geared toward Mexican immigrants]?
Are you serious? Or is your location not the Pacific Northwest [I did notice the Mexican population there, found some good at a few stores geared toward Mexican immigrants]?
I've not changed it on my profile yet. I'm currently in Chula Vista, CA due to family issues.
Not much will change. For the vast majority of the US "Hispanics" is entirely synonymous with Mexicans, and they have always been a part of US culture. Hispanics in general aren't coming in mass numbers like Mexicans. If you look at the stats, almost every other group separately doesn't even reach the one percentile. The only exception is Puerto Ricans who make up 1.6% of the US population, and that's surprisingly small considering they're US citizens so they can go there freely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
