Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorninthesofa
So if migrating out worked in one state, the rest will think to do it in all the states. thereby making asian and latino folks migrate into Europe turning Europe brown, and in time, migrating back again?  Coo-Coo
|
No, Popcorn. There's a reason why I suggested that people read about the Great Migration here in America. Blacks left the Southern states in *droves*. Huge numbers of blacks left the South and moved West and North--this is why Oakland and Detroit have such huge black communities. They didn't before WW II but by 1970 they were gigantic black communities there. So we've already run this experiment and have some idea how this plays out in the real world.
Blacks didn't migrate to Europe as you suggest, we stayed in the United States and, in fact, it DID have an effect on the economy of the South. Was it the nail in the coffin? No. However, labor became a bit more expensive because blacks *were* the cheap labor and as some of that labor left, it had a deleterious effect on the economy of those Southern states. It is instructive to note that we could get there without ALL blacks having left the South (which I'm sure you would try to suggest my argument requires). A similar pressure would be at play with a mass exodus of Hispanics out of Arizona.
Again--because you, popcorn, have a tendency to read what you want to read and not what is written--the economic impact of an exodus does NOT require the people leaving the country and we've already run the real-world experiment. So unless you are going to try to argue that somehow, while blacks were able to find work and build lives in other states but Hispanics will not, your argument *completely* collapses under its own weight.
Cheers
Aj