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.
It mostly comes down to a difference in opinions. It's hardly an issue of right or wrong.
How one would even be able to quantify that these states are "equally" influenced by Mexico is beyond me.
Equally, it's beyond me to say one is more or less influenced by Mexico. At the end of the day, both states are filled with ALOT of Whites, Blacks, and Asians. Neither one lacks the counterbalance of non-Mexicans to Mexicans. And neither lacks the historic ties to Mexico. Why not a tie?
Well, historically speaking, I don't see how saying one or the other is more influenced then the other would make any sense. Hell, presently I say the same. Percentage-wise, they're about even.
As far as population is concerned, yes, but we're talking about influence. That alone is difficult to measure.
"All over the place"? Finding authentic Mexican food in all of East Texas (outside of Houston) would probably be like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
There are parts of California where the you would be hard pressed to find decent mexican food as well such as extreme Northern California around Eureka. Anyways far as influence is concerned both states are pretty much tied in that aspect.
Finding authentic Mexican in rural East Texas would indeed be difficult. But CA's a big state also. Like the person above me said, I'd imagine it'd be hard to find authentic Mexican in extreme Northern CA.
As far as population is concerned, yes, but we're talking about influence. That alone is difficult to measure.
Then why is the influence higher in California, which is the supposition made by you, than it is in Texas?
What are the specific examples of the Hispanic and Mexican influence being higher in California than Texas?
You obviously know enough to make that much of an opinion, so it isn't that hard to measure if you made that opinion. There is an intangible that California has, at least in your mind, that puts the Hispanic and Mexican influence higher in CA than in TX. I'd be interested to hear in what it is.
Anywhere south of San Antonio in Texas is for all practical purposes MEXICO. The cultural ties between Texas and Mexico are incredibly tight. NO CONTEST. Texas.
Anywhere south of San Antonio in Texas is for all practical purposes MEXICO. The cultural ties between Texas and Mexico are incredibly tight. NO CONTEST. Texas.
On another note I believe Texas has more business ties with Mexico than California. I know Mexican businesses such as Shasa and Famsa opened their first US stores here, and several Mexican companies such as Cemex and Grupo Bimbo have offices in the Houston/Dallas areas. Likewise many Texas companies such as HEB have recently opened stores in Mexico.
I don't think California has the same amount of business ties aside from trade between Tijuana-San Diego.
On another note I believe Texas has more business ties with Mexico than California. I know Mexican businesses such as Shasa and Famsa opened their first US stores here, and several Mexican companies such as Cemex and Grupo Bimbo have offices in the Houston/Dallas areas. Likewise many Texas companies such as HEB have recently opened stores in Mexico.
I don't think California has the same amount of business ties aside from trade between Tijuana-San Diego.
On another note I believe Texas has more business ties with Mexico than California. I know Mexican businesses such as Shasa and Famsa opened their first US stores here, and several Mexican companies such as Cemex and Grupo Bimbo have offices in the Houston/Dallas areas. Likewise many Texas companies such as HEB have recently opened stores in Mexico.
I don't think California has the same amount of business ties aside from trade between Tijuana-San Diego.
Not necessarily business ties (still looking for that), but in terms of total economic connections, I think the picture is a little more complex than the above.
Remittance Value
California: $13.191 billion
Texas: $5.222 billion
Contribution to Local Economy
California: $133.365 billion
Texas: $52.792 billion
But that has more to do with the population size of Hispanics in Texas vs. California, but its good to note that the value that California sends is more than twice that of Texas even though California's Hispanic population is not anywhere near twice the size of Texas' (14 million vs. 9 million).
Value of Exports
Mexico-Texas trade: $87.393 billion
Mexico-California trade: $26.037 billion
Texas beats California decisively here as well. Again, I think this has more to do with the length of the border than anything else and where the population resides in Mexico vis-a-vis Texas vs. California.
Finding authentic Mexican in rural East Texas would indeed be difficult. But CA's a big state also. Like the person above me said, I'd imagine it'd be hard to find authentic Mexican in extreme Northern CA.
It's hard to find much of anything in extreme Northern California as once you get north of Redding or Eureka/Arcata, there's really not many people at all. A utility client I worked for had territory in the three northernmost counties of California and we calculated that there's practically neighborhoods of Los Angeles or San Francisco that have more people than all of Siskiyou, Modoc, and Del Norte Counties combined.
All the same, even a lot of the towns in the very far north have Hispanic populations upwards of 10 percent and growing. Crescent City, the northernmost town on the coast of California is 30 percent Hispanic. Even little mountain towns like Weed and Alturas are about 15 percent Mexican. There's very little diversity in these areas, but what non-white populations there are are going to be Mexican. And while the food isn't going to compare to LA, once you get a growing Mexican population, you'll find passable Mexican fare is often the best option to eat in a lot of these small towns. Once you get south of Redding and back into the northern end of the Sacramento Valley you'll find plenty of small towns like Los Molinos or Corning(over 50 percent) that have a large Mexican population.
How this compares to East Texas I can't really say, but a cursory glance at the demographics of Beaumont and Port Arthur shows around 15 percent of the population being Hispanic in those cities. But, the Mexican population has grown so fast in the United States--that it says something that those figures don't even really seem very high. I mean there's Mexican communities everywhere in much of the West and the rest of the US these days--there's places south of Portland in the Willamette Valley that feel like Mexican-dominated places in California these days.
The places that really stand out in the USA are going to be much of the southern half of California or the southern portion of Texas. I'd say that the Rio Grande region of Texas seems to be the most Mexican-dominated area of the entire US--San Diego has a much more diverse and larger mix of whites and other groups than say a border city like El Paso. But all in all, this whole comparison is sort of a wash--both California and Texas have been both historically and currently influenced heavily by Mexican/Latino culture.
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.
