Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-30-2022, 05:41 PM
 
1,764 posts, read 1,011,462 times
Reputation: 1942

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
A certain amount of diversity is okay for a society. However, I’m afraid the United States has gone way overboard with this idea. This country has imported tens of millions of Mestizo immigrants with very poor backgrounds and very low educational levels from Latin American countries.

As a result, large sections of the United States are now filled with these immigrants. Public schools that used to be good once upon a time have deteriorated. There are now more Spanish-speaking people in the United States than the entire population of Spain.

I sometimes wonder if Americans have their heads screwed on straight.
It is funny you said that, since if you were white the schools have always been of very good standard. But it has always been very good for Whites, but for Black people. Last time I checked Blacks in the USA especially in the long past spoke only English.

Many school buildings for African Americans had leaking roofs, sagging floors, and windows without glass. They ranged from untidy to positively filthy, according to a study issued in 1917.
If black children had any books at all, they were hand-me-downs from white schools.
Black schools were overcrowded, with too many students per teacher. More black schools than white had only one teacher to handle students from toddlers to 8th graders. Black schools were more likely to have all grades together in one room.
There were not enough desks for the over-crowded classrooms.
Black teachers did not receive as much training as white teachers. On top of that, the salary for black teachers was so low that it was hard to find fully qualified ones.
There were limits on what blacks could be taught in school. White school leaders did not want black children to be exposed to ideas like equality and freedom. Carter G. Woodson told how some black children in Southern schools were not allowed to use books that included the Declaration of Independence or the U. S. Constitution. These documents state that government should get its power from the consent of the governed. Reading them would confirm for African Americans that they were being denied the rights due to all citizens of the United States.
https://www.abhmuseum.org/education-...im-crow-south/

If you were at a native American boarding school at that era you were stripped of you identity.

Two hundred years ago, on March 3, 1819, the Civilization Fund Act ushered in an era of assimilationist policies, leading to the Indian boarding-school era, which lasted from 1860 to 1978. The act directly spurred the creation of the schools by putting forward the notion that Native culture and language were to blame for what was deemed the country’s “Indian problem.”

tudents were physically punished for speaking their Native languages. Contact with family and community members was discouraged or forbidden altogether. Survivors have described a culture of pervasive physical and sexual abuse at the schools. Food and medical attention were often scarce; many students died. Their parents sometimes learned of their death only after they had been buried in school cemeteries, some of which were unmarked.https://www.theatlantic.com/educatio...chools/584293/

Plus in the 1940s Mexican American schools e “Mexican” schools in California were in terrible condition compared to the “American” schools. And instead of receiving specialized instruction to improve their language and academic skills, Mexican American students were trained to become field workers and house cleaners.

So BigCityDreamer: I am sure if you were White and living in the early part of the 20th century, you would have got a much better educational opportunities in School than if you were Black or brown skinned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2022, 01:09 PM
 
Location: In the heights
36,939 posts, read 38,928,836 times
Reputation: 20979
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
I am concerned that the Hispanic immigrants who are flooding into the United States will not assimilate into American society unless any further immigration is drastically reduced.

They may become a permanent underclass. That is not without precedent in this country.
You voice some pretty silly concerns though. There's not a much larger proportion of immigrant population now than there were in the past and the assimilation is generally a lot faster these days due to the public education system and a *globally* dominant English-language media. Remember, you had large communities whether rural, small town, medium town, or sections of large cities that continued their languages, newspapers, community theaters, and day-to-day usage of languages such as German for several decades until around the early and mid-20th century when these very rapidly collapsed.

The permanent underclass you're likely referring to because you're obsessed with it, is probably the American born black population that were descended from slavery which is a very distinctively different history than immigration. Even with the slew of inherited bull**** to deal with however, the AA population still has a lot of people that are socioeconomically successful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pryvete View Post
Italian and Polish immigrants jointly amounted to 6 million people roughly between the 19th and early 20th centuries leading up to WW1. True you did have a number of 'birds of passage' who returned to their home countries but the scope and imposition of their influence in America was never so pronounced. They typically formed ethno-cultural enclaves within districts of major cities or in small towns in places such as the upper midwest. Concerning Hispanics you have a broader pan-culturalist application to most regions of the country.

However much immigration there was in the 19th and 20th centuries from downtrodden individuals it doesn't detract from the fact that they had to seek more complex means of transportational accommodations. Moreover you had an emigrational influx into the United States that was comparatively more limited in its scope than what we're seeing today; 65 million Hispanics residing in the USA with who knows how many tens of millions of illegal aliens residing here (the bulk of which coming from south of the border) and another 42 million expressing interest to migrate here from Latin America or the Caribbean according to a recent Gallup poll. Per capita that's nearly 1 in 3 people living in the USA versus less than 1 in 10 back in the 1800s/early 1990s.
Yea, there were different waves of people and different sizes of those waves in proportion to the population of the US at the time. You had some migration at those times that were voluntary, and you also had far fewer legal impediments and deportations done at the time as well. Remember, the US for a good part of its history had fairly open immigration policies and a pretty small "native" population with the impediment being time and cost to travel. And as stated earlier, those people who came formed very stable and often quite distinct communities for very long periods of time in a way that simply no longer happens in large proportions anymore.

I'm also curious about what you think the broader "pan-culturalist" bit you mentioned means.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2022, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Australia
3,602 posts, read 2,276,912 times
Reputation: 6931
Quote:
Originally Posted by omman View Post
Canada and Australia are lame steryle dull societies without a culture nor identity.
The Us is a mad house.

Europe any day!
This thread is not about Europe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2022, 12:21 AM
 
Location: Canada
14,678 posts, read 14,794,070 times
Reputation: 34664
Quote:
Originally Posted by omman View Post

Canada and Australia are lame steryle dull societies without a culture nor identity.
The Us is a mad house.

Europe any day!
Canada and Australia are actually not without their own brands of culture and identity but it might seem that way to bored young sensation seeking foreigners who possess no sense of respect, subtlety and calm normalcy and are looking for something to talk trash about. The above post quoted is rude trash-talk. You've left a string of trash-talking posts behind you which suggests that you're trolling. That's not a great way for you to introduce yourself as a newbie to a forum. I think it's good for Canada and Australia that you don't like them.

Sterile means not trashy. In this day and age I personally feel it's nice for a country to seem dull, sterile and boring to the younger generations of irresponsible sensation seekers. If any countries are dull and boring to them it's an indication that the country is too stable and laid back for them to cope with. So being boring and stable generally keeps away the irresponsible young riff-raff foreigners looking for high adventure and trouble to get into.

.

Last edited by Zoisite; 08-03-2022 at 12:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2022, 08:43 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
27,321 posts, read 28,389,714 times
Reputation: 24840
Quote:
Originally Posted by herenow1 View Post
So BigCityDreamer: I am sure if you were White and living in the early part of the 20th century, you would have got a much better educational opportunities in School than if you were Black or brown skinned.
But we are living in the 21st century and under very different circumstances.

Since the 1960s, the percentage of out-of-wedlock births among black Americans has skyrocketed to over 70%. It is the highest of any racial group.

Children of unmarried mothers are far more likely to live in poverty, drop out of school, get involved in criminal activity and go to prison.

Strangely enough, this change in American society occurred AFTER Jim Crow laws were abolished and the Civil Rights movement happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2022, 04:12 PM
 
1,764 posts, read 1,011,462 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
But we are living in the 21st century and under very different circumstances.

Since the 1960s, the percentage of out-of-wedlock births among black Americans has skyrocketed to over 70%. It is the highest of any racial group.

Children of unmarried mothers are far more likely to live in poverty, drop out of school, get involved in criminal activity and go to prison.

Strangely enough, this change in American society occurred AFTER Jim Crow laws were abolished and the Civil Rights movement happened.
Yet coloured students still recieve less funding than whites in general. But, as a 2018 report revealed, school districts enrolling “the most students of color receive about $1,800, or 13%, less per student” than districts serving the fewest students of color.

A more recent analysis further demonstrated that school funding cuts during the Great Recession disproportionately affected Black students and exacerbated achievement gaps

Most school funding gaps have a simple explanation: Public school budgets rely heavily on local property taxes. Communities with low property values can tax themselves at much higher rates than others but still fail to generate anywhere near the the same level of resources as other communities.

In fact, in 46 of 50 states,The local funding gap between districts mostly serving middle-income versus poor students in New Jersey, for example, is $3,460 per pupil. While state and federal programs often send additional funds to poor students, they are insufficient to fully meet the additional needs of low-income students. local school funding schemes drive more resources to middle-income students than poor students.https://theconversation.com/legacy-o...schools-181030
Sure one can look at the Bygone era, where many conservatives state the school quality is better, in the past yet I am sure the people making those statements are largely white people, and even 70 years ago Whites and Blacks lived seperate lives and did not live in the same neighbourhoods or schools, and more times than not, out of site, meant out of mind. In general white schools are better quality than schools where the bulk of the students are of colour and it has always been the case.
But today is different as Whites are more exposed to people of colour. In the past they were not so, and they could claim the public school system was good then as no blacks then attended the white schools in the past.

Yet when desegration was ended in the USA and states, Blacks could move into White areas and many did and also many did go to formely white schools. That resulted in the White flight, where Whites largely left the areas where Blacks started moving into. When more and more people of colour started going to public schools White parents then sent their children to largely White private schools and it is like that today.

People that make complaints about the declining standards of public schools in the USA and link it with the increased amount of non whites that go there, and complain that public schools used to be better ( I guess they mean JIm crow era where people of colour know their place) I have one word to describe them and they are racist.

With Hispanics, and I saw what you commented on, a large majority of Hispanics are legal citizens: The vast majority of Latinos in the United
States are American citizens. About 79%
of Latinos living in the country are U.S.
citizens.10 This includes people born in the
United States and its territories (including
Puerto Rico), people born abroad to
American parents, and immigrants who
have naturalized. About 33% of Latinos in
the United States are foreign born, the vast
majority of whom are lawfully present.https://www.unidosus.org/wp-content/...acismpaper.pdf

Last edited by herenow1; 08-04-2022 at 05:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2022, 11:13 PM
 
29 posts, read 12,866 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
100 percent. In the last 75 years or so due to this, there are probably more famous American Italians than out of Italy itself during that period. Also, the U.S is 9X more populated than Canada and 13X more than Australia. Given these factors is it all all shocking there are more and more famous Italian Americans than either of ours
...Why do you guys keep using this argument?

"Of course the US has more of x ethnic group, it has more people!", is not a logical conclusion.

Having a larger population doesn't give you more German, Italian, Jewish, Black people, etc, than a smaller population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2022, 11:16 PM
 
29 posts, read 12,866 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
Most of small town and rural America, especially in the northern half of the country, is 95-99% white. You can travel for hundreds of miles in those places and hardly ever see a non-white person living there.
Mostly not even close.

The rural far west, is not a supermajority white.

The small town south is often not remotely 95-99% white.

Given the diversity of the US, and the much more racially mixed nature of the population, it absolutely is not accurate to claim "you'd never see a non-white person living in the rural US" in the same respect that you'd hardly see a non white person in rural Canada or the UK. You absolutely do see non-white people living in the US suburbs and rural areas.

So, no, not remotely accurate.

Last edited by hardwoodisanissue; 08-06-2022 at 11:33 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2022, 11:18 PM
 
29 posts, read 12,866 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post
Perhaps if Australia's population was 12 times more than what it is so that Australia and America were on an equal footing population-wise, then such a list might also be more equal between the two countries.

But I guess that's a moot point.

.
It's not an accurate point, considering you people seem utterly incapable of grasping logic

A large population does not mean you have larger amounts of a given ethnic group. That's not how population works, lmao.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2022, 11:26 PM
 
29 posts, read 12,866 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
I'm aware. Even in New Jersey, the most densely populated state, we have such areas. I think you missed the point I was making that the place I was describing is not the Toronto area, but a rural area about 3.5 hours drive from the GTA where you hear wolves howling at night in winter, and still there is some diversity. Less than the GTA, but still more than the rural areas you describe in the States.

However, that is Ontario. It may be different in other provinces.
This is why Americans need to stop claiming that the "rural USA is 99% white" in an attempt to equivocate themselves with much less diverse countries like Canada and the USA.

You can give anecdotes about diversity anywhere, but considering the scope and distribution of the American population, the very high absolute rate of immigration, the much more ethnically and racially mixed American populace, etc, you are far, FAR more likely to find ethnic and racial diversity in the rural US than in rural Canada.

And that's not even up for debate: the south has heavy rural black populations, and African Americans have their own folk cultures rooted in the rural south.

This is such a ridiculous point.

Mestizo Hispanics and Latinos are evenly distributed throughout the country, from rural areas to the cities.

The suburban and semi-rural areas of the US are often some of the most diverse places in American cities, vs Canadian cities, where diverse populations are almost all concentrated in a select few inner-city neighborhoods and CBDs.

There are notable rurally-based ethnic communities, from the Punjabi Mexicans of old Yuba City to the Hmong of Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, to the Mississippi Chinese, to Clarkston, Georgia, a refugee resettlement area in the 90s, to the Melungeon and tri-racial isolate communities in the mid-south. When the US has a rural, cross-national culture, with populations that are 80% Mestizo Hispanic along the southern border, how would anyone believe that "most rural areas in the US are 99% white"? That's true of, like...Scotland, or Canada. Not the US.

Rural Canada is objectively, wildly less diverse than rural America.

Last edited by hardwoodisanissue; 08-06-2022 at 11:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top