Sunday, April 13, 2008

Edwin Rubinstein Finds $100 Billion Lost In Taxes From Income Reductions Caused By Immigration Cohorts

As the Washington Times reports it here : '$100 billion in federal taxes lost “from the reduction of native incomes caused by immigrant workers.”' This is something new which I don't recall being spoken of before. A class of citizens has lower incomes on account of recent mass immigration of low quality, and this reduces the level of taxes that they pay. There is no way the immigration cohorts cannot be responsible for this.


Anonymous said...


I'll cut and paste a post from "The Ambler" a Sailer-linked-blog of Kevin Michael Grace. Its chilling and instructive of what the elite think of white "proles" who work at ordinary jobs:

My father worked in a greengrocers' shop for 35 years; my mother was a housewife before she committed suicide in 1987. They were both lifelong Labour voters. My mother hanged herself in the house she lived in all her life, in Southall, west London, a town that had changed beyond all recognition. It is today the least white place in the whole of Britain.

She wrote in her suicide note: "I hate Southall, I feel so alone." In case anyone dare accuse her of any racism, she may have hated Southall, but my mother was incapable of hating people. She worked in the last years of her life as a dinner lady in an all-Asian school and was much loved. But she was lost. Her world had disappeared.

Her dilemma is partly the dilemma of the white working class...

By what methods were the white working classes (WWC) despatched? The first development that undermined WWC hopes and morale was the great betrayal in education— the abolition of grammar schools and the retention of private schools.

Grammar schools, in the guilt-ridden WLMC [white liberal middle classes] view of things, favoured middle-class children over working-class children. What they actually favoured— or could have favoured, if the tests were designed sufficiently well— was clever children over less clever children. And if you look at the dynamism of the post-war grammocracy (Pinter, Dyke, Potter, Jacobson, Sillitoe, Bragg, Bennett and hundreds of others), it provided a crucial injection of WWC sensibility into the wider culture...

The second great betrayal was multiculturalism. This was the creed that said all cultures were as valid as each other (in theory) but that minority cultures were somehow— no one was quite sure how— actually superior to the host white indigenous culture which was axiomatically racist. So even if you happen to come from a culture that endorsed female circumcision and was misogynist and homophobic, it was a given that you were a "victim." And who were the "victimisers"? The WWC who were faced with the profound challenge and stresses of assimilation.

There was a lot of WWC resistance to immigration. This was partly about racism, which, of course, the WLMC are immune to. Something in the organic bread, I think. But it was also about losing housing opportunities, cheap labour taking away jobs, and the simple, profound problem of learning to exist in a new kind of culture, which in some cases overwhelmed and bewildered the indigenous one. The trick of learning to feel ashamed at the same time as everything was being taken away from you was a really hard one to pull off...

The third great betrayal was the WLMC determination to stamp out nationalism— at least if you were English. If you were Scottish, Welsh or Irish, of course, you could celebrate your flag and your culture as loudly and proudly as you liked. But if you were native WWC, to celebrate St George and the English flag was racist. This is because the WWC, despite being stuck down mines and corralled in factories, apparently managed to exploit their colonial brothers and sisters throughout the previous centuries, so they could no longer show pride in their own country, the country that their parents and grandparents died for and suffered for in two world wars— in the second one fighting a racist tyrant. They continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan. And without complaint, because they have learned to be quiet and to be ashamed of who they are and accept that they aren't "good" like the WLMC, who lived in all-white enclaves and to whom multiculturalism meant a nice Continental deli at the end of the road.

What else? The utopian council estates of the 1960s and 1970s— the WLMC, pursuing their project of bracing architectural piety, uprooted whole WWC communities and put them in ugly, unliveable blocks, leaving them without a sense of place or meaning, while the architects and town planners themselves lived in little Edwardian terraces or Cotswold villages. Since the great council house sell-off of the 1980s— fiercely opposed, of course, by the liberal left— many of the WWC have bettered themselves. But now that the housing stock has run out and run down, those left behind are beached and helpless.

Who can wonder why the white working classes have got themselves a bad name? Who can wonder why they are angry, why they are despairing, why they carry knives, fight and drink themselves into oblivion...

Do I look down on the WWC now that I am middle class myself? Probably. But I don't hate them, not in the way I hate the people who destroyed and abandoned them, the ideologues and meddlers that have left them without a meaning and without a home and without an escape. I'll keep voting Left because I can't imagine voting Tory, and the Lib Dems are a wasted vote. But I know that, in the end, I am voting for a double-talking mealy-mouthed enemy of everything they purport to be promoting— equality, opportunity, fairness. They are the living embodiment of Lao Tse's greatest truth and the source of the white working classes tragedy— that "goody goodies are the enemies of virtue."
—Tim Lott, "White, Working Class And Threatened With Extinction: It's The Do-Gooding Liberal Middle Classes That Have Betrayed Those 'Beneath' Them," Independent, 9 March 2008

Kevin Michael Grace, 12.05 pm, 27 March 2008►

John S. Bolton said...

Although there is much truth in this, the overall class analysis would take away from national allegiance. Similarly in America, the losses from affirmative action tend to get concentrated in the group of marginal workers without minority classification. If we destroy the merit system altogether, the meritorious of haute bourgeois background will lose as much as the others. Therefore solidarity of some kind must appear before long. My preference is that this should occur on the basis of nationality relative to foreigners, since it is the nation which has attributes of sovereignty; but classes, races, ethnic groups, religions and so on, DO NOT. Double emphasis: allegiance, sovereignty, who owes loyalty to whom, and to whom is NO loyalty owed, these are the considerations upon which renewed solidarity is to be built up. Recriminations against fellow citizens are in effect surrender to foreign hostiles swarming in, not way stations to an 'enlightened' solidarity inspired by leftism.

John S. Bolton said...

Also, with KMG as in his featured quote that you sent, one gets many an appeal to emotion. This is inadequate, though, as the other side can do the same and even more effectively, if one is looking at the major media for example. To pit emotion against emotion would come out equal, UNLESS the other side is hugely better-endowed with the means to get their suggested emotional responses across to the millions. Although I can feel what you may feel from such a story, that by itself will not likely carry the day. Look at pictures of wonderful young people who are loyal, then think of those who would betray them, and ask yourself can YOU betray them too. That sort of emotion may even motivate you to preferentially use rational arguments, when you see that this is what is relatively lacking. Even if it were not, the disloyalistic elites must use unreason to proliferate evil, and thus they are vulnerable to the exposure of their fallacies.