December 20, 2007

Christmas forecast: Sunny and 67 degrees

The weather forecast for December 25, 2007 in LA is typical for this time of year: sunny and 67 degrees (19 degrees Centigrade). (The mild winter temperatures are not purchased at the expense of cruel summers, either: the average high on the Fourth of July in downtown LA, 18 miles from the beach, is only 83 degrees.)

But fewer and fewer Americans are enjoying Los Angeles's routinely amazing weather. The LA Times reports:

More flee state than move in

Population is up thanks to births and foreign immigrants, but rest of U.S. isn't California dreamin' like it was.

... In Los Angeles County alone [in fiscal 2007], nearly 115,000 fewer residents came from other states and California counties than moved to other states and counties. The county ended up with a total increase in population thanks to 91,000 births and an influx of 70,000 residents from foreign countries. (The county now has roughly 10,294,000 residents).

Since 2000, about 500,000 more people have left Los Angeles County than have moved here from other parts of the U.S. and California, the figures show.

Of course, a huge fraction of the births are to immigrants.

Why exactly is America following a policy of driving American citizens out of mainland America's most pleasant climatic zone?

By the way, have the strategic business geniuses at the LA Times ever noticed that their plummeting sales figures are linked to the replacement of English-literate Angelenos by foreigners who can't read English, and often can't read at all? (According to a recent United Way study, 53% of adults in LA are functionally illiterate.)

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

31 comments:

bjdouble said...

I don't live in LA, but yesterday a non-English speaking immigrant opened my (unlocked) apartment door looking for a job. When I kindly told him to get lost, he came back with an English speaking friend, who was as puzzled as I was. Has it really reached the point that illegals are randomly knocking on doors looking for jobs? And are they so unassimilated as to be unable to tell the difference between an apartment and an office?

Michael said...

Those are some great questions you ask. Do we elect our officials in order for them to look out for the interests of foreigners?

Concerned Netizen said...

Pleasant climate but lousy weather.

Earthquakes, mudslides, fires, you name it.

Maybe sensible middle class people factor things like that into the equation?

What was California like before the mass immigration of poor white Okies & Arkies?

But weather aside, it's a worrying prospect, I agree.

As California goes....

David Davenport said...

I don't live in LA, but yesterday a non-English speaking immigrant opened my (unlocked) apartment door looking for a job.

That's kind of a summary in the small of the whole illegal immigrant deal in the large, isn't it?

Has it really reached the point that illegals are randomly knocking on doors looking for jobs?

Wonder if this fellow previously labored in US real estate/contruction?

The good news about the real estate crash is that the plutocracy that runs this country may realize that it no longer requires so many two-legged donkeys. As the economy slumps in 2008, I predict that you'll hear less from Establishment propaganda organs about needing to fill jobs that Americans just won't do.

daveg said...

The California budget crisis is going to get very interesting. The working deficit is 20 billion and it is going to get larger.

The 0.3% who make over a million pay 35% of the taxes and the 14% who make over 100K pay 85% of the taxes.

The state is probably in for a worse year in 2008 than 2007.

As the drive to raise funds and increase taxes increases they will continue to drive out the money makers, only exasperating the problem.

It will be interesting to watch.

Bill said...

The good news about the real estate crash is that the plutocracy that runs this country may realize that it no longer requires so many two-legged donkeys.

-David Davenport


Unfortunately, many of the soon to be unnecessary donkeys are Americans. I think we'll be having a few rough years here.

As the economy slumps in 2008, I predict that you'll hear less from Establishment propaganda organs about needing to fill jobs that Americans just won't do.

I am still hearing it. The head of the Tucson chamber of commerce was on NPR yesterday talking about how much they need more Mexicans, in Tucson of all places! They won't stop until Americans force them to.

I predict that employers will continue to try to import more immigrants even as US unemployment goes up and wages down. It's always been that way when they can get away with it.

mrs. anonymous said...

And are they so unassimilated as to be unable to tell the difference between an apartment and an office?

No, you can't tell when someone is casing your apartment.

fifi said...

"According to a recent United Way study, 53% of adults in LA are functionally illiterate."

This can't be right. Are you just trying to scare us, Steve Sailer?

Anonymous said...


and often can read at all?


Hmmm, then there are the writers who ...

StephenT said...

"By the way, have the strategic business geniuses at the LA Times ever noticed that their plummeting sales figures are linked to the replacement of English-literate Angelenos by foreigners who can't read English, and often can read at all?"

I thought that way back in the 1990s, when it became obvious that the Times had made some sort of private calculation that Anglos are extinct and illegal Mexicans are the future, and cast their editorial lot with the interests of the latter. Then, they sat back to await the inevitable huge circulation payoffs. Unfortunately for the Times, however, they could hardly have picked a less auspicious culture as the new target market for a newspaper, or any written media. Mestizo Mexicans aren't readers, neither in their native land or here, whether in Spanish or in English. You only have to note how little literature has come out of the mestizo population in Mexico (almost zero) to figure that these aren't people who are going to spend their Sunday mornings poring over the L.A. Times Book Review, even if it was printed in Spanish. Market-wise, the Times would have been better off if CA had been swamped by immigrants from almost *any* other culture in the western hemisphere. Haitians, for example, have a higher level of secondary educational achievement (and, one assumes, literacy) than mestizos do. Well, the Times aimed to become the official newspaper of the Mexican illegal immigrant, and they've succeeded wildly. I haven't bought a copy in ten years.

Steve Sailer said...

"Hmmm, then there are the writers who ..."

often can't proofread at all.

poolside said...

Maybe they are leaving for fear of being caught in LA's escalating gang culture:

http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/la-gangs-nine-miles-and-spreading/17861/?page=1

ben tillman said...

Why exactly is America following a policy of driving American citizens out of mainland America's most pleasant climatic zone?

Don't conflate "America" with the American people or our rulers.

Why do America's rulers discriminate against Americans? Presumably because the rulers aren't American in any meaningful sense.

cabrolet said...

Do we elect our officials in order for them to look out for the interests of foreigners?

The Spring 2007 Elect a New People Immigration Act gave us the answer to that question. And in this election no politician will run on ending the outrageous affirmative action for immigrants regime. And, no, you won't get a border fence, either.

Franklin warned us: "A republic, if you can keep it".

And we didn't keep it.

Evil Neocon said...

Steve -- this is a natural and expected outcome of elitism.

What elites (as you point out) fear the most is competition from and being identified with ordinary, middle-working class Americans.

This is dangerous from their point of view and much better to price ordinary people out of California.

However labor being mobile it has gotten to the point where not just Californians are priced out of places but PA, or Georgia, etc. THAT massive heartland reaction to underpricing in the labor market due to too much labor and too much competition for homes with rising tax rates and Affirmative Action costs has triggered IMHO a populist movement.

Mark Seecof said...

The gov't of Norway has just announced that it will hire immigrants preferentially for government jobs. How long before the California state government does likewise? That would be a much more effective way to replace the population than the racial preferences used now, for which native-born citizens often qualify.

Anonymous said...

daveg says:


As the drive to raise funds and increase taxes increases they will continue to drive out the money makers, only exasperating the problem.


That will exasperate the money makers, which will make the problem worse, which is what you mean, I think (exaggerate?)

Steve Sailer said...

The problem (lack of taxpayers) will be exacerbated, while the solution (taxpayers) will be exasperated.

I like that dichotomy. It's like nature and nurture, but exacerbation / exasperation are the two sides of an extremely thin coin.

Anonymous said...

A policy of driving citizens out of California? I've been a fan and regular reader for years, but this sounds as crazy as any other conspiracy theory to me. It's the kind of jumping-to-conclusions that should embarrass any scholar. What about the other reasons they might be leaving?

For instance, many people move out of California by selling their house and buying a new house elsewhere twice as large, for the same price. Pure economic reasons, not govt. policy. This is such a big phenomenon I don't see how *any* discussion of California emigration in the last 30 years can fail to mention it. Trends such as baby boomers' ages and the recent housing bubble could easily account for that particular trend increasing in recent years.

Here's another -- the rise of the internet could lead to more people able to work from home (esp. in California!). Surely that has some effect in crowded LA, if anywhere.

Anyway... consider me unconvinced.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the CA budget crisis is why liberals and leftists promote open borders and immigration.

It is their way to punish the more productive in society by forcing them to pay more taxes.

SKT said...

Are there still a lot of new Mexicans arriving in California? My impression was that Texas was the big weasel in letting in these folks through, and California had heavily fortified fences to keep them out.

Of course, they can all easily go from Texas to California once they're across.

In Ohio, there were barely any Hispanics 10 years ago. Now every single landscaper and fast food employee is from Mexico, jobs that used to be done by lower middle class whites/blacks and high school kids, respectively, as recently as the 1990's.

Anonymous said...

"Here's another -- the rise of the internet could lead to more people able to work from home (esp. in California!)."

This sounds intuitive, but in reality, there is geographic clustering in most high-income fields. Most high-technology jobs in America remain clustered in areas like Silicon Valley, the Route 128 corridor in MA; most TV and film production remains clustered in Los Angeles; most publishing and finance remains clustered around New York City and regional centers like San Francisco; etc.

"The gov't of Norway has just announced that it will hire immigrants preferentially for government jobs."

But this preference doesn't apply to Swedes. Because the Swedes really have no trouble getting jobs in Norway, or because the Norwegians still hate them? I wonder.

Anonymous said...

Over on Marginal Revolution they have a posting: Who Benefits from the Federal Government?

The conclusion: The rich pay lots and get little in return ...

Some day they are going to bite the hand that robs them.

snidely whiplash said...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/12/congress_guts_border_fence_blo.asp
(...)
And a surprising move--given the increased concern about border security--is the decision to enact several provisions to make it harder to enforce U.S. immigration laws. Besides the decision not to penalize sanctuary cities, Democratic leaders also elected to scale down the border fence currently under construction, and to delay implementation of tougher ID standards at border crossings
(...)
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19132155&BRD=2290&PAG=461&dept_id=569392&rfi=6
Laredoans will no longer be ignored when it comes to the proposed border fence, according to an amendment attached to the Appropriations Omnibus Bill passed by the U.S. Congress earlier this week.Senate amendment 2466, introduced by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, now mandates that the Secretary of Homeland Security consult with "…States, local governments, Indian tribes, and property owners … to minimize the impact on the environment, culture, commerce, and quality of life for the communities and residents located near the sites at which such fencing is to be constructed," according to a text of the law provided by Hutchison's office.

Matt Mackowiak, Hutchison's press secretary, said that the ramifications for the Department of Homeland Security for not soliciting local input before commencing construction of the border fence would be decreased funding for border security.
(...)

After grudgingingly being signed into law (after passing in the Seante by 80-19)slightly more than one year ago by the worst president since Wacky Woodrow the fence is now completely dead. if one more mile is added to the lonely five already built I'll be greatly surprised.

When was the last time Washington has shown such stunningly blatant contempt for the opinions of the majority of voters? Probably wasn't that long ago but I can't recall it.

Anonymous said...

My liberal brother lives in Arcadia, CA. Great climate, safe neighborhood, good schools. When he and his family first moved there from the Midwest, they were exicited about the "diversity" the area had to offer. Their kids school is 20% Latino, 60% Asian, but their neighborhood is close to 100% non-English speaking (many older folks...no kids in the neighborhood) Chinese. They also had to pay three times more for a house that has 1,200 less square feet. They're trying to present a liberal brave face, but it's starting to crack. They are concerned that they won't get ahead and they long for the sense of community they had back in the Midwest...block parties, neighbor kids, friends on their old block who they regularily host in Cali. I was in Arcadia over Thanksgiving and there was talk of moving back to the snowy, cold, less diverse city they left...

Bill said...

That will exasperate the money makers, which will make the problem worse, which is what you mean, I think (exaggerate?)

-anon


He meant exacerbate, obviously.

Sheesh, what's with all the proofreaders? No wonder they only get $10 an hour up here.

David Davenport said...

They're trying to present a liberal brave face, but it's starting to crack. They are concerned that they won't get ahead and they long for the sense of community they had back in the Midwest...block parties, neighbor kids, friends on their old block who they regularily host in Cali.

CA's future is: former Yugoslavia.

gene berman said...

daveg:

The word that "anonymous" (and you) meant to use is "exacerbate," which means to intensify (sharpen, actually).

Mark said...

By the way, have the strategic business geniuses at the LA Times ever noticed that their plummeting sales figures are linked to the replacement of English-literate Angelenos by foreigners who can't read English, and often can't read at all?

Two reasons:

A) They're wearing their liberal, rose-tinted glasses.

AND

B) It doesn't matter, because the biggest advertisers in newspapers are all massive supporters of open borders, especially advertisers for real estate. I suspect they get significant pressure from their advertisers to continue supporting open borders.

Unfortunately, many of the soon to be unnecessary donkeys are Americans. I think we'll be having a few rough years here.

"A few rough years" may very well be a good thing if you're opposed to illegal immigration. Rising unemployment rates compounded by Americans finding lots of illegals working at jobs they previously "didn't want" will increase political pressure to do something about the matter. Illegals unable to find work may simply go home.

A poor economy will send more kids back to the workforce (only 36% of 15-19 year olds had summer jobs this year). Parents will find that their teenagers can't get decent work thanks to the illegals.

Further, states (excepting California, of course) facing a budget crunch may very well find that cracking down on illegals relieves alot of the pressure for new schools, new roads, and so on.

As the drive to raise funds and increase taxes increases they will continue to drive out the money makers, only exasperating the problem.

Does an image of Mexico come to mind?

The only problem being that the rich in California use illegal immigrants not only as gardeners and housekeepers, but to staff businesses providing services to the middle class. As the middle class flees, no services are needed, and the illegals flee, too.

The head of the Tucson chamber of commerce was on NPR yesterday talking about how much they need more Mexicans, in Tucson of all places! They won't stop until Americans force them to.

The Chamber can say it, but Americans don't have to buy it. Increasingly, we aren't.


For instance, many people move out of California by selling their house and buying a new house elsewhere twice as large, for the same price. Pure economic reasons, not govt. policy.

I seriously doubt that if you polled ex-Californians that this motive would rank high on the reasons they left. I've met dozens of ex-Californians in my time, in places with signifcantly lower housing costs - Georgia, Colorado, and Utah. Never once have I ever met one who said "I moved here to buy a bigger house." It was certainly a benefit of moving, but not the reason they moved.

THE first complaint I hear off every one of their lips is "It's so expensive there."

In Ohio, there were barely any Hispanics 10 years ago. Now every single landscaper and fast food employee is from Mexico, jobs that used to be done by lower middle class whites/blacks and high school kids, respectively, as recently as the 1990's.

And our high school kids get fatter, and college kids graduate with $60 grand in debt. Has there ever been a study linking higher obesity and soaring college debt to illegal immigration?

Most high-technology jobs in America remain clustered in areas like Silicon Valley, the Route 128 corridor in MA...most publishing and finance remains clustered around New York City and regional centers like San Francisco; etc.

Ummmmm, no. Many are but I seriously doubt that anything close to a majorty of jobs in publishing, finance, or technology are based in these areas. I have too many friends/neighbors who work in these fields and I don't live in San Jose.

Mark said...

After grudgingingly being signed into law (after passing in the Senate by 80-19)slightly more than one year ago by the worst president since Wacky Woodrow the fence is now completely dead.

Americans have lots of opinions on illegal immigration, some of them conflicting; but the one thing nearly all of us can agree on is the need for a fence.

This is one vote that will come back to haunt the Democrats. Republicans will play it up in the vulnerable districts, like Heath Shuler's.

The conclusion: The rich pay lots and get little in return...Some day they are going to bite the hand that robs them.

Ever hear of illegal immigration? Or legal immigration? Ever pay attention to who contributes to political campaigns, and who they donate to (incumbents)?

Aside form that, the rich need taxes. Would Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, or Larry Page be billionaires without an educated populace they could draw from to write their code?

David said...

anonymous said:

What about the other reasons they might be leaving? For instance, many people move out of California by selling their house and buying a new house elsewhere twice as large, for the same price. Pure economic reasons, not govt. policy.

You assume that government policy has no bearing on the housing market.

A good primer on economics might be in order; here is one of the best.

A good "Steve read" is "Affordable Family Formation" here; hopefully, it, too, will give you some food for thought.