Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#21

Post by Galaxity » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 7:31 AM UTC

irrational wrote: post #20

yuppie_scum wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s about distance. The northeast is closer to Europe.

It’s not just the NE. It’s across the entire far north and the entirety of the west (from California to Colorado). I can understand the areas that border the Pacific Ocean, but what was up with the high immigration to desert states like Nevada, Arizona, Utah, etc.? Who would want to immigrate from (presumably) the green British Isles to the desert? Western Oregon and Washington would be more their climate.

Well I'll provide some thoughts and speculation based on my reading.

The high migration/immigration rates in Nevada, Arizona, and Utah in the late 1800s is relative. There was such a small amount of people that it was easy to have a large percentage from out of the US.

Who was immigrating there? Well one group was the Mormons. Apparently the Mormons were successful early on recruiting in Britain and those people migrated to the US and directly to Utah. Later that flowed over into Nevada and Arizona.

Also early on in these western territories, many people were probably going there to mine which may have attracted overseas people directly, not so concerned with green fertile land.

Final thought. The people immigrating from Britain and Ireland were looking for land. They probably had little idea what the southwest US was like except they had been told that there was lots of land available. When they got there it was totally different but there was land and water. Also many may have been going to California but stopped on the way for various reasons.

Edit: also those states are known for their population in deserts but they do have a lot of non deserts: forest,grassland, etc. And many early settlers stopped in those areas before geographic forces started the big desert settlements.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#22

Post by jimbob45 » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 7:34 AM UTC

irrational wrote: post #2

It is interesting to see where immigrants settled in the 1800s. Primarily the North and West. Extremely few in the South. I assume this is related to slavery. These are also the most racist states. I’ve always assumed that was related to slavery, which it probably primarily is, but now I’m wondering if a bit of it can also be connected to the paucity of immigrants.

>These are also the most racist states.

I have never found this to be true in my travels. Just because you see it on TV doesn’t mean that’s how it works in real life.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#23

Post by bushbaba » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 8:14 AM UTC

irrational wrote: post #2

It is interesting to see where immigrants settled in the 1800s. Primarily the North and West. Extremely few in the South. I assume this is related to slavery. These are also the most racist states. I’ve always assumed that was related to slavery, which it probably primarily is, but now I’m wondering if a bit of it can also be connected to the paucity of immigrants.

California for example was just as racist as it’s south eastern peers.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#24

Post by earthscienceman » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 8:31 AM UTC

Dwolb wrote: post #18

Who is their SEO marketer? The main page’s headline “Your Connecticut Personal Injury & Immigration Lawyers” so I guess we’re looking at some pretty upper funnel content. Kudos for at least making it interesting.

Seriously egrigous on mobile. I was greeted by a chat not and an overlay. So bad i though I'd clicked the wrong link

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#25

Post by jedberg » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 9:05 AM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #10

> Since the 1960s, Florida has seen one of the largest increases in immigrants from outside the US of any state > Most of these newcomers are from the Caribbean–particularly Cuba and Puerto Rico. That seems worthy of a factcheck.... Pretty sure Puerto Ricans have been being born inside the United States since 1898. Although technically it took until 1917 before they were recognized as such.

Puerto Ricans get US passports and are US citizens, but they are not born in the United State. Just like people born in the Panama Canal Zone or someone like Ted Cruz who was born in Canada to an American citizen. He was born a citizen but he wasn't born in the US.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#26

Post by jedberg » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 9:17 AM UTC

The creator of the charts posted them on reddit and explained the data and methods a bit more: https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/skhtz7/oc_...

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#27

Post by loonster » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 12:55 PM UTC

jimbob45 wrote: post #22

irrational wrote: post #2

It is interesting to see where immigrants settled in the 1800s. Primarily the North and West. Extremely few in the South. I assume this is related to slavery. These are also the most racist states. I’ve always assumed that was related to slavery, which it probably primarily is, but now I’m wondering if a bit of it can also be connected to the paucity of immigrants.

>These are also the most racist states. I have never found this to be true in my travels. Just because you see it on TV doesn’t mean that’s how it works in real life.

I'm white. I have been subjected to racism from blacks in the south much more than from blacks up north. Its a different culture down there for everyone.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#28

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 3:18 PM UTC

readthenotes1 wrote: post #14

WillPostForFood wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Racism is endemic throughout North America Where do you think racism isn't endemic?

I would guess based on what little I know of human history that it's a human trait but the response bwas focused on immigration to the US

[deleted]

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#29

Post by vinay427 » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #25

jameshart wrote: post #10

> Since the 1960s, Florida has seen one of the largest increases in immigrants from outside the US of any state > Most of these newcomers are from the Caribbean–particularly Cuba and Puerto Rico. That seems worthy of a factcheck.... Pretty sure Puerto Ricans have been being born inside the United States since 1898. Although technically it took until 1917 before they were recognized as such.

Puerto Ricans get US passports and are US citizens, but they are not born in the United State. Just like people born in the Panama Canal Zone or someone like Ted Cruz who was born in Canada to an American citizen. He was born a citizen but he wasn't born in the US.

> but they are not born in the United State. Just like people born in the Panama Canal Zone or someone like Ted Cruz who was born in Canada to an American citizen

I wouldn't say it's like being born in Canada, considering Puerto Rico is on the edges of what it means to be "the United States." As you noted, those born in PR are US citizens on that basis alone, and certain other elements of the US Constitution apply to Puerto Rico as well. Perhaps ironically, this seems to not allow PR the same sovereignty that the 50 states enjoy over the federal government. In an edge case like this, some disagreement is expected and there might be a more nuanced characterization of this situation.

Re: Where Are Americans Born? An Analysis of U.S. Census Data from 1850 – 2020

#30

Post by marcusverus » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 5:06 PM UTC

irrational wrote: post #2

It is interesting to see where immigrants settled in the 1800s. Primarily the North and West. Extremely few in the South. I assume this is related to slavery. These are also the most racist states. I’ve always assumed that was related to slavery, which it probably primarily is, but now I’m wondering if a bit of it can also be connected to the paucity of immigrants.

The main reasons were likely:

1) Ease of access. The North was geographically closer to Europe. In days when travel was slow, the difference was not trivial as it is now.

2) Climate. The median European latitude is roughly on par with Maine. The North would have felt more like home, while the South would have been very different (and not in a good way, in those days before AC!)

3) Northern Industrialization. The vast majority of the population (71%) and industry (~90%) was in the North. If you were looking for a job as an unskilled laborer, there was far more work up North.

4) Immigrant communities. In a sort of feedback loop, more immigrants in the North would naturally make it a more desirable destination for future immigrants. If you're a poor German immigrant who doesn't speak English, you'd feel more at home in a German neighborhood in New York City than in a Southern city which might not host a significant German community.

5) Slavery. Slavery undermined the market for free labor in numerous ways. First, most menial work was done by slaves. Second, slaveholders would 'lease' out their slaves to serve as laborers, with the pay going to the slaveholder. As a result, the going rate for labor was much lower in the South than in the North. Even if an immigrant aspired to farm their own land in the South, they would still be in competition with slave labor. In a sort of unvirtuous cycle, the existence of slavery meant that the only way to gain wealth in the South was to own slaves, which would have been cost-prohibitive for an immigrant.