nhaliday + sentiment   13

Links 3/19: Linkguini | Slate Star Codex
How did the descendants of the Mayan Indians end up in the Eastern Orthodox Church?

Does Parental Quality Matter? Study using three sources of parental variation that are mostly immune to genetic confounding find that “the strong parent-child correlation in education is largely causal”. For example, “the parent-child correlation in education is stronger with the parent that spends more time with the child”.

Before and after pictures of tech leaders like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Sergey Brin suggest they’re taking supplemental testosterone. And though it may help them keep looking young, Palladium points out that there might be other effects from having some of our most powerful businessmen on a hormone that increases risk-taking and ambition. They ask whether the new availability of testosterone supplements is prolonging Silicon Valley businessmen’s “brash entrepreneur” phase well past the point where they would normally become mature respectable elders. But it also hints at an almost opposite take: average testosterone levels have been falling for decades, so at this point these businessmen would be the only “normal” (by 1950s standards) men out there, and everyone else would be unprecedently risk-averse and boring. Paging Peter Thiel and everyone else who takes about how things “just worked better” in Eisenhower’s day.

China’s SesameCredit social monitoring system, widely portrayed as dystopian, has an 80% approval rate in China (vs. 19% neutral and 1% disapproval). The researchers admit that although all data is confidential and they are not affiliated with the Chinese government, their participants might not believe that confidently enough to answer honestly.

I know how much you guys love attacking EAs for “pathological altruism” or whatever terms you’re using nowadays, so here’s an article where rationalist community member John Beshir describes his experience getting malaria on purpose to help researchers test a vaccine.

Some evidence against the theory that missing fathers cause earlier menarche.

John Nerst of EverythingStudies’ political compass.
ratty  yvain  ssc  links  multi  biodet  behavioral-gen  regularizer  causation  contrarianism  education  correlation  parenting  developmental  direct-indirect  time  religion  christianity  eastern-europe  russia  latin-america  other-xtian  endocrine  trends  malaise  stagnation  thiel  barons  tech  sv  business  rot  zeitgeist  outcome-risk  critique  environmental-effects  poll  china  asia  authoritarianism  alt-inst  sentiment  policy  n-factor  individualism-collectivism  pro-rata  technocracy  managerial-state  civil-liberty  effective-altruism  subculture  wtf  disease  parasites-microbiome  patho-altruism  self-interest  lol  africa  experiment  medicine  expression-survival  things  dimensionality  degrees-of-freedom  sex  composition-decomposition  analytical-holistic  systematic-ad-hoc  coordination  alignment  cooperate-defect  politics  coalitions  ideology  left-wing  right-wing  summary  exit-voice  redistribution  randy-ayndy  welfare-state 
march 2019 by nhaliday
Race, Religion, and Immigration in… | Democracy Fund Voter Study Group
Figure 2 The Relationship between 2011 Attitudes and Vote Choices in 2012

Third, although perceptions of the economy are related to vote choice in both years—unsurprisingly, people who believed the economy was doing worse were more likely to vote for the out-party Republicans—its effect is similar in both years. This suggests that the 2016 vote choice was not uniquely about “economic anxiety.”

The results also show that certain factors were less strongly related to voters’ choice in 2016 than they were in 2012: social issue attitudes, economic issue attitudes, and, more notably, party identification. The smaller impact of party identification reflects the larger number of defections in 2016, as compared to 2012.

What stands out most, however, is the attitudes that became more strongly related to the vote in 2016: attitudes about immigration, feelings toward black people, and feelings toward Muslims. This pattern fits the prevailing discourse of the two campaigns and the increased attention to issues involving ethnic, racial, and religious minorities in 2016.(v)
org:ngo  wonkish  politics  polisci  data  analysis  database  visualization  correlation  phalanges  chart  2016-election  postmortem  coalitions  policy  ranking  list  impetus  trump  migration  race  poll  values  islam  education  class  obama  elections  identity-politics  demographics  roots  nationalism-globalism  religion  christianity  usa  diversity  clinton  flux-stasis  homo-hetero  emotion  crosstab  economics  trade  redistribution  taxes  welfare-state  stylized-facts  labor  cost-benefit  prediction  descriptive  2016  2017  sentiment 
november 2017 by nhaliday
The Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue | Pew Research Center
The new typology has eight groups: Three are strongly ideological, highly politically engaged and overwhelmingly partisan – two on the right and one on the left. Steadfast Conservatives are staunch critics of government and the social safety net and are very socially conservative. Business Conservatives share Steadfast Conservatives’ preference for limited government, but differ in their support for Wall Street and business, as well as immigration reform. And Business Conservatives are far more moderate on social issues than are Steadfast Conservatives.

At the other end of the spectrum, Solid Liberals express liberal attitudes across almost every realm – government, the economy and business and foreign policy, as well as on race, homosexuality and abortion – and are reliable and loyal Democratic voters.

Taken together, these three groups form the electoral base of the Democratic and Republican Parties, and their influence on American politics is strong. While Solid Liberals, Steadfast Conservatives and Business Conservatives collectively make up only 36% of the American public, they represent 43% of registered voters and fully 57% of the more politically engaged segment of the American public: those who regularly vote and routinely follow government and public affairs.

The other typology groups are less partisan, less predictable and have little in common with each other or the groups at either end of the political spectrum. The one thing they do share is that they are less engaged politically than the groups on the right or left.

Young Outsiders lean Republican but do not have a strong allegiance to the Republican Party; in fact they tend to dislike both political parties. On many issues, from their support for environmental regulation to their liberal views on social issues, they diverge from traditional GOP orthodoxy. Yet in their support for limited government, Young Outsiders are firmly in the Republicans’ camp.

Hard-Pressed Skeptics have been battered by the struggling economy, and their difficult financial circumstances have left them resentful of both government and business. Despite their criticism of government performance, they back more generous government support for the poor and needy. Most Hard-Pressed Skeptics say they voted for Obama in 2012, though fewer than half approve of his job performance today.

The Next Generation Left are young, relatively affluent and very liberal on social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion. But they have reservations about the cost of social programs. And while most of the Next Generation Left support affirmative action, they decisively reject the idea that racial discrimination is the main reason why many blacks are unable to get ahead.

The Faith and Family Left lean Democratic, based on their confidence in government and support for federal programs to address the nation’s problems. But this very religious, racially and ethnically diverse group is uncomfortable with the pace of societal change, including the acceptance of homosexuality and non-traditional family structures.

And finally, an eighth group, the Bystanders, representing 10% of the public, are on the sidelines of the political process. They are not registered to vote and pay very little attention to politics.

...

The Faith and Family Left is by far the most racially and ethnically diverse group in the typology: In fact, just 41% are white non-Hispanic; 30% are black, 19% are Hispanic and 8% are other or mixed race. The Faith and Family Left also is less affluent and less educated than the other Democratically-oriented groups, and is older as well.

They also have strong religious convictions, which distinguishes them from Solid Liberals and the Next Generation Left. Fully 91% say “it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values.” No more than about one-in-ten in the other Democratically-oriented groups agree. And the Faith and Family Left have much more conservative positions on social issues. Just 37% favor same-sex marriage, less than half the share of the other two groups on the left.

The Faith and Family Left support activist government and a strong social safety net, though by less overwhelming margins than Solid Liberals. And while the Faith and Family Left support affirmative action programs, just 31% believe that “racial discrimination is the main reason many black people can’t get ahead these days.” Among the much less racially diverse Solid Liberals, 80% think racial discrimination is the main barrier to black progress.

...

First, Steadfast Conservatives take very conservative views on key social issues like homosexuality and immigration, while Business Conservatives are less conservative – if not actually progressive – on these issues. Nearly three-quarters of Steadfast Conservatives (74%) believe that homosexuality should be discouraged by society. Among Business Conservatives, just 31% think homosexuality should be discouraged; 58% believe it should be accepted.

Business Conservatives have generally positive attitudes toward immigrants and 72% favor a “path to citizenship” for those in the U.S. illegally, if they meet certain conditions. Steadfast Conservatives are more critical of immigrants; 50% support a path to citizenship, the lowest share of any typology group.

Second, just as Steadfast Conservatives are opposed to big government, they also are skeptical of big business. They believe that large corporations have too much power, and nearly half (48%) say the economic system unfairly favors powerful interests. By contrast, as their name suggests, Business Conservatives are far more positive about the free market, and overwhelmingly regard business – and Wall Street – positively.

group profiles (including demographics): http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/appendix-1-typology-group-profiles/

2017 redux:
Political Typology Reveals Deep Fissures on the Right and Left: http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/24/political-typology-reveals-deep-fissures-on-the-right-and-left/
Nearly a year after Donald Trump was elected president, the Republican coalition is deeply divided on such major issues as immigration, America’s role in the world and the fundamental fairness of the U.S. economic system.

The Democratic coalition is largely united in staunch opposition to President Trump. Yet, while Trump’s election has triggered a wave of political activism within the party’s sizable liberal bloc, the liberals’ sky-high political energy is not nearly as evident among other segments in the Democratic base. And Democrats also are internally divided over U.S. global involvement, as well as some religious and social issues.

...

Divisions on the right

The political typology finds two distinctly different groups on the right – Core Conservatives and Country First Conservatives, who both overwhelmingly approve of Trump, but disagree on much else – including immigration and whether it benefits the U.S. to be active internationally.

Core Conservatives, who are in many ways the most traditional group of Republicans, have an outsized influence on the GOP coalition; while they make up just 13% of the public – and about a third (31%) of all Republicans and Republican-leaning independents – they constitute a much larger share (43%) of politically engaged Republicans.

This financially comfortable, male-dominated group overwhelmingly supports smaller government, lower corporate tax rates and believes in the fairness of the nation’s economic system. And a large majority of Core Conservatives (68%) express a positive view of U.S. involvement in the global economy “because it provides the U.S. with new markets and opportunities for growth.”

Country First Conservatives, a much smaller segment of the GOP base, are older and less educated than other Republican-leaning typology groups. Unlike Core Conservatives, Country First Conservatives are unhappy with the nation’s course, highly critical of immigrants and deeply wary of U.S. global involvement.

Nearly two-thirds of Country First Conservatives (64%) – the highest share of any typology group, right or left – say that “if America is too open to people from all over the world, we risk losing our identity as a nation.”

A third Republican group, Market Skeptic Republicans, sharply diverges from the GOP’s traditional support for business and lower taxes. Only about a third of Market Skeptic Republicans (34%) say banks and other financial institutions have a positive effect on the way things are going in the country, lowest among Republican-leaning typology groups.

Alone among the groups in the GOP coalition, a majority of Market Skeptic Republicans support raising tax rates on corporations and large businesses. An overwhelming share (94%) say the economic system unfairly favors powerful interests, which places the view of Market Skeptic Republicans on this issue much closer to Solid Liberals (99% mostly unfair) than Core Conservatives (21%).

In contrast to Market Skeptic Republicans, New Era Enterprisers are fundamentally optimistic about the state of the nation and its future. They are more likely than any other typology group to say the next generation of Americans will have it better than people today. Younger and somewhat less overwhelmingly white than the other GOP-leaning groups, New Era Enterprisers are strongly pro-business and generally think that immigrants strengthen, rather than burden, the country.

Divisions on the left

...

While there have long been racial, ethnic and income differences within the Democratic coalition, these gaps are especially striking today. Reflecting the changing demographic composition of the Democratic base, for the first time there are two majority-minority Democratic-leaning typology groups, along with two more affluent, mostly white groups.

Solid Liberals are the largest group in the Democratic coalition, and they make up close to half (48%) of politically engaged Democrats and Democratic-leaning … [more]
news  org:data  data  analysis  database  white-paper  politics  polisci  sociology  ideology  coalitions  things  phalanges  exploratory  distribution  poll  values  polarization  policy  populism  vampire-squid  migration  obama  gender  sex  sexuality  corporation  finance  foreign-policy  trade  diversity  race  demographics  religion  inequality  envy  left-wing  right-wing  africa  descriptive  discrimination  identity-politics  trust  institutions  quiz  business  regulation  redistribution  welfare-state  usa  government  civil-liberty  market-power  rent-seeking  nationalism-globalism  age-generation  chart  nl-and-so-can-you  🎩  homo-hetero  trump  2016-election  postmortem  charity  money  class  class-warfare  elections  multi  let-me-see  fertility  theos  geography  urban  art  drugs  opioids  flux-stasis  entrepreneurialism  2014  2017  urban-rural  twitter  social  discussion  commentary  backup  journos-pundits  study  impetus  trends  tradition  culture  society  christianity  pdf  article  sentiment  abortion-contraception-embryo 
october 2017 by nhaliday
Places and Preferences: A Longitudinal Analysis of Self-Selection and Contextual Effects | British Journal of Political Science | Cambridge Core
preferences -> place, not place -> preferences (mostly)
Cosmopolitan immigration attitudes in Europe's large cities: Adaptation or selection: https://www.dropbox.com/s/lb3yrsdlhpxprfs/RahsaanMaxwellAPSACosmopolitanImmigrationCities.pdf?dl=0
The myth of London exceptionalism: https://quarterly.demos.co.uk/article/issue-5/ukip-in-london/
London is not as invulnerable to the appeal of UKIP as commonly reported, finds new research from Eric Kaufmann.

Are White British Londoners more accepting of immigration than White British elsewhere? The British Election Study (BES)’s 2015 panel survey asks whether immigration enriches or undermines cultural life. 34.7 per cent of White British outside London say immigration strongly undermines cultural life. But so do 34.4 per cent of White British Londoners. Not much difference there. 44 per cent of White Brits outside London want to leave the EU, but so do 42.3 per cent of White British Londoners. Again, not much in it.

...

Finally, when we control for a fuller range of demographic and attitudinal characteristics, as in figure 4, London and the South East emerge as significantly more likely than the rest of England and Wales to have voted UKIP in 2014, according to the BES.

Cosmopolitan cities and their country cousins – UK in a changing Europe: http://ukandeu.ac.uk/london-voted-leave-or-why-local-differences-in-populist-right-voting-are-overstated/
study  sociology  politics  polisci  ideology  elections  data  correlation  null-result  confounding  endo-exo  migration  causation  stylized-facts  selection  britain  urban  polarization  longitudinal  context  intervention  roots  piracy  pdf  class-warfare  multi  eric-kaufmann  brexit  trust  social-capital  race  demographics  org:ngo  summary  values  poll  dropbox  phalanges  geography  wonkish  analysis  variance-components  chart  populism  nationalism-globalism  org:edu  org:anglo  psychology  social-psych  org:mag  news  endogenous-exogenous  preprint  urban-rural  hari-seldon  sentiment 
may 2017 by nhaliday
Identifying the Determinants of Attitudes towards Immigrants: A Structural Cross-Country Analysis
not much of a difference by gender (seems female->more supportive in northern countries, less supportive in southern countries), biggest thing is urbanity+educational attainment

https://twitter.com/whyvert/status/899850410935975940
https://archive.is/nUJp2
Vote share for WEuro populist parties higher in regions: rural, ⇈foreigners, ⇈unemployment, AND ⇈education except in cities (surprising)
the urban educated hate the nationalist parties but the nonurban educated are prone to support them. Not all educated are alike

The success of radical right-wing parties in Western European regions – new challenging findings: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14782804.2016.1198691

Can Television Reduce Xenophobia? The Case of East Germany: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2932276
To examine this question, we exploit the fact that individuals in some areas of East Germany – due to their geographic location – could not receive West German television until 1989. We conjecture that individuals who received West German television were exposed more frequently to foreigners and thus have developed less xenophobia than people who were not exposed to those programs. Our results show that regions that could receive West German television were less likely to vote for right-wing parties during the national elections from 1998 to 2013. Only recently, the same regions were also more likely to vote for left-wing parties. Moreover, while counties that hosted more foreigners in 1989 were also more likely to vote for right-wing parties in most elections, we find counties that recently hosted more foreign visitors showed less xenophobia, which is in line with intergroup contact theory.

With an Open Mind: Openness to Experience Moderates the Effect of Interethnic Encounters on Support for Immigration: https://academic.oup.com/esr/article-abstract/33/5/721/4102111/With-an-Open-Mind-Openness-to-Experience-Moderates

Refugees Unwelcome? Changes in the Public Acceptance of Immigrants and Refugees in Germany in the Course of Europe’s ‘Immigration Crisis’: https://academic.oup.com/esr/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/esr/jcx071/4557564/Refugees-Unwelcome-Changes-in-the-Public
Derived from discussions making up the German immigration discourse during this time, we expect reduced acceptance especially of those immigrants who were explicitly connected to the salient events, like Muslims and the offenders of NYE. Most strikingly, we find that refugees were generally highly accepted and even more so in the second wave, whereas the acceptance of immigrants from Arab or African countries further decreased. Moreover, _female respondents’ initial preference for male immigrants_ disappeared. Contrary to our expectations, we find no changes in the acceptance of Muslims.
pdf  study  economics  sociology  demographics  gender  age-generation  urban  labor  education  poll  values  europe  nordic  germanic  mediterranean  correlation  regression  exploratory  migration  policy  coalitions  large-factor  ethnocentrism  org:ngo  us-them  phalanges  white-paper  matrix-factorization  wonkish  multi  scitariat  twitter  social  commentary  summary  backup  populism  data  intricacy  polisci  geography  econometrics  cliometrics  history  mostly-modern  cold-war  path-dependence  shift  tv  media  propaganda  diversity  natural-experiment  endo-exo  canada  politics  emotion  personality  creative  intervention  gender-diff  longitudinal  flux-stasis  islam  crime  sex  events  impetus  endogenous-exogenous  urban-rural  gnon  hari-seldon  sentiment 
may 2017 by nhaliday
Migrants and the Making of America: The Short- and Long-Run Effects of Immigration during the Age of Mass Migration*
The long-run effects appear to arise from the persistence of sizeable short-run benefits, including earlier and more intensive industrialization, increased agricultural productivity, and more innovation.

The Political Economy of Immigration Restriction in the United States, 1890 to 1921: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c6577.pdf
A large segment of rural America was against open immigration at least by the first vote in 1897 and even in the first strongly contested vote in 1898. Why this was the case probably has more to do with the history of nativist sentiment in America than with the particulars of immigration restriction of concern here. It is important, however, that some parts of rural America were considerably less in favor of restriction than were others. Rural Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan can be easily contrasted with equally rural areas in Ohio, Indiana, and Kansas (see table 7.2). In general, those from countries whose populations were still emigrating at high rates voted to keep the door open, while the native born and those from countries that were not active sending regions did the nativity of constituencies, as they were in the cities.15 The South was firmly against open immigration, as were the Pacific region and most of the Mountain states. The 1915 and 1917 votes are similar to that in 1913 with an erosion of support in much of the Midwest and an increase in support in some large cities.

...

The industry results conform to the predictions regarding the roles of labor composition and product demand. In men’s clothing, which contained a large proportion of immigrants, wages were distinctly depressed in cities having an increase from 1899 to 1909 in the percentage of their populations that was foreign born. The decrease is substantial: a 1-percentage-point increase in the fraction of the city’s population that was foreign born decreased wages by about 1.5 to 3 percent. Foundries also show negative coefficients. Because foundries hired both skilled (native) and unskilled (foreign-born) workers (see table 7.5), the results are even more supportive of the view that immigration severely depressed the wages of less-skilled labor.
pdf  study  economics  migration  labor  growth-econ  cliometrics  usa  history  natural-experiment  path-dependence  long-short-run  🎩  regularizer  intervention  stylized-facts  agriculture  econ-productivity  innovation  heavy-industry  nationalism-globalism  broad-econ  assimilation  chart  microfoundations  pre-ww2  early-modern  mostly-modern  multi  article  political-econ  poll  values  policy  compensation  effect-size  branches  sentiment 
february 2017 by nhaliday
What Do Europeans Think About Muslim Immigration? | Chatham House
- majority of population wants complete moratorium
- 48% of college graduates as well
- 44% for 18-29
- UK and Spain the only ones <50% overall
- no Scandinavian countries surveyed

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/07/11/europeans-fear-wave-of-refugees-will-mean-more-terrorism-fewer-jobs/
Relatively few Europeans believe diversity has a positive impact on their countries. At 36%, Sweden registers the highest percentage that believes an increasingly diverse society makes their country a better place to live. In many countries, the prevailing view is that diversity makes no difference in the quality of life.

https://global.handelsblatt.com/politics/looking-to-germany-to-protect-the-world-order-779939
fundamental incompatibility >50% in Germany, etc.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/publications/research/2017-06-20-future-europe-attitudes-raines-goodwin-cutts-final.pdf
ridiculously out-of-touch
https://necpluribusimpar.net/publicelite-divide-immigration/
It’s as if people in the elite were mostly protected from the bad consequences of immigration, but not from its benefits, while the opposite were true for most people in the public… (A study showed a similar phenomenon in the US, although there is less opposition to immigration overall here, which is not saying much given how much opposition there is to immigration in Europe.) What is really striking is that, on every single point raised in that poll, people in the public are right and people in the elite are wrong. At least, they are if we’re talking about the immigration of poor, unskilled and non-Western people, but this is what people have in mind when they complain about immigration. In fact, not only is the public right, but it’s obviously right.

Of course, the sophisticates don’t know that, because they haven’t actually read the literature which they claim shows the public is mistaken about immigration. So they ascribe the hostility to immigration among the public, which is off the charts, to bigotry and ignorance. As soon as I have more time, which probably won’t be until a few months from now, I plan to publish a series of very detailed posts in which I discuss the literature on the effects of immigration in the West. In the meantime, if you are convinced that the elite is right and that immigration is great for Europe, you should ask yourself why, if members of the elite are right, they have to lie all the time about this. For instance, you should ask yourself why, if immigration really doesn’t make crime worse, the French government under Jospin gave instructions to the police not to release any names when communicating to the press or why journalists systematically replace non-French names by French names when they write on crime. Similarly, you could ask yourself why both the authorities and the media covered up the sexual assaults perpetrated by migrants in Cologne and many other cities throughout Europe in 2016, before the truth finally came out. If these were isolated incidents, you couldn’t conclude much from them, but the cover-up is systematic. Maybe it’s just me, but when I think what I’m saying is true, I don’t have to lie about it.

https://twitter.com/phl43/status/889570666327965704
https://necpluribusimpar.net/quick-look-immigration-crime-germany/
Of course, this is not surprising in the least, what is surprising is that so many people were stupid enough as to think it wasn’t going to happen. But the most amazing thing is that you can be certain that, despite this fiasco, the sophisticates will continue to treat anyone who voice skepticism about the benefits of mass immigration in Europe as a bigoted cretin. To be convinced of your intellectual and moral superiority when you are making claims that are manifestly absurd is perhaps the worst kind of stupidity.

lawlz from NYT: https://twitter.com/tcjfs/status/884829474445029376

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/the-public-vs-the-politicians/

ick source but whatever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SE6x_I7yYE
'I would do it again’ Defiant Merkel has no regrets about opening Germany’s borders: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/846397/german-election-2017-angela-merkel-migrants-germany-borders

https://www.ft.com/content/23e02b76-7074-11e7-93ff-99f383b09ff9
A recent poll by the University of Mainz, cited in the study, found that 55 per cent of those asked felt “systematically lied to by the media”. Some 26 per cent agreed with the statement that “the media and politicians work hand in hand to manipulate public opinion”.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.welt.de%2Fpolitik%2Fdeutschland%2Farticle167673517%2F7-von-10-Deutschen-wollen-Mittelmeerfluechtlinge-zurueckschicken.html&edit-text=&act=url
7 out of 10 Germans want to send Mediterranean refugees back
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.welt.de%2Fpolitik%2Fdeutschland%2Farticle168016985%2FGrosse-Mehrheit-findet-Muslime-in-Deutschland-schlecht-integriert.html&edit-text=&act=url
Despite this strong connection, a large majority of the Germans sees the Muslim immigrants here as badly integrated. 65.6 percent of the Germans would generally call Muslim immigrants in Germany as rather poor or very badly integrated. This was the result of the WELT-Trend, a representative survey which was exclusively made by the opinion research institute Civey.

Tribes of Europe: https://tribes.chathamhouse.org/the-tribes

Australia and Muslim ban: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/half-of-all-australians-want-to-ban-muslim-immigration-poll-20160920-grkufa.html
Report: Voters Say Country Is Full, Support Partial Muslim Immigration Ban: http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/10/26/report-voters-say-country-full-support-muslim-immigration-ban/
New Zealand's Refugee Policy is Closer to Trump's 'Muslim Ban' Than You Might Think: https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/aej3aj/is-new-zealands-refugee-policy-closer-to-trumps-muslim-ban-than-you-think
news  org:anglo  data  poll  policy  migrant-crisis  migration  islam  MENA  demographics  europe  EU  britain  gilens-page  mediterranean  gallic  germanic  eastern-europe  org:ngo  values  crosstab  current-events  nationalism-globalism  assimilation  zeitgeist  multi  terrorism  descriptive  org:euro  pdf  analysis  class  elite  vampire-squid  redistribution  welfare-state  crime  culture-war  westminster  white-paper  social  video  lurid  censorship  culture  org:mag  journos-pundits  neocons  unaffiliated  right-wing  propaganda  media  twitter  discussion  org:rec  org:biz  crooked  criminology  commentary  gnon  org:data  diversity  putnam-like  judaism  civic  universalism-particularism  nordic  database  chart  anglo  statesmen  🎩  attaq  wonkish  org:lite  counter-revolution  track-record  africa  exploratory  list  maps  visualization  politics  polisci  coalitions  ideology  phalanges  urban-rural  sentiment 
february 2017 by nhaliday
The Hidden American Immigration Consensus: A Conjoint Analysis of Attitudes toward Immigrants - Hainmueller - 2014 - American Journal of Political Science - Wiley Online Library
https://twitter.com/tcjfs/status/862076519077879808
https://archive.is/worD7
Polls re "increasing"/"decreasing" levels aren't reliable, because normies have no idea how much we currently have. https://cis.org/Camarota/Survey-Highlights-Popularity-Immigration-Enforcement

https://www.numbersusa.com/news/voters-swing-states-support-raise-act
https://www.numbersusa.com/news/pew-us-has-more-immigrants-any-other-country
The report also noted that almost half of Americans (49%) say that immigration in the U.S. should be decreased while only 15% said it should be increased.

also:
- 13.4% foreign-born
- of those, 25% illegal, 44% naturalized, 25% permanent resident
- 1/2 not proficient in English

It's the immigration, stupid: http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2015/11/its-immigration-stupid.html
Polling on immigration often appears to be all over the place. Wording is crucial. When the choices are "deport everyone" and "secure the border and then offer a path to citizenship", the Cathedral can manufacture headlines to try and create an illusion of amnesty as a political winner. When the questions are more objectively designed, it becomes clear that restrictionism is the populist position.

Over the summer, Reuters approached the issue in the most straightforward manner I've ever come across. In terms of fleshing out public sentiment, the approach is bar none. Respondents were asked about what should be done with illegal immigrants in the US. Only two committal answers--"deport most or all of them" and "allow most or all of them to stay"--along with a third "unsure" cop-out option, were offered as responses.

World Publics Welcome Global Trade — But Not Immigration: http://www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/
In both affluent countries in the West and in the developing world, people are concerned about immigration. Large majorities in nearly every country surveyed express the view that there should be greater restriction of immigration and tighter control of their country’s borders.
study  labor  politics  policy  society  regularizer  usa  gilens-page  poll  migration  proposal  values  managerial-state  nationalism-globalism  chart  multi  twitter  social  commentary  gnon  unaffiliated  right-wing  news  org:ngo  data  latin-america  demographics  language  assimilation  zeitgeist  🎩  attaq  anglo  backup  scale  sampling-bias  knowledge  intricacy  realness  org:data  world  developing-world  white-paper  database  analysis  sentiment 
july 2016 by nhaliday

related tags

2016-election  abortion-contraception-embryo  africa  age-generation  agriculture  alignment  alt-inst  analysis  analytical-holistic  anglo  anomie  art  article  asia  assimilation  attaq  authoritarianism  backup  barons  behavioral-gen  biodet  branches  brexit  britain  broad-econ  business  c(pp)  canada  causation  censorship  charity  chart  checking  china  christianity  civic  civil-liberty  class  class-warfare  clinton  cliometrics  coalitions  cold-war  commentary  community  comparison  compensation  composition-decomposition  confounding  context  contrarianism  cooperate-defect  coordination  corporation  correctness  correlation  cost-benefit  counter-revolution  creative  crime  criminology  critique  crooked  crosstab  culture  culture-war  current-events  data  database  degrees-of-freedom  demographics  descriptive  developing-world  developmental  dimensionality  direct-indirect  discrimination  discussion  disease  distribution  diversity  domestication  dotnet  dropbox  drugs  early-modern  eastern-europe  econ-productivity  econometrics  economics  ecosystem  education  effect-size  effective-altruism  elections  elite  emotion  endo-exo  endocrine  endogenous-exogenous  entrepreneurialism  environmental-effects  envy  eric-kaufmann  ethnocentrism  EU  europe  events  exit-voice  experiment  exploratory  expression-survival  fertility  finance  flux-stasis  foreign-policy  functional  gallic  gender  gender-diff  geography  germanic  gilens-page  git  github  gnon  golang  government  growth-econ  hari-seldon  haskell  heavy-industry  higher-ed  history  homo-hetero  identity-politics  ideology  impetus  individualism-collectivism  inequality  info-dynamics  innovation  institutions  intervention  intricacy  islam  javascript  journos-pundits  judaism  jvm  knowledge  labor  language  large-factor  latin-america  left-wing  let-me-see  libraries  links  lisp  list  lol  long-short-run  longitudinal  lurid  madisonian  malaise  managerial-state  maps  market-power  matrix-factorization  measurement  media  medicine  mediterranean  MENA  methodology  microfoundations  migrant-crisis  migration  money  mostly-modern  multi  n-factor  nationalism-globalism  natural-experiment  neocons  news  nl-and-so-can-you  nordic  null-result  obama  ocaml-sml  oly-programming  opioids  org:anglo  org:biz  org:data  org:edu  org:euro  org:lite  org:mag  org:ngo  org:rec  organizing  oss  other-xtian  outcome-risk  parasites-microbiome  parenting  path-dependence  patho-altruism  pdf  personality  phalanges  piracy  pls  polarization  policy  polisci  political-econ  politics  poll  populism  postmortem  pre-ww2  prediction  preference-falsification  prejudice  preprint  pro-rata  programming  propaganda  proposal  psychology  putnam-like  python  quiz  r-lang  race  random  randy-ayndy  ranking  ratty  realness  recommendations  redistribution  regression  regularizer  regulation  religion  rent-seeking  repo  review  right-wing  roots  rot  russia  rust  sampling-bias  scala  scale  scitariat  selection  self-interest  sentiment  sex  sexuality  shift  social  social-capital  social-norms  social-psych  society  sociology  ssc  stagnation  statesmen  stories  study  stylized-facts  subculture  summary  sv  systematic-ad-hoc  taxes  tech  technocracy  techtariat  terrorism  theos  thiel  things  time  time-series  top-n  track-record  trade  tradition  trends  trump  trust  tv  twitter  unaffiliated  universalism-particularism  urban  urban-rural  us-them  usa  values  vampire-squid  variance-components  video  visualization  welfare-state  westminster  white-paper  wonkish  world  wtf  yvain  zeitgeist  🎩 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: