MM> G'morning Bob,

 MM>> And immigrant groups tend to work harder than residents -

 BK>>  Which is of what value to the residents?

 MM> Economically, yes - appreciated, not always...

 Is it of value economically? In the short run, maybe. In the
 long run it pulls everyone down to the same level.

 MM>> "in", share the local work habits and urgencies and accept
 MM>> the mythical things that "can't be done".

 BK>>  Or things that shouldn't be done.

 MM> Immigrants are never really `foreign' - "should'nt be done"
 MM> is usually more of a perception than a hard rule...

 Shouldn't be done is very often the common wisdom derived from
 doing it and screwing things up royally.

 MM>> The more groups a country gets,  the less reaction is
 MM>> generated; in Australia and New Zealand after WW2,  both
 MM>> populations had real trouble getting to grips with the
 MM>> "hard and earnest" workings of newcomers...

 BK>>  Eventually it would be nice to actually enjoy the results of
 BK>>  generations of work.

 MM> True - but it seems not that easy;

 That's my point.

 MM> some of NZ's first
 MM> settlers are still resisting every subsequent wave - but
 MM> are first in line to revel in the new ways of the
 MM> newcomers...

 When people here ask how it would have turned out if the Indians
 had had the sort of immigration restrictions I favor, I point
 out that it would have been much better for the Indians.

 MM> Interesting,  people Asian are most subject to racism right
 MM> now - but Asian take-aways are away and by far the most
 MM> popular, leaving F&Cs, the Colonel's and McDonalds in the
 MM> shade...

 I say the only reason for allowing immigration here is for the
 cultural advantages.

 MM> and most shops good carry a `made in Asia' label.

 Which is one of the downsides.

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... If there is no God, who pops up the next kleenex?
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5