Why would "native citizens" want to "create divisions" in the first place? Just because they can or because they perceive real differences in their interests and values from those of immigrants? The costs and benefits of immigration to the economy of a place is very much an open question. Immigrants are not necessariy any more economically beneficial to a place than "native citizens".  Residents of a place may like to see immigrants coming to their city to support their metro economy with their labor and taxes, but that does not mean that this isn't a second-best option in some cases if the goal is economic growth. While it may be good for the owner of a service business to have more workers, that doesn't mean it it a net economic gain for the metro in which the business operates. Immigration can be as good, bad, or neutral for a city, state or country as any other socioeconomic phenomenon.

There was an article in the Columbus Dispatch last year about how immigrants had been opening small businesses and redeveloping previously abandoned or struggling retail areas, such as along the Morse Road corridor in Columbus.  They tend to move into places, as you said, that are inexpensive and in which space for business is easily attainable.  In that same frame, they are also moving into low-income neighborhoods, and in some cases, helping to reverse the population losses in what are considered to be less desirable neighborhoods of urban cores.  This can only be positive in the long run. 

Here is that Columbus Dispatch article from 2011 you were talking about:

 

Immigrants lead the way on Morse Road

^Which is mostly PR (or at least a very healthy chunk) and 10% of the overall population would extrapolate into to a much higher percentage of foreign born population.

 

BTW, you are going to get 'scolded' for using the term "Hispanic".  Fair warning.

 

^^You have to go a bit outside of Cleveland to find any significant mexican population.  In the City itself, or even Cuyahoga County, we have an extremely small mexican population (legal and illegal) as compared to other places I have lived.  But as EVD mentioned above, as you go to the outskirts of the metro into Geauga and Lake Counties, there is a noticeable difference.  Not much farmland here in Cuyahoga County, I suppose.

Not sure I follow why the last comment explains the the lack of a significant Mexican presence in Cleveland. Yes, the reason they settled in Painesville initially was for the work available in the nurseries in the surrounding area (many have moved beyond that; but it may still be why Mexicans are moving there); but agricultural opportunities don't explain the enormous Mexican population in a large city like Chicago (or for that matter, Toledo, which apparently has a good number of them). Surely they're not working on farms in those cities. There's some other reason they haven't been drawn to the core of Cleveland. Why?

 

Chicago is a bit of an enigma as far as mexican population, with estimates at over 500,000, making it the second most populous city for mexicans in this country.  But the other top cities are in Cali and Texas where the latino culture is more prevalent and the climate is more like mexico.

 

I suppose Cleveland never really built up any momentum with mexicans and just never became a popular choice.  I would bet that a big part of the reason is the relative lack of construction (compared to other boom cities) over the past few decades and the local trade unions' grip on the industry for the jobs which were available.  Could you imagine what would happen if Turner Construction brought in a truckload of mexicans to drywall the convention center?  The jobs that are available which mexican immigrants seem to gravitate toward are agriculture, which we don't have in the City core, and services, which is where you do find some presence here.

Why would "native citizens" want to "create divisions" in the first place? Just because they can or because they perceive real differences in their interests and values from those of immigrants? The costs and benefits of immigration to the economy of a place is very much an open question. Immigrants are not necessariy any more economically beneficial to a place than "native citizens".  Residents of a place may like to see immigrants coming to their city to support their metro economy with their labor and taxes, but that does not mean that this isn't a second-best option in some cases if the goal is economic growth. While it may be good for the owner of a service business to have more workers, that doesn't mean it it a net economic gain for the metro in which the business operates. Immigration can be as good, bad, or neutral for a city, state or country as any other socioeconomic phenomenon.

 

Yawn, I can see you're not going to give up until you've made the discussion in this thread about what you want it to be about.

^^There are also hundreds of thousands of Mexican immigrants in NYC now, which has happened in pretty short order.  But I don't think it's weird there aren't so many in Cleveland.  Your proposed reasons seem reasonable.  And immigration patterns have always been spotty and self-reinforcing, sometimes for obvious reasons, sometimes not.

 

Sorry to pile on, but I'm totally with MTS on the Puerto Rican thing.  That drives me bonkers the same way people use "American" to mean "white" in certain contexts.  It either betrays a factual error (like calling Irish people English) or plays into a casually racist view of what "Americanness" is.  And I definitely don't think most people here use "immigrant" and "migrant" interchangeably when having these kinds of discussions.  I don't think people mix this stuff of maliciously, but it's a mistake worth correcting...

 

 

Yawn, I can see you're not going to give up until you've made the discussion in this thread about what you want it to be about.

  Urbanohio is about the economic, political, and social aspects of Ohio's metropolitan areas. This thread is about the role of immigraton in Ohio's metros. I don't think that immigration is as economically significant in ohio's metros as some have suggested. That seems on topic to me.

^ Your approach is just way off. You came in with an attitude like "no one should care about this" and tried to pick a fight. You could have instead started with "You know, some people think a high immigrant population is inherently good for a city's economy. I don't really think that's true, or it's only contingently true, because..."

 

What you did say is insulting to people who care about these statistics, even without regard to why they care about them.

And I definitely don't think most people here use "immigrant" and "migrant" interchangeably when having these kinds of discussions.  I don't think people mix this stuff of maliciously, but it's a mistake worth correcting...

 

That's what I meant. People don't know that they're messing it up. You even see authors, historians and cultural geographers mix 'em up.

See that's the thing though MTS, is that we use the term immigrant for people that have moved around inside the U.S., like from the South to the northern industrial cities or even from Appalachian Ohio to glaciated Ohio. A more accurate term would probably be "migrant" but they seem to be used interchangeably. And I don't know if someone from PR wants to be called a migrant, either.

 

Yes, but I don't think Missing was or is aware that PR's are US citizens.  Many people do not know that.

I wish PR would just become the 51st state. It would do a lot to combat the argument about making English our official language. It would get rid of the misconceptions you guys are talking about as they relate to PRs and it would broaden people's ideas about who Americans are, which is good preparation for not only the future but also the present.

 

Some people would find it that much harder to remain in denial about our country's identity and diversity.

I wish PR would just become the 51st state. It would do a lot to combat the argument about making English our official language. It would get rid of the misconceptions you guys are talking about as they relate to PRs and it would broaden people's ideas about who Americans are, which is good preparation for not only the future but also the present.

 

Some people would find it that much harder to remain in denial about our country's identity and diversity.

 

Thats part of the problem.  PR want to keep Spanish is the official language. Granted, classes are also taught in English.  Today, children learn both English and Spanish.

^ Your approach is just way off. You came in with an attitude like "no one should care about this" and tried to pick a fight. You could have instead started with "You know, some people think a high immigrant population is inherently good for a city's economy. I don't really think that's true, or it's only contingently true, because..."

 

I believe that the creator of this thread thinks that immigration is an unquestionable good for all concerned. I was opposing this view and saying the immigration can have also have negative economic effects for a metropolitan area. Its a legitimate disagreement, not an insult.

 

 

(EDIT: quote box correction to original post)

Too many uneducated immigrants is obviously bad if there are no jobs for them. That's why Immigration policy has quotas and limits on the amount of immigrants permitted. President Obama has massively stepped up deportation procedures for illegal immigrants. Ask any immigration lawyer - the Obama administration is on an absolute blitz of deportation, which certainly wasn't what they expected. Nobody anywhere even seems willing to consider amnesty anymore, which was in the conversation as recently as 2008.

 

Your views are strongly reflected by the law. I do not believe Ohio has a serious problem with illegal immigrants, nor large unemployed populations of migrants, but I'd obviously welcome any data that suggests otherwise. One problem I know Ohio has, along with many other states, is that otherwise legal immigrants come, are tricked into working quasi-legal or illegal jobs, and lose their legal status because of employer exploitation. Some are even trafficked in the sex trade - certainly an unquestionable negative for all concerned.

 

I also doubt that anyone has advanced the position that 'immigration is an unquestionable good for all concerned.' - that's a straw man. Economically beneficial, generally? Yeah, I'd agree with that, if we're talking about legal immigration.

Too many uneducated immigrants is obviously bad if there are no jobs for them. That's why Immigration policy has quotas and limits on the amount of immigrants permitted. President Obama has massively stepped up deportation procedures for illegal immigrants. Ask any immigration lawyer - the Obama administration is on an absolute blitz of deportation, which certainly wasn't what they expected. Nobody anywhere even seems willing to consider amnesty anymore, which was in the conversation as recently as 2008.

 

Your views are strongly reflected by the law. I do not believe Ohio has a serious problem with illegal immigrants, nor large unemployed populations of migrants, but I'd obviously welcome any data that suggests otherwise. One problem I know Ohio has, along with many other states, is that otherwise legal immigrants come, are tricked into working quasi-legal or illegal jobs, and lose their legal status because of employer exploitation. Some are even trafficked in the sex trade - certainly an unquestionable negative for all concerned.

 

I also doubt that anyone has advanced the position that 'immigration is an unquestionable good for all concerned.' - that's a straw man. Economically beneficial, generally? Yeah, I'd agree with that, if we're talking about legal immigration.

 

Those "trafficked" in the sex trade didn't come here by choice so I wouldn't count them.  Most are kidnapped and forced to work in the sex trade.

 

In addition, many people who have degrees or are professionals in their home country or language.  Due to a language barrier are looked about as stupid here in the states and immediately labeled "immigrant".

^Many Americans don't know how much kidnapping goes on outside the U.S., Canada and Western Europe. There's a ton. People of all ages and backgrounds.

 

A buddy of mine teaches businessmen and other professionals English at a private language school. He doesn't know their languages, so it's a "Jump in the Fire" situation intended to prepare them to work with English speakers.

 

I believe that the creator of this thread thinks that immigration is an unquestionable good for all concerned. I was opposing this view and saying the immigration can have also have negative economic effects for a metropolitan area. Its a legitimate disagreement, not an insult.

 

I neither said that immigration was inherently good nor inherently bad, but that immigrants are clearly changing neighborhood dynamics in many ways, and at least with the Columbus area I mentioned, have definitely been a positive influence on previously run-down corridors.  And let's be honest here, your original response in the thread was not an opposing viewpoint, but a dismissal of the data as important in any way. 

I don't know the rules for posting articles, so I will just post the link.  Figured it was an interesting article due to the fact that we have talked about Puerto Rico and Ohio here.  This USA Today article is from a day or so ago, and talks about Puerto Rico's exodus and the top destinations many are headed to.  Ohio is the 6th most popular destination.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-11/puerto-rico-economy-brain-drain-exodus/53490820/1

I have domestic and international migration numbers for major Ohio metros since the 1990s.  Here's that info.

 

Domestic Migration Average by Decade and Metro

 

1990-1999

Columbus: +4,889

Cleveland: -11,464

Cincinnati: +2,885

Dayton: -5,695

Toledo: -4,116

Akron: -447

 

2000-2009

Columbus: +3,800

Cleveland: -15,216

Cincinnati: -1,961

Dayton: -4,935

Toledo: -4,256

Akron: -1,924

 

International Migration Average by Decade and Metro

 

1990-1999

Columbus: +1,367

Cleveland: +1,909

Cincinnati: +1,055

Dayton: +450

Toledo: +370

Akron: +317

 

2000-2009

Columbus: +4,544

Cleveland: +3,214

Cincinnati: +2,569

Dayton: +623

Toledo: +703

Akron: +634

 

Total Average Migration (Domestic and International combined) by Decade and Metro

 

1990-1999

Columbus: +6,256

Cleveland: -9,555

Cincinnati: +3,940

Dayton: -5,245

Toledo: -1,873

Akron: -130

 

2000-2009

Columbus: +8,344

Cleveland: -12,002

Cincinnati: +608

Dayton: -4,312

Toledo: -1,777

Akron: -1,290

Alright, kids.  Your options here are:

 

1. Discuss the actual topic at hand

2. Ignore the topic and move on to other things

3. Shake your fist in impotent rage; post nothing

 

I don't know the rules for posting articles, so I will just post the link.  Figured it was an interesting article due to the fact that we have talked about Puerto Rico and Ohio here.  This USA Today article is from a day or so ago, and talks about Puerto Rico's exodus and the top destinations many are headed to.  Ohio is the 6th most popular destination.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-11/puerto-rico-economy-brain-drain-exodus/53490820/1

I don't know the rules for posting articles, so I will just post the link.  Figured it was an interesting article due to the fact that we have talked about Puerto Rico and Ohio here.  This USA Today article is from a day or so ago, and talks about Puerto Rico's exodus and the top destinations many are headed to.  Ohio is the 6th most popular destination.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-11/puerto-rico-economy-brain-drain-exodus/53490820/1

God I hate that movie!  Especially that scene

 

Here is another example of people who do not know that PR are American citizens.

 

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2012/03/southern-miss-band-chants-wheres-your-green-card/1#.T2TGo46jIyx

 

 

 

 

Who would have thought that a story like that would have come out of Mississippi?

^^I loved that movie! I always wondered what Puerto Ricans thought of it (now I know; not that one person's opinion is everyone's :roll:), but it was over 50 years ago. Wasn't Natalie Wood Puerto Rican, as well as George Chakiris? Okay, seriously, there had to more than one Puerto Rican besides Rita Moreno they could have cast in a lead role (but again, it was the 1950's). The music is great. Leonard Bernstein transformed it into a symphonic work which is excellent. I loved this scene:

 

 

^^I loved that movie! I always wondered what Puerto Ricans thought of it (now I know; not that one person's opinion is everyone's :roll:), but it was over 50 years ago. Wasn't Natalie Wood Puerto Rican, as well as George Chakiris? Okay, seriously, there had to more than one Puerto Rican besides Rita Moreno they could have cast in a lead role (but again, it was the 1950's). The music is great. Leonard Bernstein transformed it into a symphonic work which is excellent. I loved this scene:

 

 

 

the music is nice, but Mambo is Cuban not Puerto Rican!  We Salsa not Mambo.

Who would have thought that a story like that would have come out of Mississippi?

 

Shocking that such a culturally diverse state like Mississippi would have issues like this?  Don't even get me started on how phenomenal their education system is.

^^I loved that movie! I always wondered what Puerto Ricans thought of it (now I know; not that one person's opinion is everyone's :roll:),

 

Depends who the person is.  Some people think their opinion is everyone's.