| In my view, comparing the outcome of the poorest class in India, specifically the high unlikelihood of their chances for moving up not to mention getting to America, to the outcome of the poorest class in the US is a more fair comparison. So it's more fair to compare poor Americans to poor Indians who poop in the field, have no power, get water from a communal well, and may well be living under naxalite (communist) oppression? Actually, I suspect that latter group may also do pretty well if allowed to enter the US. Poor Vietnamese fleeing Communism didn't do too badly, nor did the poor illiterate Chinese who came here to work on the railroads. EDIT: the closest thing I can think of is the oppression and discrimination against Jewish people in society prior to the Nazis and its role in driving social outcomes for the Jewish people. I was deliberately hinting at this. Yet somehow American Jews have excellent outcomes, far better than non-Jewish whites, nearly as good as Asians. It's weird how their circumstances didn't hinder them. Of course, it's not so weird if you observe that American Jews share certain behaviors with other high income Americans, with Gujuratis, and with Chinese. But they don't tend to share these behaviors with either low income whites or blacks. It's almost as if behavior is far more important than circumstances. My emotional reaction came about because it was extremely strange for me to see someone blithely compare such blatantly obvious apples and oranges to make a point. I can't understand why that makes sense to you and I still don't. Why is it apples and oranges? I'm also curious why you seem to want to make my statistically typical American black. Virtually none of the things you bring up happened to white Americans, yet the Gujurati (or Tamil if you prefer) will probably have better outcomes than the typical poor white American also. |