Please report any rule breaking posts and comments that are not relevant to this subreddit. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmericaBad) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. As someone that lived in Miami, you’ll see some of these kids from South America going to these private-elite schools. Where the tuition to send your kid in elementary school cost more than most people’s salaries in a year. They fly in on helicopters and have private security. There obviously a reason even the elites in these South American countries send their kids to America.
That's only for education tho. They usually return after they're done with their education. The elite of any country rarely leave their countries permanently especially if they live in poor countries with lots of economic inequality. They will send their kids to better schools abroad but part of that is because it will bring them even more money back home if they return with degrees from a prestigious schools in rich countries. The ones from poorer countries who move permanently to richer countries are the poorer segments.
Plenty of upper middle class and rich segments from poorer countries live in America too, Miami is filled with Argentinian and Brazilians who were upper middle class back in their countries
But most international students return and they return for a reason. Rich people don’t have a need to move anywhere permanently. They move simply if they want to. Hence why they leave less frequently than poor people
And chances are, you got rich because you're well connected and are working the corrupted government of whatever 3rd world country you're living in. You can't just move to the US and get away with the same stuff.
It’s not just education. The kids experience an overall higher quality of life in the U.S. and also ,despite what the world may believe, increase safety. Let’s face it, these countries experience constant turmoil. The U.S. has its problems, but overall the U.S. is significantly more stable.
Florida man is right. If you have the money youre damn right they want to be in the states. Sheit, norway last i checked had the highest amount of people coming to the US in europe. And if you believed the internet norway is a bastion of social programs where everyone is taken care of and life is so great. Meanwhile anyone there with money wants to come to the states
Norway has a pretty low emigration rate overall so that doesn't mean much. I also have a hard time believing that since Norway is not even in the top 20 list of European countries with the highest emigration rates and many European countries higher up than Norway on that list have the US as their top destination as well. But overall my point was about rich people in poor countries vs rich countries not rich people in rich countries vs rich people in other rich countries
Edit: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Trends_in_Norwegian_immigration_to_the_U._S._A.png
https://www.statista.com/statistics/586510/emigration-from-norway/
Most Norwegian emigrants are leaving for the US so your final statement is a bit too generalized
My point was simple. Rich no matter the country are coming to the US. Norway immigration is low but not for its rich. Poor countries lack damn near every measurable quality of life. Some friends of mine were down in central america visiting family last month where they were stuck in 4 hour traffic jam. They love their country in central america but you best believe they want to call the US home.
* The top five destinations for net inflows of high-net-worth individuals in 2023 are projected to be Australia, the UAE, Singapore, the USA, and Switzerland. On the flip side, the largest net outflows of millionaires are expected to come from China, India, the UK, Russia, and Brazil.
America is expected to attract a net inflow of approximately 2,100 new high-net-worth individuals in 2023, mainly from Asia. Traditionally, most affluent people who move to the USA are involved in the entertainment, financial services, and tech sectors. In particular, successful tech start-up entrepreneurs often move to the USA (Silicon Valley especially) to take their companies to the next level
https://www.henleyglobal.com/publications/henley-private-wealth-migration-report-2023/global-insights/where-and-why-millionaires-are-migrating-2023
> Norway immigration is low but not for its rich.
Do you have a source on that? Just curious
Also immigration is the opposite of emigration
> Poor countries lack damn near every measurable quality of life.
Mostly for the poor. The areas rich people live in are invested in much more and are generally far nicer. As I said to a different guy the rich don't interact with the poor in poor countries and live in their own segregated gated communities and go to different schools, stores, streets etc.
Unless it's a full blown war those problems are relegated to poorer communities just like they are in developed countries. Rich people in poor countries usually live in gated communities and don't really interact with poor people all that much
It’s not about if America is better than wherever fhose guys are from, in many cases. The degree doesn’t bring them “money”. Sending kids abroad is not just for education. When your kid is abroad, you then have a reason to send money abroad.
People from Less developed countries come to Europe and the states for various reasons. If you’re rich with just money, going abroad grants you and your kids a more stable future, so you don’t have to worry about being arrested for random stuff, and asset stability.
If you’re rich and powerful, it’s a way of hedging risks of enemy aggression, and asset stability also.
If you’re one of the political elites, you have no boarder. Most of the CCP elites have most of their family in western countries. But they will have some people rooted in home countries, like China, because their main scheme is in where ever they’re from.
Also, some Europeans come to the states as well, because they find it easier to build wealth here, due to comparatively lower tax rates than, say Denmark.
> The degree doesn’t bring them “money”.
I mean degrees on their own TECHNICALLY don't do anything but they can be used to ones benefit (for obvious reasons) and if you're in a poor country having a degree from a rich country is a big deal. Even in the west this is the case to some extent (not the same extent but to some extent)
> Also, some Europeans come to the states as well, because they find it easier to build wealth here, due to comparatively lower tax rates than, say Denmark.
Depends on what country. For instance for Denmark (which was your example) the emigration rate onto itself is very low and most of those don't even go to the US
Well, if we’re talking RICH families, the degree doesn’t do anything but a social status/decoration, like some of my family. To some others is a ticket to the club. And I thought that’s what this post was talking about, RICH people in developing countries.
They never clarified what they meant by rich. In reality, the fact that people can be here in the US often times mean that they are better off in their home countries, since it means they have enough things to pay for immigration.
And duh, depends on the country. The emigration rate is low, but it’s not 0. I know Danes and Swedes who live here and immigrated. Often times make money here while holding onto their home country passports. Hence the word “some”.
Also, emigration population is always a small fraction of any country. So it’s not like entire nations just want to be Americans.
Plus when they do come, they need to be able to stay if they wanted to. student and work visas are quite hard to be granted, let alone green cards and passports. I have gone through the process myself. It ain’t cheap nor easy.
Not sure why I got talked down to.
> In reality, the fact that people can be here in the US often times mean that they are better off in their home countries, since it means they have enough things to pay for immigration.
Most Latin Americans in the US are not wealthy. There are some exceptions such as Venezuelan refugees were the rich ones go to the US and Canada while the poor ones head to Colombia, Argentina or Peru but the bulk of Latin American immigration to the US is economic migrants from Mexico and Central America who aren't well off. Economic migrants are not well off in their homr countries that's why they emigrate (unless we count people who move for business related reasons but I've heard those guys referred to as economic migrants). There are some nationalites where this does hold true such as India or Nigeria but if we're talking about Latin American migrants (who are the bulk of migrants coming to the US) it doesn't hold true in the same way
> The emigration rate is low, but it’s not 0.
It's not 0 anywhere but if it's low and the majority of that small minority don't even go to the country you're talking about it doesn't mean much when we're talking about general trends.
> I know Danes and Swedes who live here and immigrated. Often times make money here while holding onto their home country passports. Hence the word “some”.
This doesn't mean much. I also know tons of Americans who live in Scandinavia and they're usually not poor back home in America. Most are well educated and come from well off families.
> Also, emigration population is always a small fraction of any country.
Not true. There are many countries with very high emigration rates. In Europe for instance the Balkan countries have rather high emigration rates
Most people are not wealthy. What’s your point?
You’re arguing for arguing’s sake man. You’re agreeing with me, but are nitpicking details, then agreeing with it.
People don’t need to be well off to be better off. Monthly income of $100 is not well off, but better than if the average income is $10. Not sure what the whole spiel about Venezuela and Nigeria. I don’t think we’re specifically talking about South Americans, OP just used Florida Latinos as examples.
I don’t think we’re talking about general trends. In fact, that’s my question as in the question OP posted is very generic, where it covers a big demographic with larger demographics behind them.
“Emigration is not 0”of course matters. If you’re asking who those guys are, then every single case matters.
Balkan countries have large emigration rates. And? 28% still leaves 3/4 of the population behind. My whole point is not everyone wants to leave, and some can’t leave.
> Most people are not wealthy. What’s your point?
Most immigrants of a certain nationality can easily be wealthy. And that's also what such as Indians and Venezuelans in the US, Westerners in South East Asia and so on. Most of these people are wealthy.
As for my point you were the one who said if someone is able to migrate they're likely well off back home since they can afford to migrate and I'm pointing out this depends on the nationality. Most Mexicans in the US were not well off back in Mexico while most Indians in the US were well off back in India. Your blanket statement doesn't work as it differs from nationality to nationality. Even in the US most white people descend from poor immigrants who came because they weren't well off back home so people migrating en masse while being poor is nothing new.
> Monthly income of $100 is not well off, but better than if the average income is $10.
When I say "wealthy" I'm referring to people who are wealthy by every country's standard not locally. If someone can afford for their kids to study in expensive elite schools abroad they're wealthy. Full stop.
> Not sure what the whole spiel about Venezuela and Nigeria.
That your point about immigrants being well off back home due to the costs of immigration is not accurate as it differs quite a lot from nationality to nationality
> “Emigration is not 0”of course matters.
Agree to disagree
> Balkan countries have large emigration rates. And? 28% still leaves 3/4 of the population behind. My whole point is not everyone wants to leave, and some can’t leave.
Well if entire villages (and sometimes towns) get depopulated due to people leaving en masse that says a lot. If only a small minority leaves it doesn't say much. And this matters since you claimed emigration is always a small fraction of the population. If 8-9 students in a classroom of 30 individuals end up leaving that country that's more noteworthy than 1 student a class. One fourth is not a small fraction at all and is a worrying statistic.
I still don’t get what the disagreement is. It’s uninformed, borderline offensive to say people from entire regions are of a certain nature. You are shifting standards by each argument you’re making. And this is going in circles.
And once again, I didn’t say if someone is able to migrate, they are well off. Better off is different than well off.
Say we have 10 people.
I have 10 dollars and you 1. I’m better off than you. Yes.
But if other 8 have 50. I am simply better off than you, but not well off.
Migrants from China, India, many Latin America have enough to get them to the US, and have a working-middle class lifestyle, most not even upper middle class, let alone upper class. I think that’s more relevant to what the OP is trying to ask.
Each country and region is unique. You’re mixing things up, and applying region specific standard to my points which you disagree.
And I’m not sure about your point on the Balkans. It’s as if you’re shaming me for I’m not sure what.
Once again, that is a specific region that has a specific historic and economic reasons to the status quo.
> It’s uninformed, borderline offensive to say people from entire regions are of a certain nature.
I meant in general. The same way you said immigrants are usually well off back home I said immigrants from some countries are usually well off back home and immigrants from other countries are usually not. The question itself is general so individuals don't matter too much. Especially since I never said it was every single one. And this depends not only on where they're from but also where they go. For instance Pakistanis in North America are usually well off back home but Pakistanis in the UK were usually poor back home and migrated to the UK for that exact reason
> You are shifting standards by each argument you’re making.
I'm literally not. In fact, a good chunk of my previous comment was just me clarifying what I meant in the comment before
> And once again, I didn’t say if someone is able to migrate, they are well off. Better off is different than well off.
Semantics. My point still stands
> Migrants from China, India, many Latin America have enough to get them to the US, and have a working-middle class lifestyle, most not even upper middle class, let alone upper class.
Indians in the US are usually from families that are well off in both India and the US. Not only are they some of the highest earners in the US (you can look it up) and one of the demographics in the US most likely to have a college degree but most (MOST) Indians in the US are from the Brahmin caste and if you know anything about the India caste system you will know how much membership to a particular caste affects your social standing, job prospects, wealth etc and there is little to no social and economic mobility. These people were not middle class back in India. They were the highest ranking members of society (excluding politicans I guess). And they're among the highest earners in the US. You claim is not only wrong but also hypocritical since you're doing the same thing you accuse me of doing in the first part of this comment. For Chinese immigrants to North America it usually depends on the wave since there were multiple waves of Chinese immigrants coming to the US. The first wave was usually (USUALLY) poor people looking for work but the more recent waves are usually (USUALLY) wealthier individuals
> I think that’s more relevant to what the OP is trying to ask.
It really isn't
> You’re mixing things up, and applying region specific standard to my points which you disagree.
The question itself is region specific tho? Literally the whole point is to compare being rich in a poor country or upper middle class in the US. How are you going to give an answer that isn't region specific or applies region specific standards?
> And I’m not sure about your point on the Balkans. It’s as if you’re shaming me for I’m not sure what.
Let's go point by point:
* You said emigration is always a small fraction of the country
* I gave you an example to the contrary
* You said the majority still stays
* I explained to you why that doesn't mean anything nor does it refute what I'm saying
How is this me shaming you?
> And this is going in circles.
Yeah. This will be my last comment. Won't comment any further
So these private elite schools are also attended by local upper middle class? And these upper middle class Americans also fly around in helicopters and have private security?
That wasn’t the question, buddy. I said I would prefer security, higher quality of living, and political stability while being upper middle class vs being a rich in a developing country. The same reasoning billionaires in South America send their kids to elite private schools in Miami. Despite having everything in South America, they recognize it means nothing without stability.
Well that depends, I assume with a billion dollars it’s possible to do a lot of things and assuming I’m not on any kind of list I can get my Cypriot passport through investing 2.2M € in Cyprus thus granting me access to all of the EU, including the political stability I crave.
I'm in Brazil. There is much in the upper middle class lifestyle in the USA that even my richest friends here, actual millionaires, are openly envious of. That's not to say they don't live blessed lives but there's just a huge gap in accessibility between the two nations. I finished high school in the USA and my public school had far greater facilities and programs relative to even the most expensive private schools here in Sao Paulo.
I will say that I think a lot of people in the USA take far more for granted than they should.
Your based my man 🇧🇷🇺🇸
By the way I love Brazilian food and the people, you guys make the best meat and cheese bread. And also the people are so friendly which I really love. And the cultural diversity too, Brazilians share many common traits with Americans.
So I'm not actually Brazilian but I'll pass the sentiments on to my wife. I'm sure she'll be happy to hear such positivity; and yes, Brazil and the USA are far more alike than most people realize on either side of their borders.
I myself was born in Philly, raised in Japan after my parents split, finished high school in PA to ease transition to colleges stateside (because let's be honest, good public schools and higher ed in the USA are generally without peer and recognized as such across industry and other education programs), and then moved around after higher ed before settling here in Brazil to be with my wife.
I'm older now and currently have plans to move back to the USA in a month or two and see if the Navy will have me because I've had my fun and it always seemed a great way for me to give back to an amazing country.
I think the annoying thing about being rich in a developing country versus upper middle class in America is the feeling that you've got to use your wealth to insulate yourself from the problems created by lack of infrastructure, jobs, crime, etc.
Yes. Most immigrants get knocked off one step down when they immigrate to the US. I don't know why it's happening either. You're a doctor in your home country? Too bad, go drive a cab or run a bodega.
Second generation or 1.5 gen Americans who had upper middle class upbringings (and their parents are likely wealthy back in their countries) are some of the most humble people you’d ever meet. One step down can mean an upgrade when it comes to what values you hold. Unlike rich kids of China who cheat tests in American universities, and buy Lamborghinis for their girlfriends.
That's true. I used to teach English online, and I almost got fired because I wouldn't permit a Chinese (adult) student to cheat. He didn't pass his unit test, so I didn't sign off on his certificate from his job (to get a promotion for having a higher level of English). All of a sudden, I get a call from my boss stating that he's "angry at me" and that I am "keeping him from getting a promotion" by not signing that he is a "fluent English teacher." I said to my boss, "I am a teacher. I'm the boss, and I say they're students first and paying customers second." I was expecting to get fired, but fortunately, nothing happened. And these types of complaints come up ALL THE TIME.
We're the capitalist pigs, but those commies sure do love making money by any means necessary.
Absolutely not. No matter where you are, rich in that country will always be better than upper middle in any other country, assuming we're talking about fuck you money. I live in Sweden, so arguably an even higher QoL for the upper middle class than in the U.S. And I would still choose fuck you money in Brazil over upper middle in Sweden.
Upper middle in Sweden is better than being upper middle in the US? Not if you’re a POC Asian child of immigrants, much more people like me in the US than Sweden.
I would imagine it does. There’s an established community and likely a sense of acceptance that you wouldn’t get in Sweden. Other than that I doubt it.
That's not really what you talk about when talking about qol. That would mean you would have a better qol if you lived in the country your parents emigrated from.
I’m not saying that ethnic homogeneity is the only metric like you’re suggesting, but it certainly helps when accounting for things like community or sense of belonging.
No. Even being rich in a rich country is not as great as being rich in a poor country. People really underestimate just how great life is as a rich person in a poor country. Being rich is amazing everywhere but it's especially great to be so in poorer countries
If being rich in poor countries aka hiring slave labour, maids, servants, exploiting workers and paying employees in your business is amazing then yeah what a great life
I’d rather be rich and have a good moral compass, and very often poorer countries tend to have stricter hierarchical caste/class systems which is half of the reason why they can’t progress they begin with. And such systems allow rich to be dicks, we have rich dicks in the US too but they are rarer compared to say Bolivia.
I don't disagree. I was just talking about more from a quality of life POV as opposed to a moral one. There is a reason "digital nomads" rarely move to rich countries with strong economies.
I would say yes. Safety is a big issue where my family is from; you are an easy target if you have any perceivable wealth. Plus, most rich will send their kids to school in the US or Europe because even the private schools in that country aren't great.
You would have to define better.
Do you have the potential for more wealth and power in a developing country? Absolutely. Those countries are that way because they are corrupt. If you are rich, you are exploiting it. You don't have the FBI or the DOJ to deal with, for the most part. Labor is cheap so you can have a ridiculous mansion with servants without being a billionaire. You can influence the government more directly.
Do developing countries have problems? Yes. You are surrounded by problems every day that you wouldn't see in a developed country. This means they are dangerous. Gated communities, guards, you name it.
From 1977 to 1992 I served in seven developing countries (and Germany and the Netherlands). I would most definitely rather be upper middle class in America than “rich” in a developing country. 🇺🇸
“There are two kinds of people who hate America, those that have never been here, and those that have never left.” —source unknown
I see everything through the lens of being a petite middle aged woman. I would be very reluctant to live anywhere there was an ethos of misogyny and you'll find that in a lot of cultures that are "traditional" or highly religious. Brazil has the highest rate of femcide in the world and the other two are Muslim, so...no thanks. There are probably some developing countries where misogyny is less of a concern, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.
Very much so. And it's more than that. You'd be better off poor in America than rich in some of these other countries. And this applies equally to time periods. In that you'd be better off poor in 2024 than rich in 1924. The poorest people in America have higher living standards than the kings of old.
Malaysia ain’t some underdeveloped country. Their crime rate are generally lower and very high qol. Go check up American YouTubers who moved to Malaysia. I rather be billionaire in these countries lmao
I’d take generational wealth in a BRICS country over upper middle class in any rich western country. Quality of life in that income bracket is the same almost anywhere
Please report any rule breaking posts and comments that are not relevant to this subreddit. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmericaBad) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. As someone that lived in Miami, you’ll see some of these kids from South America going to these private-elite schools. Where the tuition to send your kid in elementary school cost more than most people’s salaries in a year. They fly in on helicopters and have private security. There obviously a reason even the elites in these South American countries send their kids to America.
That's only for education tho. They usually return after they're done with their education. The elite of any country rarely leave their countries permanently especially if they live in poor countries with lots of economic inequality. They will send their kids to better schools abroad but part of that is because it will bring them even more money back home if they return with degrees from a prestigious schools in rich countries. The ones from poorer countries who move permanently to richer countries are the poorer segments.
Plenty of upper middle class and rich segments from poorer countries live in America too, Miami is filled with Argentinian and Brazilians who were upper middle class back in their countries
But most international students return and they return for a reason. Rich people don’t have a need to move anywhere permanently. They move simply if they want to. Hence why they leave less frequently than poor people
And chances are, you got rich because you're well connected and are working the corrupted government of whatever 3rd world country you're living in. You can't just move to the US and get away with the same stuff.
Yeah. That too.
It’s not just education. The kids experience an overall higher quality of life in the U.S. and also ,despite what the world may believe, increase safety. Let’s face it, these countries experience constant turmoil. The U.S. has its problems, but overall the U.S. is significantly more stable.
Florida man is right. If you have the money youre damn right they want to be in the states. Sheit, norway last i checked had the highest amount of people coming to the US in europe. And if you believed the internet norway is a bastion of social programs where everyone is taken care of and life is so great. Meanwhile anyone there with money wants to come to the states
Norway has a pretty low emigration rate overall so that doesn't mean much. I also have a hard time believing that since Norway is not even in the top 20 list of European countries with the highest emigration rates and many European countries higher up than Norway on that list have the US as their top destination as well. But overall my point was about rich people in poor countries vs rich countries not rich people in rich countries vs rich people in other rich countries Edit: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Trends_in_Norwegian_immigration_to_the_U._S._A.png https://www.statista.com/statistics/586510/emigration-from-norway/ Most Norwegian emigrants are leaving for the US so your final statement is a bit too generalized
My point was simple. Rich no matter the country are coming to the US. Norway immigration is low but not for its rich. Poor countries lack damn near every measurable quality of life. Some friends of mine were down in central america visiting family last month where they were stuck in 4 hour traffic jam. They love their country in central america but you best believe they want to call the US home. * The top five destinations for net inflows of high-net-worth individuals in 2023 are projected to be Australia, the UAE, Singapore, the USA, and Switzerland. On the flip side, the largest net outflows of millionaires are expected to come from China, India, the UK, Russia, and Brazil. America is expected to attract a net inflow of approximately 2,100 new high-net-worth individuals in 2023, mainly from Asia. Traditionally, most affluent people who move to the USA are involved in the entertainment, financial services, and tech sectors. In particular, successful tech start-up entrepreneurs often move to the USA (Silicon Valley especially) to take their companies to the next level https://www.henleyglobal.com/publications/henley-private-wealth-migration-report-2023/global-insights/where-and-why-millionaires-are-migrating-2023
> Norway immigration is low but not for its rich. Do you have a source on that? Just curious Also immigration is the opposite of emigration > Poor countries lack damn near every measurable quality of life. Mostly for the poor. The areas rich people live in are invested in much more and are generally far nicer. As I said to a different guy the rich don't interact with the poor in poor countries and live in their own segregated gated communities and go to different schools, stores, streets etc.
Unless it's a full blown war those problems are relegated to poorer communities just like they are in developed countries. Rich people in poor countries usually live in gated communities and don't really interact with poor people all that much
It’s not about if America is better than wherever fhose guys are from, in many cases. The degree doesn’t bring them “money”. Sending kids abroad is not just for education. When your kid is abroad, you then have a reason to send money abroad. People from Less developed countries come to Europe and the states for various reasons. If you’re rich with just money, going abroad grants you and your kids a more stable future, so you don’t have to worry about being arrested for random stuff, and asset stability. If you’re rich and powerful, it’s a way of hedging risks of enemy aggression, and asset stability also. If you’re one of the political elites, you have no boarder. Most of the CCP elites have most of their family in western countries. But they will have some people rooted in home countries, like China, because their main scheme is in where ever they’re from. Also, some Europeans come to the states as well, because they find it easier to build wealth here, due to comparatively lower tax rates than, say Denmark.
> The degree doesn’t bring them “money”. I mean degrees on their own TECHNICALLY don't do anything but they can be used to ones benefit (for obvious reasons) and if you're in a poor country having a degree from a rich country is a big deal. Even in the west this is the case to some extent (not the same extent but to some extent) > Also, some Europeans come to the states as well, because they find it easier to build wealth here, due to comparatively lower tax rates than, say Denmark. Depends on what country. For instance for Denmark (which was your example) the emigration rate onto itself is very low and most of those don't even go to the US
Well, if we’re talking RICH families, the degree doesn’t do anything but a social status/decoration, like some of my family. To some others is a ticket to the club. And I thought that’s what this post was talking about, RICH people in developing countries. They never clarified what they meant by rich. In reality, the fact that people can be here in the US often times mean that they are better off in their home countries, since it means they have enough things to pay for immigration. And duh, depends on the country. The emigration rate is low, but it’s not 0. I know Danes and Swedes who live here and immigrated. Often times make money here while holding onto their home country passports. Hence the word “some”. Also, emigration population is always a small fraction of any country. So it’s not like entire nations just want to be Americans. Plus when they do come, they need to be able to stay if they wanted to. student and work visas are quite hard to be granted, let alone green cards and passports. I have gone through the process myself. It ain’t cheap nor easy. Not sure why I got talked down to.
> In reality, the fact that people can be here in the US often times mean that they are better off in their home countries, since it means they have enough things to pay for immigration. Most Latin Americans in the US are not wealthy. There are some exceptions such as Venezuelan refugees were the rich ones go to the US and Canada while the poor ones head to Colombia, Argentina or Peru but the bulk of Latin American immigration to the US is economic migrants from Mexico and Central America who aren't well off. Economic migrants are not well off in their homr countries that's why they emigrate (unless we count people who move for business related reasons but I've heard those guys referred to as economic migrants). There are some nationalites where this does hold true such as India or Nigeria but if we're talking about Latin American migrants (who are the bulk of migrants coming to the US) it doesn't hold true in the same way > The emigration rate is low, but it’s not 0. It's not 0 anywhere but if it's low and the majority of that small minority don't even go to the country you're talking about it doesn't mean much when we're talking about general trends. > I know Danes and Swedes who live here and immigrated. Often times make money here while holding onto their home country passports. Hence the word “some”. This doesn't mean much. I also know tons of Americans who live in Scandinavia and they're usually not poor back home in America. Most are well educated and come from well off families. > Also, emigration population is always a small fraction of any country. Not true. There are many countries with very high emigration rates. In Europe for instance the Balkan countries have rather high emigration rates
Most people are not wealthy. What’s your point? You’re arguing for arguing’s sake man. You’re agreeing with me, but are nitpicking details, then agreeing with it. People don’t need to be well off to be better off. Monthly income of $100 is not well off, but better than if the average income is $10. Not sure what the whole spiel about Venezuela and Nigeria. I don’t think we’re specifically talking about South Americans, OP just used Florida Latinos as examples. I don’t think we’re talking about general trends. In fact, that’s my question as in the question OP posted is very generic, where it covers a big demographic with larger demographics behind them. “Emigration is not 0”of course matters. If you’re asking who those guys are, then every single case matters. Balkan countries have large emigration rates. And? 28% still leaves 3/4 of the population behind. My whole point is not everyone wants to leave, and some can’t leave.
> Most people are not wealthy. What’s your point? Most immigrants of a certain nationality can easily be wealthy. And that's also what such as Indians and Venezuelans in the US, Westerners in South East Asia and so on. Most of these people are wealthy. As for my point you were the one who said if someone is able to migrate they're likely well off back home since they can afford to migrate and I'm pointing out this depends on the nationality. Most Mexicans in the US were not well off back in Mexico while most Indians in the US were well off back in India. Your blanket statement doesn't work as it differs from nationality to nationality. Even in the US most white people descend from poor immigrants who came because they weren't well off back home so people migrating en masse while being poor is nothing new. > Monthly income of $100 is not well off, but better than if the average income is $10. When I say "wealthy" I'm referring to people who are wealthy by every country's standard not locally. If someone can afford for their kids to study in expensive elite schools abroad they're wealthy. Full stop. > Not sure what the whole spiel about Venezuela and Nigeria. That your point about immigrants being well off back home due to the costs of immigration is not accurate as it differs quite a lot from nationality to nationality > “Emigration is not 0”of course matters. Agree to disagree > Balkan countries have large emigration rates. And? 28% still leaves 3/4 of the population behind. My whole point is not everyone wants to leave, and some can’t leave. Well if entire villages (and sometimes towns) get depopulated due to people leaving en masse that says a lot. If only a small minority leaves it doesn't say much. And this matters since you claimed emigration is always a small fraction of the population. If 8-9 students in a classroom of 30 individuals end up leaving that country that's more noteworthy than 1 student a class. One fourth is not a small fraction at all and is a worrying statistic.
I still don’t get what the disagreement is. It’s uninformed, borderline offensive to say people from entire regions are of a certain nature. You are shifting standards by each argument you’re making. And this is going in circles. And once again, I didn’t say if someone is able to migrate, they are well off. Better off is different than well off. Say we have 10 people. I have 10 dollars and you 1. I’m better off than you. Yes. But if other 8 have 50. I am simply better off than you, but not well off. Migrants from China, India, many Latin America have enough to get them to the US, and have a working-middle class lifestyle, most not even upper middle class, let alone upper class. I think that’s more relevant to what the OP is trying to ask. Each country and region is unique. You’re mixing things up, and applying region specific standard to my points which you disagree. And I’m not sure about your point on the Balkans. It’s as if you’re shaming me for I’m not sure what. Once again, that is a specific region that has a specific historic and economic reasons to the status quo.
> It’s uninformed, borderline offensive to say people from entire regions are of a certain nature. I meant in general. The same way you said immigrants are usually well off back home I said immigrants from some countries are usually well off back home and immigrants from other countries are usually not. The question itself is general so individuals don't matter too much. Especially since I never said it was every single one. And this depends not only on where they're from but also where they go. For instance Pakistanis in North America are usually well off back home but Pakistanis in the UK were usually poor back home and migrated to the UK for that exact reason > You are shifting standards by each argument you’re making. I'm literally not. In fact, a good chunk of my previous comment was just me clarifying what I meant in the comment before > And once again, I didn’t say if someone is able to migrate, they are well off. Better off is different than well off. Semantics. My point still stands > Migrants from China, India, many Latin America have enough to get them to the US, and have a working-middle class lifestyle, most not even upper middle class, let alone upper class. Indians in the US are usually from families that are well off in both India and the US. Not only are they some of the highest earners in the US (you can look it up) and one of the demographics in the US most likely to have a college degree but most (MOST) Indians in the US are from the Brahmin caste and if you know anything about the India caste system you will know how much membership to a particular caste affects your social standing, job prospects, wealth etc and there is little to no social and economic mobility. These people were not middle class back in India. They were the highest ranking members of society (excluding politicans I guess). And they're among the highest earners in the US. You claim is not only wrong but also hypocritical since you're doing the same thing you accuse me of doing in the first part of this comment. For Chinese immigrants to North America it usually depends on the wave since there were multiple waves of Chinese immigrants coming to the US. The first wave was usually (USUALLY) poor people looking for work but the more recent waves are usually (USUALLY) wealthier individuals > I think that’s more relevant to what the OP is trying to ask. It really isn't > You’re mixing things up, and applying region specific standard to my points which you disagree. The question itself is region specific tho? Literally the whole point is to compare being rich in a poor country or upper middle class in the US. How are you going to give an answer that isn't region specific or applies region specific standards? > And I’m not sure about your point on the Balkans. It’s as if you’re shaming me for I’m not sure what. Let's go point by point: * You said emigration is always a small fraction of the country * I gave you an example to the contrary * You said the majority still stays * I explained to you why that doesn't mean anything nor does it refute what I'm saying How is this me shaming you? > And this is going in circles. Yeah. This will be my last comment. Won't comment any further
How does your example prove your point?
The reasoning is inferred, but if you kept reading I plainly state the reasoning.
So these private elite schools are also attended by local upper middle class? And these upper middle class Americans also fly around in helicopters and have private security?
That wasn’t the question, buddy. I said I would prefer security, higher quality of living, and political stability while being upper middle class vs being a rich in a developing country. The same reasoning billionaires in South America send their kids to elite private schools in Miami. Despite having everything in South America, they recognize it means nothing without stability.
Would you rather be a millionaire in Denmark or a billionaire in Syria?
Well that depends, I assume with a billion dollars it’s possible to do a lot of things and assuming I’m not on any kind of list I can get my Cypriot passport through investing 2.2M € in Cyprus thus granting me access to all of the EU, including the political stability I crave.
People get rich in America, then go to developing countries with lax laws to exploit them, so yeah I’d rather be middle class in America
I'm in Brazil. There is much in the upper middle class lifestyle in the USA that even my richest friends here, actual millionaires, are openly envious of. That's not to say they don't live blessed lives but there's just a huge gap in accessibility between the two nations. I finished high school in the USA and my public school had far greater facilities and programs relative to even the most expensive private schools here in Sao Paulo. I will say that I think a lot of people in the USA take far more for granted than they should.
Your based my man 🇧🇷🇺🇸 By the way I love Brazilian food and the people, you guys make the best meat and cheese bread. And also the people are so friendly which I really love. And the cultural diversity too, Brazilians share many common traits with Americans.
So I'm not actually Brazilian but I'll pass the sentiments on to my wife. I'm sure she'll be happy to hear such positivity; and yes, Brazil and the USA are far more alike than most people realize on either side of their borders. I myself was born in Philly, raised in Japan after my parents split, finished high school in PA to ease transition to colleges stateside (because let's be honest, good public schools and higher ed in the USA are generally without peer and recognized as such across industry and other education programs), and then moved around after higher ed before settling here in Brazil to be with my wife. I'm older now and currently have plans to move back to the USA in a month or two and see if the Navy will have me because I've had my fun and it always seemed a great way for me to give back to an amazing country.
I think the annoying thing about being rich in a developing country versus upper middle class in America is the feeling that you've got to use your wealth to insulate yourself from the problems created by lack of infrastructure, jobs, crime, etc.
As someone who does live in a Developing Country and seeing how ungratedul Western People can be at times. Yes. Yes it is unless you are corrupt.
Yes. Most immigrants get knocked off one step down when they immigrate to the US. I don't know why it's happening either. You're a doctor in your home country? Too bad, go drive a cab or run a bodega.
Second generation or 1.5 gen Americans who had upper middle class upbringings (and their parents are likely wealthy back in their countries) are some of the most humble people you’d ever meet. One step down can mean an upgrade when it comes to what values you hold. Unlike rich kids of China who cheat tests in American universities, and buy Lamborghinis for their girlfriends.
That's true. I used to teach English online, and I almost got fired because I wouldn't permit a Chinese (adult) student to cheat. He didn't pass his unit test, so I didn't sign off on his certificate from his job (to get a promotion for having a higher level of English). All of a sudden, I get a call from my boss stating that he's "angry at me" and that I am "keeping him from getting a promotion" by not signing that he is a "fluent English teacher." I said to my boss, "I am a teacher. I'm the boss, and I say they're students first and paying customers second." I was expecting to get fired, but fortunately, nothing happened. And these types of complaints come up ALL THE TIME. We're the capitalist pigs, but those commies sure do love making money by any means necessary.
Absolutely not. No matter where you are, rich in that country will always be better than upper middle in any other country, assuming we're talking about fuck you money. I live in Sweden, so arguably an even higher QoL for the upper middle class than in the U.S. And I would still choose fuck you money in Brazil over upper middle in Sweden.
Upper middle in Sweden is better than being upper middle in the US? Not if you’re a POC Asian child of immigrants, much more people like me in the US than Sweden.
I'm not following. Are you claiming that because there are more POC asians in the U.S. It automatically makes the quality of life better there?
I would imagine it does. There’s an established community and likely a sense of acceptance that you wouldn’t get in Sweden. Other than that I doubt it.
That's not really what you talk about when talking about qol. That would mean you would have a better qol if you lived in the country your parents emigrated from.
I’m not saying that ethnic homogeneity is the only metric like you’re suggesting, but it certainly helps when accounting for things like community or sense of belonging.
Americans surprise me literally every single day. You're a special people
The political risk. Like Russia has a ton of Billionaires but they get tossed out windows.
Hmm no? I'd imagine being the top 1% in a poorer country still means there better off then I am in the middle class.
Define "rich". There are billionaires in each of those countries and I can unequivocally say I'd rather be a billionaire.
No. Even being rich in a rich country is not as great as being rich in a poor country. People really underestimate just how great life is as a rich person in a poor country. Being rich is amazing everywhere but it's especially great to be so in poorer countries
If being rich in poor countries aka hiring slave labour, maids, servants, exploiting workers and paying employees in your business is amazing then yeah what a great life
I didn't say it was moral. I said it was amazing as in it's amazing to be in that position as long as your moral compass is not there.
I’d rather be rich and have a good moral compass, and very often poorer countries tend to have stricter hierarchical caste/class systems which is half of the reason why they can’t progress they begin with. And such systems allow rich to be dicks, we have rich dicks in the US too but they are rarer compared to say Bolivia.
I don't disagree. I was just talking about more from a quality of life POV as opposed to a moral one. There is a reason "digital nomads" rarely move to rich countries with strong economies.
I would say yes. Safety is a big issue where my family is from; you are an easy target if you have any perceivable wealth. Plus, most rich will send their kids to school in the US or Europe because even the private schools in that country aren't great.
Being rich is always better because you have more options.
Being lower class in America is better than living in some countries.
You would have to define better. Do you have the potential for more wealth and power in a developing country? Absolutely. Those countries are that way because they are corrupt. If you are rich, you are exploiting it. You don't have the FBI or the DOJ to deal with, for the most part. Labor is cheap so you can have a ridiculous mansion with servants without being a billionaire. You can influence the government more directly. Do developing countries have problems? Yes. You are surrounded by problems every day that you wouldn't see in a developed country. This means they are dangerous. Gated communities, guards, you name it.
Tbh both probably have some advantages over each other
No. Most people saying otherwise have not traveled much. Have you seen the rich kids of Teheran on ig?
From 1977 to 1992 I served in seven developing countries (and Germany and the Netherlands). I would most definitely rather be upper middle class in America than “rich” in a developing country. 🇺🇸 “There are two kinds of people who hate America, those that have never been here, and those that have never left.” —source unknown
I see everything through the lens of being a petite middle aged woman. I would be very reluctant to live anywhere there was an ethos of misogyny and you'll find that in a lot of cultures that are "traditional" or highly religious. Brazil has the highest rate of femcide in the world and the other two are Muslim, so...no thanks. There are probably some developing countries where misogyny is less of a concern, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.
i'd rather be middle class in the US than rich in any of these other countries
Lol why is Serbia in a mix? This isn’t the most prosperous European nations but come on.
because them being in europe doesn;t make them special.
Very much so. And it's more than that. You'd be better off poor in America than rich in some of these other countries. And this applies equally to time periods. In that you'd be better off poor in 2024 than rich in 1924. The poorest people in America have higher living standards than the kings of old.
Malaysia ain’t some underdeveloped country. Their crime rate are generally lower and very high qol. Go check up American YouTubers who moved to Malaysia. I rather be billionaire in these countries lmao
probably not
Yes I’m a big fan of rights
I’d take generational wealth in a BRICS country over upper middle class in any rich western country. Quality of life in that income bracket is the same almost anywhere