English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

38 answers

I hate to be too simplistic about this, but...

If you were leaving your home for another country and didn't have restrictions on where you ended up, wouldn't you head to the wealthiest place with the most opportunities?

Isn't that the point behind leaving Mexico in the first place?

2007-06-27 10:30:22 · answer #1 · answered by floatingbloatedcorpse 4 · 5 2

The myth of Aztlan can best be explained by California's Santa Barbara School District's Chicano Studies textbook, "The Mexican American Heritage" by East Los Angeles high school teacher Carlos Jimenez. On page 84 there is a redrawn map of Mexico and the United States, showing Mexico with a full one-third more territory, all of it taken back from the United States. On page 107, it says "Latinos are now realizing that the power to control Aztlan may once again be in their hands."

Shown are the "repatriated" eight or nine states including Colorado, California, Arizona, Texas, Utah, New Mexico, Oregon and parts of Washington. According to the school text, Mexico is supposed to regain these territories as they rightly belong to the "mythical" homeland of Aztlan. On page 86, it says "...a free-trade agreement...promises...if Mexico is to allow the U.S. to invest in Mexico...then Mexico should...be allowed to freely export...Mexican labor. Obviously this would mean a re-evaluation of the border between the two countries as we know it today." Jimenez's Aztlan myth is further amplified at MEChA club meetings held at Santa Barbara Public Schools..

The book, paid for by American tax payers, cites no references or footnotes, leaving school children totally dependent on their teacher to separate fact from opinion and political propaganda. The book teaches separatism, victimization, nationalism, completely lacks patriotism towards the United States, and promotes an open border policy. The book is 100 percent editorial -- the opinions of the author.

2007-06-27 10:56:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

California has been wealthy since before the illegals came here and plus california and texas are HUGE states and so obviously would make more money than the other states.

Aztlan isn't a state so this just goes to show how dumb the illegals are and it should be Why is it that those states... which justs proves that illegals don't want to learn english.

So basically your question just backfired. Good try though. It must have been pretty hard for you to figure that one out!

2007-06-27 10:45:35 · answer #3 · answered by iammisc 5 · 2 1

They are states with strong and/or growing economies (well, except fro NM which is poor, AZ which is mainly a retirement destination, and Aztlan, which is a myth). That hardly makes them the 'best' by every measure, but it does mean a lot of money is changing hands in them, so there are a lot of jobs there relative to states with more staid economies.

Strong economies attract refugees from weaker economies. They're also the states with the most people moving to them from other parts of the US, for example - also economic refugees, just perfectly legal ones.

Basically it's for the same reason that you see people panhandle on the streets of San Francisco, rather than in gullies in Death Valley.

2007-06-27 10:29:37 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 6 1

I remember in my old radical Chicano days, there was talk of Aztlan. I had not heard it mentioned for a decade, Now most of the persons addressing this issue are Anglos. Now today there are 3 states California, New Mexico and Texas. Are minority majority states, these states are 3 that are included in Aztlan. Makes you think , Right!!

2007-06-27 11:03:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I know for a fact that Az. is not one of the wealthiest nor best states. Post a link please

Here's a few of mine....
The first indicates that 5 of the wealthiest states are in the northeast.
The Northeast is also home to some of the wealthiest regions in the US. As of 2004, the U.S. Census Bureau reported five out of the ten wealthiest states, in terms of household income, as New Jersey (1st), Connecticut (2nd), Maryland (3rd), Massachusetts (5th), and New Hampshire (6th) [2]. As of 2005, the Bureau of Economic Analysis defined the five wealthiest states, in terms of Per Capita Income, as Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York [3]. New York alone accounts for nearly 8% of U.S. gross domestic product as of 2005. [4] While they rank high in income, they are predominantly small in overall population and area (New York and Pennsylvania aside), with only New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania ranking in the top 10 states in population and no state ranking in the top 10 in regards to size.

From the second link....
The U.S. Census Bureau has released some new 2005 numbers analyzing the national population. This batch includes more localized information for cities and states. According to this most recent census, Texas ranks 6th among states with the most people living in poverty, and 36th among states with the highest median household income.

From the third...
Study findings emerged from several methods and data sources, including analyses of spending trends, econometric models of state spending on different types of social welfare functions, and the case studies of the six poor states (Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Carolina, and West Virginia). Five of the six case study states were in the fourth, or poorest, quartile. The sixth state (Arizona) was at the bottom of the third quartile. All had high social needs as measured by poverty and unemployment rates. The states also showed important differences in geography and recent changes in fiscal capacity and need. The case studies relied on discussions with public officials, administrative data on program spending and caseloads, and state budgets, reports, policy information, and other public documents.

I have included a fourth link with rankings as to the most dangerous states to live in,notice the southwest is ranked as most dangerous.....

2007-06-27 10:58:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I live in California and it totally sucks here so I don't know why your using this state as a good example of how it benefits from having Mexicans.
Mexico is also full of Mexicans and it sucks there too that's why all of them want to leave.
California is very diverse and has people living here from all over the world.
So it's not full of just Mexicans it has allot of other types of people too.
But the reason why everything about California sucks isn't because of the people it's because of the politicians who run this God forsaken state.

2007-06-27 10:39:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Because the corporations hiring these illegals are making record profits. But, "wealthiest state" doesn't say a damn thing about the price the middle class is paying for these corporations to become richer.

2007-06-27 10:40:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

For those who don't believe that their state is majority minority, they need to look at statistics. ARIZONA AND TEXAS is majority hispanic like Los Angeles. Reality check people it is!!! It has been since 1940's that it has been this way. So look it up, because reality is, maybe your community isn't but trust me the state is majority hispanic.

2007-06-27 17:08:09 · answer #9 · answered by egomezz007 4 · 0 0

Because the Mexicans live 20 people to a household. They have less home bills and expenses, and more buying power.

Imagine 20 people in one home and the total bills are $800 a month. Its like $40 a person per month. If they are each working full time, making about $350-450 a week. $40 a month is nothing. The rest is for their spending.

2007-06-27 10:30:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 5

fedest.com, questions and answers