Gyroscopic Investing

America’s ruling financial, media, and political elites are largely concentrated in three major urban centers—New York City, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.—and all three have contained large black populations, including a violent underclass. During the early 1990s, many observers feared New York City was headed for urban collapse due to its enormously high crime rates, Los Angeles experienced the massive and deadly Rodney King Riots, and Washington often vied for the title of American homicide capital. In each city, the violence and crime were overwhelmingly committed by black males, and although white elites were rarely the victims, their fears were quite palpable.

One obvious reaction to these concerns was strong political support for a massive national crackdown on crime, and the prison incarceration of black men increased by almost 500% during the two decades after 1980. But even after such enormous rates of imprisonment, official FBI statistics indicate that blacks today are still over 600% as likely to commit homicide than non-blacks and their robbery rate is over 700% larger; these disparities seem just as high with respect to Hispanic or Asian immigrants as they are for whites. Thus, replacing a city’s blacks with immigrants would tend to lower local crime rates by as much as 90%, and during the 1990s American elites may have become increasingly aware of this important fact, together with the obvious implications for their quality of urban life and housing values.

According to Census data, between 1990 and 2010 the number of Hispanics and Asians increased by one-third in Los Angeles, by nearly 50% in New York City, and by over 70% in Washington, D.C. The inevitable result was to squeeze out much of the local black population, which declined, often substantially, in each location. And all three cities experienced enormous drops in local crime, with homicide rates falling by 73%, 79%, and 72% respectively, perhaps partly as a result of these underlying demographic changes. Meanwhile, the white population increasingly shifted toward the affluent, who were best able to afford the sharp rise in housing prices. It is an undeniable fact that American elites, conservative and liberal alike, are today almost universally in favor of very high levels of immigration, and their possible recognition of the direct demographic impact upon their own urban circumstances may be an important but unspoken factor in shaping their views.

[...]

But consider that support for very high levels of foreign immigration is an impeccably liberal cause, and such policies inevitably displace and remove huge numbers of urban blacks; it is easy to imagine that Yglesias quietly redoubled his pro-immigration zeal in the wake of the incident. Multiply this personal example a thousand-fold, and perhaps an important strand of the tremendous pro-immigration ideological framework of American elites becomes apparent. The more conspiratorially-minded racialists, bitterly hostile to immigration, sometimes speculate that there is a diabolical plot by our ruling power structure to “race-replace”? America’s traditional white population. Perhaps a hidden motive along these lines does indeed help explain some support for heavy immigration, but I suspect that the race being targeted for replacement is not the white one.

[...]

Indeed, the strong support of our political elites for Section 8 housing vouchers may be less connected with any alleged social benefits these provide than with their important role in moving large numbers of impoverished urban residents away from the near vicinity of wealthy neighborhoods out into the remote suburbs of the middle class. Several years ago the Atlantic published a major article by Hanna Rosin on the rapid changes in the geographical pattern of crime induced by these demographic shifts, and the piece provoked much discussion even though the author avoided unduly emphasizing the troubling racial aspects. Elite selfishness is hardly surprising and a policy of exporting those populations with a strong link to crime into other localities seems a natural strategy, especially if this can be accomplished under the altruistic guise of socially-uplifting anti-poverty programs.

[...]

On rare occasions, the mask slips and the underlying mental workings of our national elites are momentarily revealed. Consider New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, one of our most vocal pro-immigration voices on the national stage and a man whose vast wealth and influence often allow him to be far more candid on controversial topics than most other public figures. In May 2011 Bloomberg was interviewed on Meet the Press, and explained that if he had full authority, he could easily fix the seemingly insoluble problems of a city like Detroit at no cost to the taxpayer. He proposed opening wide the floodgates to unlimited foreign immigration on the condition that all the additional immigrants moved to Detroit and lived there for a decade or so, thereby transforming the city. I suspect this provides an important insight into how he and his friends discuss certain racial issues in private.

It is an undeniable fact that American elites, conservative and liberal alike, are today almost universally in favor of very high levels of immigration, and their possible recognition of the direct demographic impact upon their own urban circumstances may be an important but unspoken factor in shaping their views.

MachineGhost wrote: I wouldn't call these excerpts "rigorous"; it reeks of a pompous blowhard's paranoid conspiracy theory.

MachineGhost wrote: Conservative elites are in favor of high levels of immigation?  Hello???

And for these campaigns, the racial lines are clearly established, with the modern Republicans being the “white party,”? drawing over 90% of their support from that demographic group, while over 90% of blacks regularly vote the Democratic ticket, which also usually attracts the overwhelming majority of other non-white voters.

Indeed, although restrictionists routinely denounce that legislation for having flooded America with Hispanic immigrants, the facts are precisely the opposite. While the 1924 Immigration Act had drastically curtailed immigration from Europe (and Asia), the entire Western Hemisphere was totally exempted, and the U.S. retained its previous “open borders”? policy for Mexico and the rest of Latin America until strict quotas were finally introduced as part of the 1965 law.

WiseOne wrote: One oft-repeated theme struck me:  the author kept saying that "black removal/replacement" was an effect of heavy Hispanic immigration.  I don't believe that's the case; the black population stays put, but is diminished only percentage-wise by the influx of new immigrants.  I wonder if "black removal" hasn't been more due to the high rate of incarceration.  Not only does it take all those black males out of the picture, but they also aren't fathering children.

Pointedstick wrote:

MachineGhost wrote: Conservative elites are in favor of high levels of immigation?  Hello???

Business leaders and many politicians, like Jeb Bush, who we are discussing in another thread... Maybe not "conservative" as in "tea party" but the mainstream right-of-center elites definitely seem to agree with the leftist elites on immigration nowadays.

Simonjester wrote: i suspect the (both party) establishment support of open borders is less about racism or crime than it is about being able to "gruber" ...all the public all the time... or at least a majority of the public all the time. Its about dumbing down and lowering the education level, and especially the american civics level of enough voters that they can continue to do the will of the special interests (military industrial, banksters, prison/police-state industrial, and big business) who pay to get them elected and pay for their control of the policies...

WiseOne wrote:
I also wondered why the article ignored the "Freakonomics" factor - i.e. a carefully researched thesis that access to abortion was a major factor in the crime drop, and far more significant than police tactics.  I do wish the author had taken a biostatistics course, where he would have learned about regression analysis for addressing multiple related factors.  Wish he'd taken his analysis of NYC one step farther and done that...it is interesting that the crime rates here are so low despite the presence of a large underclass, and it may or may not be the case that NYC's policing innovations explain all of that.

Simonjester wrote: Economic elites mostly support increased immigration, regardless of the party they support.  Sheldon Adelson comes to mind.

WiseOne wrote: BTW...how do you define "elite"?  I'm probably technically one of them and so are many of us here on this forum.

Lowe wrote: Just let me know where I can sign up for Team Them.  Not that you guys aren't great. 

WiseOne wrote: BTW...how do you define "elite"?  I'm probably technically one of them and so are many of us here on this forum.

MachineGhost wrote: Okay, it looks like we can put the "abortion effect" to bed now.  Great find, PS!  There's a lesson in there about highly popular fad authors and sloppy research.