This dumb meme needs to die. The effects of immigration on population aging are very small, because immigrants age too. China would need literally billions to put a dent in population aging. There are not billions of people as productive as the avg Chinese angling to move there.
South Korea keeping dependency ratios constant would require about a hundred million immigrants... PER YEAR.
All of this, of course, assumes that the immigrants are just as capable and productive as the native population (they are not), do not engage in ethnic conflict (they usually do), and have comparably pro-growth politics to the natives (they do not).
Some excerpts from the white flight chapter of Jeremy Carl's "The Unprotected Class": The "racial transformation" of urban neighborhoods in the 50s-80s was incredibly rapid, South Shore going from 96% white to 94% black in 30 years.
I did not know Rosa Parks was attacked in her own home in Detroit (by a black man).
"White flight resembles ethnic cleansing, but we blame the victims rather than the perpetrators."
2024 Dutch version of the famous Danish "It's Complicated" graph. First generation immigrants are net fiscal negatives at all ages - entirely because of "non-western" immigrants. But at least the Netherlands benefits from... there must be something. (new study, short thread)
This is a very familiar map. Bet you could predict almost all of this with national IQ + selection + obvious adjustment for Afrikaners.
Everyone knows "asylum seekers" are absurdly expensive. But even study migration is a net negative at all ages. Student visas often get a free pass in immigration discussions - people just assume they're fine based on half-remembered recollections from college. But they're not.
Not surprising to those familiar with US immigrant achievement, but about 80% of 21st century Chemistry/Physics/Medicine US immigrant Nobelists are from Europe or the Anglosphere. Of the 10 Asians, 5 are Japanese and 2 are Israeli. As far as national origins: UK dominates.
Wrong as applies to newspapers and television. There's strong evidence media radicalization (Great Awokening) caused the attitude shift in white liberals, not the other way around. From "Explaining Shifts in White Racial Liberalism".
Newspapers that optimize for audience engagement look like the NYPost or the Daily Mail. Think prominent pictures of scary black criminals, rather than burying nonwhite murderer's race like most papers.
It's more correct wrt newsletters, blogs, podcasts, and social media because the barriers to entry are so much lower and there aren't rivers of public, foundation, and rich donor money to keep things running without an audience. But that's not what people are complaining about.
Thread on the difference between the history of pre- and post-tax and transfer income inequality in the US. The well-known story is the left earned one, with a U-shaped curve. The right is what it looks like after taxes and transfers - there's no increase post-1970.
So what happened? Short answer is the things described in @charlesmurray's Coming Apart. First, Great Society welfare programs disincentived work among the left half of the productivity Bell Curve - you need to be above average to make real income gains from working harder.
All of the income gains of the bottom quintile since 1970, and most of the income gains of the second quintile, have come from increased transfers (mostly paid for by the top quintile).
It's common knowledge that Asian science is full of fraud. Less common knowledge is that Asian scientists in the US also commit a lot of fraud vs their white peers. For instance, as of 2022 19/29 researchers sanctioned by the ORI are of Asian origin.
This reflects poorly on university plans to attract Asian STEM talent to replace their white faculty. Ability isn't enough - you also need honesty.