Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: arun gera who wrote (98051)	1/20/2013 2:47:47 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217901

The migration restrictions you mention were to maintain cultural norms. Similarly, I think it a good idea to restrict Islamic migration. When people migrate, as I have done, they don't change culture. Their children do if they are immersed in the new culture, but if the reasons for their ancestral culture are strong enough, they don't. For example Jews maintained their culture for centuries in their adopted countries. Moslems do too. When there is mass migration, as there was from England to NZ, the immigrant English did not become Maori. If mass migration from China booms, NZ will become a province of China. Considering how China is run, that's a bad thing. The Europeans are now learning to their cost that immigrants do not just become locals with the same values and cultural norms of the locals. Islamic Jihad maintains the ideology. It's fashionable now to criticize migration controls of last century, but as the USA is finding with large scale Mexican migration, mass migration changes the character of a country and its politics. To see what the new country will be like after mass migration, look at the place the new people came from. It won't be quite the same, but similar. Humans are not clones and are not fungible, contrary to current mythology. Mqurice