Is there any data on how developed America would be with only whites? What about only blacks? What about only hispanics? What about only asians and whites?

submitted by 8thmonitor from self.debatealtright

Like Human Development Index numbers. I know violent crime would be so much lower without blacks and hispanics.

I can't remember if Alt Hype did any analysis like this because their site is still down. I know blacks and hispanics are overall costs on US but I wonder how much higher would America's HDI ranking be. Would it be around Norway for only whites and asians? Would it be some African country for only blacks?

This map is the closest I can find and I am looking at states with highest white population. I find it confusing because urban vs. rural factors.
https://vividmaps.com/human-development-index-us-vs-europe/

Added Alt Hype research: https://web.archive.org/web/20220216230408/https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2020/03/19/fiscal-impact-by-race-in-2018/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220216230447im_/https://i.imgur.com/qqHCsm5.png

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lGpgvkf3THs/

all 46 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

With Whites and northeast Asians only, the United States would be like Norway or Switzerland.

With blacks only, it would look like Haiti or Somalia.

With Hispanics only it would look like El Salvador or Honduras.

[–]BISH 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The majority of the slave traders weren't white. That group isn't listed as a category.

They're the divide and conquer conspirators.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The data you provided isn't that helpful, because the niggers and wetbacks in every state benefit from white maintained infrastructure and government. Niggers struggle to maintain basic human needs like clean drinking water. When niggers took over Detroit, it collapsed and went bankrupt. Whites had to step in so that it wouldn't turn into Mogadishu.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah. I was also thinking about how even though black median household income is 46k, it would be impossible for them to reach that without whites.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Diversity hires can make $180k/year+ and usually get fake jobs.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Why not use data from the past?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans#Demographic_information

America was at its Whitest in 1940, and it was the first country in the world to develop nukes. Not even Germany or Japan got that far (although Germany was winning the Space Race).

From 1940 to 2023, you can clearly see the decline. There are now U.S cities that look worse than Hiroshima.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4A9MLKaRBM

And unlike the atomic bombs, you can still see White people standing in that rubble cheering for their own racial suicide. Jesus Christ.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Germany's scientists seem to have purposely slowed down their research on the weaponization of nuclear fission, itself a German discovery.

German physicists had, already in 1939, concluded that 'in principle atomic bombs could be made', but, Werner Heisenberg delayed and de-emphasized the possibility, as he 'did not want the Führer to get so interested that he would order great efforts immediately to make the atomic bomb'.

In September 1941, at the Heisenberg-Bohr meeting in Copenhagen, Werner Heisenberg asked Niels Bohr to ask scientists in the USA to also do as he had, to prevent 'grave consequences in the technique of war'.

When Bohr asked Heisenberg if a nuclear weapon was even possible, Heisenberg replied that he personally knew that it was. He even produced a drawing that showed how a reactor would produce the uranium or plutonium necessary to build an atom bomb. This was a very dangerous move, as it would have been considered treason.

Heisenberg furthermore informed Bohr that he was in a position to neutralize the German nuclear effort. But he also pleaded for Bohr to get 'Allied' scientists to do the same. He hoped that the international physics community could cooperate to spare the world of this horrendous weapon.

Bohr would have none of it. US teams pushed even harder to build the grotesque weapons of mass destruction. Once this was done, the USA would then use them on cities-full of civilians, women, children, etc., for no justifiable reason. The USA, far from desperate, was completely intact from the war, had suffered no civilian casualties, and was in no danger whatsoever.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Damn. Sad footage.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Turns out niggers are worse than atomic bombs for your city. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/2023/01/14/special-supplements/hiroshimas-rebound-atomic-bomb-prosperous-regional-hub/

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (36 children)

Latinos are responsible for a significant portion of population growth in the US. The Latino population in the US has been growing at a faster rate than any other ethnic group, and by 2050, it is estimated that Hispanics will represent nearly one-third of the US population. This growth in population translates to a growth in the labor force, as Latinos are also one of the largest sources of labor force expansion in the US.

Latinos make significant contributions to the US economy through their participation in various industries. For example, Hispanics make up a large share of workers in industries such as agriculture, construction, and healthcare. In the agriculture industry, for instance, Latinos comprise around 75% of the workforce in certain states. In the construction industry, Hispanics represent about one-quarter of all workers. In the healthcare industry, Hispanics account for a significant share of the nursing assistant and home health aide workforce.

Hispanic-owned businesses are a significant source of economic growth in the US. Latino-owned businesses contribute more than $500 billion to the US economy annually and have been growing at a faster rate than non-Latino-owned businesses.

Latinos are also important contributors to the US Social Security system. They contribute billions of dollars each year in payroll taxes and other forms of revenue, which are essential to the long-term sustainability of the system.

The claim that Hispanics don't provide a net contribution to the US economy is incorrect.

https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/sustainable-inclusive-growth/the-economic-state-of-latinos-in-america-the-american-dream-deferred

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Did you ask this ChatGPT lol

[–]8thmonitor[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I also thought that lol. According to GPTZero AI Detector, text is likely to be written entirely by AI.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

nah, this I sourced on my own. lol

[–]8thmonitor[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But according to GPTZero AI Detector, text is likely to be written entirely by AI.

You can try yourself https://gptzero.me/

Latinos are responsible for a significant portion of population growth in the US. The Latino population in the US has been growing at a faster rate than any other ethnic group, and by 2050, it is estimated that Hispanics will represent nearly one-third of the US population. This growth in population translates to a growth in the labor force, as Latinos are also one of the largest sources of labor force expansion in the US.

Latinos make significant contributions to the US economy through their participation in various industries. For example, Hispanics make up a large share of workers in industries such as agriculture, construction, and healthcare. In the agriculture industry, for instance, Latinos comprise around 75% of the workforce in certain states. In the construction industry, Hispanics represent about one-quarter of all workers. In the healthcare industry, Hispanics account for a significant share of the nursing assistant and home health aide workforce.

Hispanic-owned businesses are a significant source of economic growth in the US. Latino-owned businesses contribute more than $500 billion to the US economy annually and have been growing at a faster rate than non-Latino-owned businesses.

Latinos are also important contributors to the US Social Security system. They contribute billions of dollars each year in payroll taxes and other forms of revenue, which are essential to the long-term sustainability of the system.

The claim that Hispanics don't provide a net contribution to the US economy is incorrect.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

agree with everything said. But it's not sourced. The info I commented with is sourced. (whether people accept the source is another argument of course.) BTW, I will try out that AI, I'm kinda over chatGPT, its inconsistent.

I was having trouble making the net calculation which is why I went with two really basic sources that are tough to argue with.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

This is wrong. You didn't mention the costs of Latinos. I agree Latinos generate revenue. But the cost of welfare and others are higher than their revenue. I hope they become net benefits in the future.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220216230408/https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2020/03/19/fiscal-impact-by-race-in-2018/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220216230447im_/https://i.imgur.com/qqHCsm5.png

Most Latinos near me cannot even speak English. Latino kids need to be put in their own special classes in school.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

this study is interesting. https://archive.ph/v7xxt It says working-class whites are the biggest beneficiaries of federal poverty-reduction programs, even though blacks and Hispanics have substantially higher rates of poverty....

[–]EuropeanAwakening14 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's really dishonest to not point out that that "study" doesn't take into account per capita measurements. White Americans make up a little under 60% of the American population. It's actually Black's and Hispanics that are over represented on a per capita basis.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In 2020, hispanics and latinos contributed 2.8 trillion USD to the economy. Meanwhile in 2020 the ENTIRE US budget for social services was around 1 trillion USD. This means that hispanics and latinos could support the ENTIRE safety net for all races 3 times over. This means that it is physically impossible for hispanics and latinos to be a net drain on social services. This is a fallacy.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did they contribute 2.8 trillion USD to the federal budget?

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Every time the topic of wetbacks come up, we always hear about Muh GDP. I'm not a GDP nationalist. Whites are doing just fine maintaining very high GDP around the world. The anlgosphere is wealthy. That's why wetbacks want in. If Mexicans immigrants really do raise GDP, I don't want it. It's not worth it. I don't want to send my kids to a school with a bunch of Spanish speaking Mexicans, for a slight increase in GDP.

Every time this GDP stuff comes up I'm always perplexed by it. I guess leftists view it as some sort of gotcha, checkmate. All these wetbacks raise GDP, therefore let the invasion continue?

[–]8thmonitor[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

I don't understand if this is responding to my previous comment. Sure but there are still more than enough whites that are overall benefit for America and pay for those poor whites. That is sadly not the case for latinos and blacks. There are just so many latinos and blacks being a cost and burden on America.

I am pretty sure poor people of any race are overall cost.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

if you look at the overall net contribution of latinos to GDP, versus what they consume in safety net services, it's a plus. In other words, latinos contribute more than they consume. Not sure about the other races, but from my research, its a net positive. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/us-latino-economic-output-rank-5th-world-gdp-according-new-study-rcna48740

[–]EuropeanAwakening14 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Actually it's been mathematically shown that blacks and Hispanics both take waaaay more than they put in. Unfortunately alt hypes website is down but his video debunking you is still up https://www.bitchute.com/video/lGpgvkf3THs/

The link you provided doesn't say what you have concluded. It says nothing about contribution versus cost of hispanics. It just says how much they contribute to the GDP.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Actually it's been mathematically shown that blacks and Hispanics both take waaaay more than they put in.

The problem with all of these economic studies is they fail to capture the social and cultural cost of having millions Mexicans living in our communities. The Mexicans in my neighborhood don't mow their lawn, pickup their trash, maintain their dwelling appearance, or adhere to proper occupancy numbers. That has a cost.

The greater concern however is the adults speak English and Spanish, and when they have a child, they raise it bilingual.

German Americans dont speak German. Norwegian Americans don't speak Norwegian, but Mexicans Americans will retain Spanish, and they know exactly what they are doing. They are retaining their ethnic and cultural identity. This seems more like invasion than assimilation. What is the economic cost of turning parts of America into Mexico?

Another uncaptured cost is having to maintain yet another entitled minority victim group. Muh Latinx. Lol, they even made Oprah grovel for not selecting the right mexican books. When you go to work in a corporate office, there will be a LatinX affinity group shilling for more diversity hires. When you send your kids to a high Latin percentage school, they will be further alienated during formative.

All of these things have a cost that aren't captured in much GDP studies. We don't need these people.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I see the same disgusting behavior. In my neighborhood, the only difference is that most Latino kids cannot speak English either. In my public high school, Latinos were around 50% of the school and needed to be in their own special classes for idiots that cannot speak English.

They cause so many problems. The worse ones are definitely the boys. I have no idea what they do except bully, harass, disrupt, and more problems. In my middle school, there were 0 smart Latino boys. Not even 1. In high school, there was 1 smart latino boy. At least there were a few smart latino girls in poverty that really did work hard and value education, but the remaining latino girls are focused on pumping out as many kids as possible to ruin America further.

This is 100% invasion. I try not to think about what schools and the country will look like in the upcoming decades.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Latinos were around 50% of the school and needed to be in their own special classes for idiots that cannot speak English.

They're not necessarily idiots. Learning another language is hard and their parents teach them Spanish first, because they know that's more important. They know they will learn English eventually in school.

They cause so many problems

They are a hostile foreign non-white minority group, so of course.

This is 100% invasion

Obviously.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

No it is not. Your link doesn't say that. I already linked my source that explained latinos are an overall burden.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

I'd feel a lot better about your source if it included references, citations etc. I get that the person is explaining that they are using tax and demographic data from the states, but there is nothing that shows the actual source. Trusting someone's source without supporting data isn't something I'm comfortable with, personally.

The NBC news link I presented above shows that Hispanics and Latinos contribute more than the entire Federal budget for safety net programs, for ALL races. This means that hispanics on their own could support the entire welfare program for all races. This makes your argument impossible.

Contribution of hispanics and Latinos to USA economy in 2020 = 2.8 trillion; Total social services budget in 2020 for USA = 1 trillion.

*hispanics and latinos contribute 3 times more than they consume. *

source:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/us-latino-economic-output-rank-5th-world-gdp-according-new-study-rcna48740

https://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-budget/#:~:text=Federal%20Spending%20in%20Fiscal%20Years,%24773%20billion%20to%20%241.215%20trillion.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

It does include references and citations. It is all on the bottom of the page.

You are confusing GDP vs. budget. That claim that hispanics and latinos contribute 3 times more than they consume is 100% incorrect.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

How am I confusing GDP though? From my source (the NBC article) it clearly states the 2020 hispanic contribution to GDP is 2.8 trillion. From the other source it clearly states that the maximum could be spent on social services for 2020 is 1 trillion. It would be physically impossible then for hispanics to be a net drain on the economy.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It would be physically impossible then for hispanics to be a net drain on the economy.

This argument assumes social services is the only economic cost of wetbacks. This is false.

Secondly, it takes much more than $2.8 trillion worth of economic throughput to generate $1 trillion in surplus funding for social services

Third, of the $2.8 trillion in GDP, a large portion of this is going back to Hispanics. If a wetback sells me a taco for a dollar, that is a lift in GDP and income for the wetback. The $2.8 trillion includes money paid to wetbacks.

Lastly, simply adding up hispanic GDP doesn't provide any economic consideration for substitution. For example, if a wetback sells me a taco for lunch for $1, he lifts GDP. If the taco stand isn't there, am I going to skip lunch? No, I buy a hot dog from a Joe instead, substituting a taco for a hot dog, still lifting GDP. Of the $2.8 trillion, many of these transactions would still occur, without the wetbacks.

[–]8thmonitor[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I never said that Latinos are a drain on the economy. I said they are a fiscal burden like my source says. That means the tax revenue they generate for nation is less than the tax revenue they take from the nation. The total US GDP numbers vs. total US budget numbers is not the same. It makes 0 sense to compare them. You need to compare budget numbers for both like my citation.

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

but there is nothing that shows the actual source. Trusting someone's source without supporting data isn't something I'm comfortable with, personally.

Well that's interesting because the nbcnews article you linked is not an actual source either. Nor does it link to an actual source. It links to a website of a pro-latino organization that published the report. I guess you are comfortable with trusting sources without data as long as it shows what you want to see.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I guess you are comfortable with trusting sources without data as long as it shows what you want to see.

geez, that's kinda uncalled for, and pot calling kettle black. I've seen multiple reports that put hispanic small business contribution at about 1 trillion, and worker contribution between 1 and 2 trillion - to GDP. Based on the research I've done, I feel pretty confident quoting those numbers. I'm not a statistician, or economist, so I may not have the knowledge to get this info directly from the source, but I'm perfectly ok accepting that these news organizations are as legit as the sources you're quoting. I personally feel like its legit and good, and therefor I am going to continue using these sources with no guilt. You don't have to like it if you don't want. My audience is people who are reasonable and willing to acknowledge that perhaps its a myth that hispanics are takers. If you're not in that audience that's perfectly ok with me. cheers and have a great day.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

perhaps its a myth that hispanics are takers

Hispanics are hard workers. They are certainly not takers. They mostly just get medicaid for their children. There is a rigorous argument for why wetbacks should be excluded from the anlgosphere, but being takers isn't part of it, in my opinion.

It's also important to point out that your argument appears to assume that social service spending is the only economic cost associated with wetbacks. This is a poor assumption, for obvious reasons.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Latinos make significant contributions to the US economy through their participation in various industries

This is like telling Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull about how the pale forces are lifting GDP.