June 6, 2010

Texas Cities: Not Trustatopias

From the Houston Chronicle on Texas public school enrollment trends:
Perhaps the most stunning statistic when it comes to school enrollment is the number of children from low income families. That number has increased by 893,055 over the past 10 years - exceeding the overall student enrollment growth.

That's a 46% increase in low income students in just a decade. In contrast, the number of non-low income public school students fell 2%. And that's in Texas, one of the leaders in affordable family formation. Oh, dear ...

Low incomes students now make up 59% of the total public school students in Texas.

Also, Limited English Proficiency students were up 47%.

That growth of low income and LEP students is driven in large part by Hispanics being up 49%.

In Texas, we aren't seeing the Trustafarian Exception, where wealthy whites have been increasing their share of the population of elite cities like New York and D.C. In contrast, white students in Texas were down 6% in absolute numbers. As a share of all students, whites collapsed from 43% to 33% in one decade.
The number of white children attending public schools is declining all across Texas. White children now make up less than 8 percent of the total enollment in the Houston ISD and less than 5 percent of the Dallas ISD enrollment.  

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Money. You're so fucking money and you don't even know it man. Great post(s).

Anonymous said...

Steve -

Are there any trends we can see in the fertility rate of the children of Mexican immigrants to Texas vs the Children of mexican immigrants to California?

Due to birthright citizenship all of these US born children are eligible for social services like section 8.

Texas offers a very low cost of living, combined with low social service levels (ie the section 8 voucher is small, AFDC is small)

California offers a very high cost of living, combined with high social service levels (ie the section 8 voucher is large and AFDC is large)

Steve, is there evidence that
(1) the children of immigrants have a larger or smaller number of children depending on how affordable the cost of living is

(2) the children of immigrants have a larger or smaller number of children depending on how large the average social service check is

chicagopeasant said...

I guess then Chicago public schools are doing quite well at 8%

chicagopeasant said...

I guess then Chicago public schools are doing quite well at 8%

jody said...

i have never been to houston. but every frequent business traveler who i have ever known, has told me it is one of the worst cities in the US. they were unanimous on this opinion.

it's amazing that euro americans comprise less than 10% of the students in both the houston and dallas public school districts. those rates are like detroit or washington DC.

i have a friend who was looking at his much younger sister's high school yearbook, and was shocked to see the transformation his high school had made in only 13 years. he said his old high school now looked like "Sudan High". i hear this all the time from people who grew up in california. the speed at which the demographic transition is happening is shocking.

personally i just look to see who is getting off the school bus in the afternoon, then project 10 years into the future. the US is in for a bumpy ride.

Chief Seattle said...

Heard this first hand from my cousin and her husband. Both Ivy League educated, moved to the Dallas area as associate professors at good colleges about 60 miles apart. They split the difference on the commute, and bought in a new subdivision (in 2005 or so). Two young daughters. Well, guess what - as the first daughter went through Kindergarten and then first grade they realized that the middle-class average Jose's in their school district just didn't care about education all that much. They couldn't move without taking a huge hit on their house. So both girls are now in private school at exorbitant cost. Score another victim of blank slate theory.

Anonymous said...

...the speed at which the demographic transition is happening is shocking...

Yep.

...the US is in for a bumpy ride...

Yep.



At which point you are duty-bound to ask yourself: What preparations must I be making?

What can be salvaged?

And what must be abandoned?

You and your loved ones must be prepared to survive the maelstrom which is staring us down from the horizon.

That is your duty - to see to it that your loved ones survive.

Kevin K said...

One of the reason HISD has such a high fraction of minorities is that Texas used to fund school districts almost all the way from local property taxes. HISD was where the businesses and rich people, who sent their kids to private schools, lived, so it kept the taxes low. However, the ring of suburbs had high property taxes and really good schools. Therefore, everyone with kids lived in the suburbs and would commute downtown. Texas has changed that system of funding, but its still probably mostly true.

I live in DC now, but I grew up in Houston. The inside-the-loop area has really been gentrified so I wonder if there is something funny with those numbers you present.

Anonymous said...

Don't have the number for Texas, but birth rate numbers for California are:

- about 1.8 children born per non-immigrant woman.
The birthrate numbers for non-immigrant Asian and African American women are about the same as for whites.

- about 4 children born per Latina (from Mexico and Central America) (mostly illegal) immigrant.

In California, more than 60% of illegal immigrants are from Mexico. Approximately 20% are from other Latin American countries.

Mexican and Latin American women also have the highest rate of teen pregnancy.

Other startling statistics indicate that less than half of Latina mothers are married.

I'm speaking as a woman who spent years in post-secondary studies. I delayed having kids until I was in my late thirties. I've never had access to any form of paid materity leave, government paid childcare or even access to a reasonable public school for my children.

I'm incredulous that California pays for childcare (from infancy to kindergarten) and all birth expenses for these illegal immigrant women.

In San Francisco, where I live, the children of illegal immigrants have priority access to the best public school ahead of my family.

I am truly tired of hearing that white women are not having enough children.

If it was left to non-immigrant women, our schools would be prospering and producing well educated, productive children. Our population would be at a sustainable rate of growth and we would not be destroying our environment.

Data source:

http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/cacounts/CC_1107HJCC.pdf

http://www.csuchico.edu/cjhp/1/2/78-87-davis.pdf

Whiskey said...

I wonder how much is immigration driven (i.e. younger kids brought in illegally), and how much a differential between fertility rates of Whites and Mexicans?

Everyone just assumes that low White fertility rates are "natural" and that high Mexican ones are "un-natural" yet it seems to me the reverse is true. It also seems intuitive that relative attractiveness of men will play a part in the total fertility rate.

If men available are deemed attractive enough, even lack of marriage or money will not be a barrier for women to get pregnant, often at an early age. Of course, against this is the role social pressure among female peers sliced by race/ethnicity play.

I.E. who among middle class White girls wants to be "Juno" vs. who among Latinos would avoid it?

But this brings up another issue, where is Whitopia?

Assuming one wants to avoid the noxious effects of majority non-White status that California has, among them ruinous rates of taxation, very high social spending, hard-left politics (the only Whites left are trustafarians), lack of decent middle class shopping, food etc. in a place catering to Mexicans, and so on, where does one move?

ALL of America seems like that.

[BTW, the Weekend WSJ had a piece on Black flight from Detroit. Not even hard-core Black revivalist folks will stay now. It's dying.]

Anonymous said...

So what states are all the whites moving to from Texas?

Steve Sailer said...

Dear Kevin K:

Do the boundaries of Houston ISD expand as the municipal boundaries of Houston expand (in Texas, big cities can forcibly annex their suburbs), or do the suburbs keep their separate school districts? Is that what's meant by "Independent" in HISD -- that the school district and the city is not coterminous?

Chris said...

I'm incredulous that California pays for childcare (from infancy to kindergarten) and all birth expenses for these illegal immigrant women.

My wife is in prenatal health care in California and, on top of having a patient population in which around half were pregnant illegals, she was required by her employer to take night classes after work to learn Spanish so she could communicate with these people so they could get the very best completely free health care possible for their new American citizen babies.

jody said...

damn. some of these anecdotes are crazy. just when you think you have a handle on how insane america has gone...

Stephen said...

Steve,

The whites in Houston have moved to the suburbs. In Sugar Land which is about 25 minutes SW of Houston the numbers are probably much different. The high school I went to (Clements) was mostly white and with a pretty high number of asian (including indian) kids. The school district is Fort Bend ISD. There are many rich suburbs outside of HISD.

Stephen said...

Steve,

Here's from wikipedia on ISDs:

"Geographical School districts in Texas are (with one exception, the Stafford Municipal School District) completely independent from city or county jurisdiction.
Texas school district boundaries are not always aligned with county or city boundaries; a district can occupy several counties and cities, while a single city (especially larger ones such as Dallas, Houston, or San Antonio) may be split between several districts.
Almost all Texas school districts use the title "Independent School District", or ISD."

Here are the demos for the city of Sugar Land in

2000:
http://sugarland.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

and 2006:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Land,_Texas

l said...

Anonymous said...
California offers a very high cost of living, combined with high social service levels (ie the section 8 voucher is large and AFDC is large)


California had those things, but that's ending. They be broke. It'll be interesting how to see how CA and TX de-develop into Latin-flavored Detroits.

Anonymous said...

Stephen,

While that is a valid observation (that white flight has caused many whites to flee to the suburbs) it would still be worthwhile to get the demographic statistics of children who are geographically eligible (i.e. they live in the ISD's boundaries) for attendance in these urban ISD's (Houston, Dallas) vs those that actually get enrolled.

I find it hard to believe that the actual numbers of enrolled are even closely representative of the numbers of whites who would be geographically eligible to attend.

Very very roughly, these districts do correspond with city boundaries (I know its not always accurate: Alief ISD is entirely in Houston city limits, and parts of Fort Bend ISD are in Houston too), but according to the 2000 Census, 31% of residents (or about 602,000) within the city limits were White. So I think Steve's point still stands.

--A fellow graduate of the FBISD school system

ATBOTL said...

The sort of conservatives who won't talk about race have been touting Texas as a model for the rest of America lately.

Kevin said...

Houston city limits have expanded, but as other commenters have pointed out the school districts and the city limits are independent of one another.

I grew up way out in the Cy-Fair school district and when the kids moved out my parents moved downtown to the West Gray area. That area has developed culturally from a formerly Hispanic neighborhood to an upscale upper middle class neighborhood. However, I suspect there are areas in Houston that I never go to that probably have had a lot more population growth (rather than economic growth).

I just looked up the demographics of my old school district (CFISD):

1975 – 90% white,10% minority

2009-10 – 35.7% White, 38.9% Hispanic, 16.8% African American, 8.8% Asian, 0.3% Native American

Stephen said...

Anon,
I wasn't trying to refute Steve, just trying help explain part of the HISD numbers. What's interesting about my family my parents had my older brother and were kicked out of their apartment because they had a baby (back when they could do this). Eventually they bought a house in Alief, but fled that area. I was only 6 at the time, but it was bad schools and higher crime due mostly to Hispanics moving in that made my family move to Sugar Land. My Vietnamese friend and his family also fled Alief to live in Sugar Land.

Boris said...

Steve, are there groups within white America with comparable fertility rates to Hispanics? Mormons come to mind-is there anybody else?

Wido Incognitus said...

Steve,
Texas: 33% white students
San Francisco: 11%
DC: 6%
Manhattan: 13%, 19%, 22%, 2%, 2%, 2%

Whether or not the white student population is growing in Trustopolis as opposed to in Texas, a white parent who sends his children to public schools in Trustopolis will be sending him to schools with many more minority students than a parent in many parts of Texas. The CHANGE in demographics is less important than the absolute percentages (in schools, in the general population) for gauging how much contact there is with people of other races.

You may reply that public school numbers are unimportant because whites in Trustopolis have no children or send their children to private school, but then it's not clear why you bothered to use them for Texas. I agree that limousine liberals are ridiculous, but to argue that they are insulated from the effects of diversity by geography as compared to the typical American makes absolutely no sense unless you argue about Trustopolis already having a culture based on diversity while the small town is having its culture and social trust undermined by the changing population.

Max said...

I delayed having kids until I was in my late thirties.


Really sorry for your kids. For the most healthy children their mother should be in 18-25 year old range.

Anonymous said...

Independent school districts in Texas are not coterminous with municipal boundaries.

A good example is the Richardson Independent School District. http://www.risd.org/group/schools/schools_main.html It's home to J.J. Pearce High School. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._J._Pearce_High_School

Richardson is home to a large, public university and many tech firms. It's also home to Hamilton Park. http://www.risd.org/Group/Schools/Schools.asp?OrgCode=105 Any school with "magnet" in it exists to attract more whites.

Anonymous said...

Houston ISD schools are highly segregated. Even if you go to a school that has many minorities on paper, it has a segregated program of honors students. For example, right in the middle of town just south of downtown, Lanier Middle School, with a special program in which students average 93%ile math on the Stanford test.
http://ms.houstonisd.org/lanierms/departments/magnet/MagnetWeekPres09-10.pdf

HISD's strategy is to segregate within the school rather than between schools so that the building average on paper is good. The joke in HISD is that if you didn't get a transfer, you didn't ask. They locate their most selective programs in the worst schools to draw the good students in where they spend all of their time with the best students and teachers. The point is to keep the good kids from going to private. This actually works quite well because a private school comprised of almost all good students means that even the good students have trouble competing to get into the top 50%. I say it works well for HISD because in Texas, the top 10% are the only group guaranteed admission into the public universities like UT and A&M. So students who would easily be top 10% in a school with 4000 students that are 90% NAM's, can't get into the top half in a competitive private HS like Strake Jesuit or Saint John Episcopal. If they aren't in the top 10%, they have a really hard time getting a good reasonably priced in state education. In fact plenty of private HS students transfer to public for their senior year just to graduate in the top 10%. This was so common that the schools had to come up with a policy that said only the grades earned in their school counted to class rank. Only credits transferred, not GPA. So they would have to do well their senior year.

The deal that HISD unofficially cut with the upper middle class parents was to give them segregated classes in exchange for their enrollment.

wild chicken said...

I lived in Dallas 30 years ago and even then people who lived within city limits sent their kids to private schools. Or, you lived out in Carrollton or Mesquite or Seagoville etc.

Most the surrounding counties were dry, so as soon as you'd hit the city limit inbound there would be rows of liquor stores and bars. Even a drive-through liquor store down near Oak Cliff.

So it was quite a bifurcated culture even then.

Anonymous said...

Steve:

San Francisco: 11%

That number is wrong. I'm pretty much an expert on what is going on in SF with the schools. We're not all a bunch of trust fund babies either. A lot of us are middle class or upper middle class (usually dual income professionals.)

About 30 to 40% of kids in SF are white. Most of them are in private school. Because of the way the school "lottery" works in SF, white people CAN'T get their kids into the better public schools.

Yes, many do move to Palo Alto or Marin.

Frankly, at this point, given in the state of things, I've adopted an unapologetic siege mentality.

Also, the sfgate article you posted does not correctly report what is going on in California. The problem is *not* white infertility. The European birthrate has always been around the 2/3 level, except in peak periods.

A birthrate of 4 (at the moment, Latinas) has always been disastrous, except where there has been agricultural land to expand into. Don't forget the very high rate of infant and maternal fatality experienced well into the 20th century.

A birthrate of 4 and low infant mortality is a complete aberration.

So if the kids of all these Latinas were willing to eke it out in the desserts of Nevada (or Mexico), maybe we wouldn't have a problem. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Anonymous said...

"I delayed having kids until I was in my late thirties."

"Really sorry for your kids. For the most healthy children their mother should be in 18-25 year old range."

Sorry dear, you are confused.

The facts:

The miscarriage rate increases slightly for women when they reach there late thirties.

It increases again, on average, more sharply after the age of about 42.

With the exception of certain genetic defects that can be tested in utero, the health of born children is unaffected by the age of the mother. There are few survivable age-of-mother related birth defects. Nature has a way of taking care of this.

My grandmother had seven children, the last at the age of 42. (my uncle Richard.)

I had two children, the last at the age of 43.

Before the advent of birth control, the average age of the mother when she had her last child was 43.

My uncle Richard is easily the sharpest and best looking in family.

My daughter, born when I was 43, is sharp as a whip and a cute as a button. No health problems.

Women have always had kids in their late thirties and early forties. One of the things that has increased the miscarriage and fertility rate for women in this age group is smoking.

So, yes, have the necessary tests. Don't smoke.

And by the way, many women are not ready, physiologically, psychologically or financially, to have a child when they are 18.

Most of the Latina women are in that unready group. Society will bare the cost of this.

Paid maternity leave and more work place friendly attitudes toward mothers would certainly help middle class women have children at a younger age.

Misinformed anecdotes about "the healthy age" of mothering will not increase the middle class birth rate.

roo_ster said...

Texas ISDs are not coterminous with city/county boundaries. For instance, Richardson ISD includes a great portion of north Dallas, which is mostly middle-class & more affluent.

If you are white, middle class or more prosperous, and live in the confines of Dallas ISD, you send your kids to private school. If a parent has ANY sense and the means to do so, they send their kids to private school. Best count that as an unadvertised housing cost, if you have school-aged kids and want to move to Dallas.

Heck, that is beginning to be the case with the innermost suburbs, too, as the effects of destroying the old housing projects and rise in Section 8 continues. For example, Richardson ISD used to be top notch, what with the sons & daughters of telecom & defense industry engineers packing the RISD schools and their parents pounding the table at district trustee meetings for academic excellence.

Nowadays, though, Richardson ISD is halfway to Dallas ISD numbers (demographically & academically). I won't send my kids to RISD.

Anonymous said...

There are majority-white Texas school districts, but they are no longer urban or suburban. The farther out you move, the whiter you get. According to the local rag (uber left Dallas Morning News), the Plano ISD (lousy but widely considered to be excellent and white) in the last decade saw a more than 5000 student increase each in Hispanic (east side) and Asian (west side) students, and approximately 2500 increase in blacks. White students decreased by over 5000. My local elementary school depicts this in microcosm; when I rejected it for my older son it was at least 65% white; when I recently removed my younger son it was perhaps 45% white. In contrast, the growing and slightly-further north Frisco ISD saw an increase in each minority group of under 5000 students, but an increase in whites by over 15000. Give it another ten years, and Frisco will look like Plano and the next suburb on the way north (Prosper) will look like Frisco. Just how far out people can go, and where the jobs will be, and what kind of commutes are tolerated, remains to be seen. My children attended private school k-8 (majority white but increasing numbers of Asians) but the local high school is heavily Asian and unless you have an over 4.0 GPA (lots of AP and honors classes) you cannot possibly get into the top 10% with resultant admission to a good in-state university. If you want your kids to meet/marry a fellow member of the white race, you need to send them far away from the urban centers or out of state. I recently visited a local Walmart (out of necessity) after attending Memorial Day services at a cemetery, and mused about the patriotic service and family history of all the Chinese, Indians, and Mexicans thronging the store - i.e. if I want to pretend I still live in America, I stay home.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

>I lived in Dallas 30 years ago
>and even then people who lived
>within city limits sent their
>kids to private schools.

This is very true.

Whites in Dallas by-in-large do not go to DISD.

My wife early-30-ish in Dallas for her first 18 years and went to a christian private school the whole time.

There are home school groups in my area doing home school sports leagues.

Much of the DISD "Black Flight" is local and state government employees and associated government contractors getting out.

There is a on-going partonage fight between the Blacks and Latinos for control of the DISD administrative hiring and contracting machinery that Blacks are slowly losing.

The local DISD associated, and teacher unon controlled, PTA has started trying to salvage some elementary schools in upper middle class white neighborhoods via "early learning" PTA groups so they can get bond issues approved in low turn out elections.

BamaGirl said...

"A birthrate of 4 (at the moment, Latinas) has always been disastrous, except where there has been agricultural land to expand into. Don't forget the very high rate of infant and maternal fatality experienced well into the 20th century. "

Thank you for pointing this out, anonymous. Instead of complaining about the "low" (more like smart and sustainable, imo) white birth-rate, our efforts should be focused on bringing down skyrocketing birth rates of other groups. I honestly believe certain minority families have the large families intentionally (with demographic displacement in mind) considering how defensive they (and self-hating liberals) get of their lifestyle when some talking head on tv mentions the problems associated with it.

Anonymous said...

Hey BamaGirl,

Thanks for your comments.

By the way, if you look at the California counts data, almost every minority group has lowered their birthrate into the 2-3 range.

The exception are immigrant (mostly illegal) Latinas.

So the constant hand-ringing about low white birthrate is ill founded. Sure, without illegal immigration, labor wages would go up. We'd pay more for lettuce!

All forces should be brought to bear on the very high birth rate of Latina (mostly illegal) women, who have their kids at a very young age, and therefore cannot develop the potential of each child.

Anonymous said...

...who have their kids at a very young age, and therefore cannot develop the potential of each child...

Just what exactly is the potential of a child whose IQ is 80 [or 75, or 70, or 65...]?

Seriously - what the heck difference would it make whether or not they even attended school?

Underachiever said...

This is my area of expertise!

Kevin,

Four years ago, I graduated from Cypress Creek High School which is the largest school in CFISD, a suburban school system in northwest Houston. The demographics were slightly more favorable at my school than your numbers. Within my school, the races were largely segregated by class level (Asians and whites in the AP and honors classes, whites and hispanics in the regular classes, hispanics and blacks in the slow classes). Therefore, my experience was actually a very good one.

In that school at least, the whites were usually upper or upper middle class. I moved around a lot before I went to high school and I noticed that the whites at the school were much sharper than I had encountered before (in Oklahoma and Arkansas). In our school, there were about 630 graduating seniors (I think there were about 750 students including dropouts). Among these, there were 13 NMFs (National Merit Finalists) which correspond roughly the top .5% of test takers for the PSAT. Among these 13, there was 1 black, 2.5 asians, one hispanic and the rest were white. Three of the NMFs were my three best friends. Among the five NMFs I personally knew (myself included), one was quite poor, one was middle class, one was upper middle class, and two were very rich.

Some anecdotes:
I saw a couple of fights at school; all involved solely Mexicans and blacks.

Also, as a junior, Katrina happened and Houston decided to take in some poor, lower class blacks from Louisiana. As a senior, I made the mistake of being lazy and not taking the English AP class, subsequently I was exposed to some of our guests from New Orleans. Basically, the only black from Louisiana that I encountered in class was extremely rude, astonishingly stupid, had a sloping forehead (and a noticeably small head) and seemed to get a lot of pleasure out of calling me a faggot.

One time a Mexican threw a shoe at a student. It missed and hit the teacher in the face. This was in art class, where I had to deal with the NAMs.

Sadly as a senior, I noticed that the freshman class appeared more black and Mexican than I remembered. I do not believe that the demographic change is favorable for that school.

Anonymous said...

BTW, after having watched Sunday night's episode, one has to wonder how much longer Vince Gilligan & the Breaking Bad creative team are going to be allowed to continue pushing the envelope in the direction of hyper-realistic portrayals of sand-state dysgenia.

Eventually someone is going to start screaming The R-Word [which is assuming they haven't started screaming it already].

eh said...

For the most healthy children their mother should be in 18-25 year old range.

Those girls are busy playing softball. On TV no less.

...our efforts should be focused on bringing down skyrocketing birth rates of other groups.

That wouldn't hurt. But what we really need to do is keep them the hell out in the first place. Which means not only illegals, but also most of the legal (Hispanic) immigrants as well (about which you pretty much never hear any serious discussion whatsoever).

Anonymous said...

And yet, (minority-majority) Texas public school students outscore their colleagues in mostly-white Michigan, Tennessee, Alaska, etc...

Somehow, I doubt the Armageddon is nigh.

Gene Berman said...

BamaGirl (+ anon immed following):

The problem is as BG sees it--she just doesn't see the cause, nor does anon, even with better grasp of demo-trends. (Even Europe has declining rates of--more fecund--Muslim women.)

The U.S. and European problems are roughly similar, tho' by no means identical. To understand as fully as necessary, my strong suggestion would be to read (all three)essays at: lagriffedulion.f2s.com:
1. Smart Fraction Theory and the
Wealth of Nations;
2. Smart Fraction Theory II--Why
Asians Lag;
3. Cognitive Decline--Irreducible
Legacy of Open Borders

Reading and internalizing these will produce an accurate appreciation for "what's going on"
and the most likely "shape of things to come." But I'll put it a nutshell for you (or as reasonable a facsimile thereof as I'm capable).

Civilization (especially material aspects reflected in "standard of living") are everywhere related to % of "smart fraction" ability-distribution. Nearly everywhere, this fraction is in significant (and growing) decline for reasons I'll save for a subsequent comment (as these are my own distillation of other matters quite apart from the demographic data or trend).

The important--"takeaway"--point (deducible from the cited essays) is that levels of civilization are dependent on these "smart fractions." It's not a matter of an advantage/disadvantage to the "smart" as opposed to another group: in a very real sense, all others derive greater benefit from existence of the smart fraction than actually flows to that fraction itself. The cognitively able can produce what they require and want "all by themselves," if there were no others (who are absolutely in need of the benefit of the more able just to maintain present levels of existence).

Try to imagine the disappearance of everyone--everywhere--with an IQ of 105 or better. It would be Africa(!) everywhere (and even the possibility climates not sub- or tropical would become much less habitable). World population of such unfortunates must shrink to levels sustainable only under more primitive agriculture.

Some might argue that the dumbed-down population could continue at levels only slightly less than exist at present. That supposition, however, is most seriously flawed: mere maintenance requires the same cognitive distribution at the original attainment (and, perhaps, even a bit more, for reasons to be discussed in the promised subsequent comment). As "things" stand now, the pyramids of Egypt may, in a few centuries, indeed, have managed to outlast virtually everything developed since.

And it may not take that long.

Anonymous said...

One time a Mexican threw a shoe at a student. It missed and hit the teacher in the face. This was in art class, where I had to deal with the NAMs.

Did the teacher find a white scapegoat to punish for this incident?

Anonymous said...

First of all, I resent having ILLEGAL aliens being referred to as immigrants. A immigrant is one who applies Legally for citizenship according to the law of the land, meets all requirements, is accepted/sworn in and swears allegiance to the USA, not Mexico. One of the requirements is that they need to be able to support themselves. Not go on OUR welfare .