Yale To Poor People: Drop Dead…Literally
Xiaochen Su (Yale ‘10), following the lead of misanthropic YDN contributor Jun Teresa Ding, has written an op/ed so ill-conceived, insensitive, and fundamentally absurd that you have to wonder if we aren’t being treated to some elaborate hoax. It reads like an SAT-II writing exercise, as taken by Thomas Malthus in a bad mood.
Su is alarmed by America’s, “increase in population, due to the failure to control population growth in the past.” Even worse, Su reports:
“Statistics show that majority of U.S. population growth comes from immigration and high birth rate among the minorities, while the native Caucasian population is stabilizing.“
Then Su reminds us why we don’t like minorities again:
Notwithstanding exceptions, larger numbers of minorities are ill-educated, have less desirable jobs, and thus are less capable to financially sustain their livelihoods.
In fact, many more minorities depend on government welfare and low-income assistance than whites. Over time, jobs that require less skill will continue to decrease, being outsourced to developing countries with lower labor costs, and the percentage of minorities in the U.S. population will increase, forcing the government to spend much more to evade riots by poor, hungry, unemployed minorities.
The minorities are coming! The minorities are coming! Not to worry, though, Su has a radical solution to thin out the teeming underclasses. It’s reminiscent of Communist China, so you know it’s good. He want to eliminate the child tax-credit and replace it with… a child tax.
And if this doesn’t work, true-born philanthrophist Su thinks that, “welfare programs should be cut back and the cost of children’s necessities, such as infants’ formula and college education, should be raised in price.” He writes of, “extracting taxes and fees from the lower class and poor immigrants.” Spoken like a true German bureaucrat. Unsurprisingly, Su is also against immigration by poor people:
“With no understanding of the country’s economic dynamics, the poor continue to reproduce and immigrate to lightheartedly siphon off the state’s budget.“
Those poors, so lighthearted, so numerous, if only they understood this country’s economic dynamics like our Great Leader Xiaochen Su.
After the jump — the article in full.
U.S. cannibalizes self by enabling immigrants, poor
Xiaochen Su
Today, the U.S. population is continuing growth abnormal for its status as one of the most developed countries in the world. Compared to similarly wealthy states such as Japan, Great Britain, Germany or France, the American population is rising rapidly.The U.S. should control its population growth through financial incentives to prevent a decrease in the standard of living and increase in the government’s burden to accommodate the rapidly growing lower class of the society. The increase in population, due to the failure to control population growth in the past, has led to a population size that is no longer sustainable and must be reduced.
A growing population can destabilize the American society in two ways. First, the growth can reverse the trend upon which people can confidently say, “At least my children/grandchildren will have it better than I do.” An increase in income would no longer be guaranteed if the population continues to grow. Even for GDP annual increase of five percent, an astounding figure for a developed country, there is no net increase in the standard of living, as the five percent is cancelled out by the combination of inflation and increase in population. If the U.S. growth slips below five percent, the real income of its average citizen can decline.
Second, the population growth is concentrated in the poorer segment of the society. Statistics show that majority of U.S. population growth comes from immigration and high birth rate among the minorities, while the native Caucasian population is stabilizing. Notwithstanding exceptions, larger numbers of minorities are ill-educated, have less desirable jobs, and thus are less capable to financially sustain their livelihoods.
In fact, many more minorities depend on government welfare and low-income assistance than whites. Over time, jobs that require less skill will continue to decrease, being outsourced to developing countries with lower labor costs, and the percentage of minorities in the U.S. population will increase, forcing the government to spend much more to evade riots by poor, hungry, unemployed minorities. In the future, growth in spending on welfare programs for the growing impoverished population will plunge the government into further debt and force it to cut back on other budgets such as education. Population growth can hurt America by financially crippling the people and the government in the future.
To counter the problem of high population growth that has led to the unsustainable population size, financial measures can be undertaken against high birth rates and immigration. The government should not only eliminate the concept of “child tax credit” on tax returns but also create a child tax.
With addition of each new child, a family should be levied a limited amount of money in annual tax. A well-publicized child tax can restrict population growth of the lower-class who cannot afford to pay the new tax, while only lightly affecting the middle- and upper-class, who can easily pay the tax if they want children. If the child tax is not enough to lower the growth of the lower-class significantly, the welfare programs should be cut back and the cost of children’s necessities, such as infants’ formula and college education, should be raised in price. Such actions by the government can also increase income and decrease the spending, partially alleviating the problems of deficit spending.
Also, a new, large one-time “entrance fee” should be placed upon all foreign citizens applying for immigration to the U.S. Such a measure should make it difficult for poor, unskilled labor from legally entering U.S. and adding to the burden of the government. With the extra income from the entrance fee, the government can put more money into efforts of thwarting illegal immigration by strengthening the numbers of border patrol and INS agents looking for illegal immigrants in the shantytowns of various American cities.
Extracting taxes and fees from the lower class and poor immigrants can decrease population growth and ease the burden of the government spending at the same time.
The United States, as the richest country on Earth, has become a target for freeloading to the poor both here and abroad. With no understanding of the country’s economic dynamics, the poor continue to reproduce and immigrate to lightheartedly siphon off the state’s budget.
The result is a population size that is no longer sustainable for the continued growth of the economy and preservation of social structure. It is urgent that the U.S. government understands the dangerous situation created by an abnormally large population size and takes measures to solve the problem.
Xiaochen Su is a sophomore in Davenport College.
51 Comments | 
| 
Print This Post
Read more: the underclasses, this is why people hate the ivy league, Yale, Yale Daily News
Email – 
Search
About
Follow us on Twitter
Report a bug
Archives
RSS Feed
October 9th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
A self-hating immigrant… how appropriate he goes to Yale.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Are you sure this isn’t satirical? The title seems to make reference to Swift’s “Modest Proposal” with its use of “cannibalizes.”
Just a (hopeful) thought.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Props to Yale for again reinforcing the ‘Chinese people are soulless automatons’ stereotype. In before one-child-policy, lead paint, and genocide jokes.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
no he’s completely serious; people on campus are rather upset
October 9th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
his facebook profile says his hometown is in china & his political belief is “others.” we should deport his sorry ass back to china where he’ll surely fit in with the robber barons who wants to poison the rest of the world
October 9th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
Hmm, if this article was given to me without the sources I would’ve probably concluded that this was written by the KKK. I still don’t get why there’s a needless cheapshot at minorities here (minorities are evil, blah blah blah, and then it shifts to immigrants, without mentioning how to deal with the “minority problem.” note to Su: immigrants =/= minorities). His plan of eradicating the poor and the alien sounds oddly… evil.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
http://www.wnbc.com/news/14303832/detail.html
October 9th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
http://www.wnbc.com/news/14303832/detail.html
October 9th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Stupid Chinese self-hater. I propose Yale start capping Chinese-admission rate at 5%, similar to how China caps the birth rate at 1 child. Would he still be at Yale?
October 9th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Su happens to be right about minorities being the main recipients of government programs such as welfare, but he did not have to portray them in such a light that paints them as leeches suckling off of a seemingly endless supply from the American teat (which is essentially, what he did). Perhaps with a little more research and a little more time editing, I think Su can try again to say what he wants to say without sounding like an evil commie douchebag.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
yeah…. most of the people of color, specifically the latinos.
expect a rebuttal in the YDN.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Does he realize that the “native Caucasian population” is not the native population of the Americas? Just curious on that one, since it might have something to do with immigration–some way some how.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
hey, he follows in the footsteps of another great yale graduate: clarence thomas.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
So, this is what Yale gets for sucking up to China…
On another note, is it just me, or does this guy eerily resemble Cho Seung-Hui (the VTech killer)?
October 9th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
He’s actually an Obama supporter.
Commie douchebag for sure. Yalies aren’t happy.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Why are we calling him a “commie douchebag”? It seems like the policies he supports would be the very opposite of the kinds of policies an actual communist would support. It might sound like one of China’s policies, but no one seriously thinks that China’s communist in anything but name. Communism’s not a good thing, but it is what it is, and this guy doesn’t sound like a communist.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
and he obviously has no experience with paying taxes while being poor. namely, you don’t. because you have little to no income. the very poor he’s talking about get back virtually every penny that they pay. and even if that weren’t a problem, the extra monies from the various types of welfare and aid that are doled out via headcount would more than offset his “limited amount” of child tax.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:17 pm
Hello? FYI poor people don’t pay taxes (except sales tax) and ’cause of tax credits for having kids, they usually make out like bandits ’round rebate time. And I’m saying this as someone who has been poor
October 9th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
That you should submit comments once and wait for a while before resubmitting them?
October 9th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
My comment for Mssr Su: Fuck you, you immigrant motherfucker.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
That’s what you have to do to be at Yale. Suck the white man’s cock.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
You’re right, Big Red: Mr. Su mixes up immigrants, the poor, and unskilled labor. Better: he separates economic outcomes from economic incentives and references unspecified numbers.
And his fix: limiting births and immigration. More intrusive government — so we can be like Japan, the UK, Germany, and France.
I hope Mr. Su takes some econ at Yale; he needs it.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
this kid is seriously crazy if he stands by these views. it’s almost too far-fetched to be real- maybe it IS satire…?
if not, xiaochen should probably go ahead and read a history book about his own country. and also, maybe some econ would help- i’m not really sure the US has reached its maximum population point.
anyone reminded of clayton bigsby, the blind black white supremacist from chapelle’s show?
October 9th, 2007 at 10:39 pm
But how DO you suck the white man’s cock? What buttons need to be pressed? Do you go slow or fast? And what, oh what, should you do with your tongue? Find out this Friday’s D, in “Aurora’s Guide to Taking the White Motherfucker’s Cock.”
October 9th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Oh! y08, yes, Mr. Su must be BLIND.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
The idea that we can centrally-plan population is not a classically Marxist idea, but modern statist communism certainly believes that government intrusion is the remedy for all economic and social problems.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Su appears to have a blatant disregard for history. There are too many inaccuracies to even know where to begin.
But: “Over time, jobs that require less skill will continue to decrease…” Really? The recent immigrant experience of illegal Mexicans in this country begs to differ. There exists an insatiable demand for cheap, low-skilled labor in this country that will continue at least for the next generation.
And: ‘A well-publicized child tax can restrict population growth of the lower-class who cannot afford to pay the new tax.” Really? Isn’t immigration (be it skilled or unskilled) and continued indigenous population growth our main hope for sustaining America’s rather successful social security and Medicare programs, which mostly benefit America’s middle class?
October 9th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
i don’t know this kid, but he’s obviously not self-hating; most kids who end up at yale from china have ass-tons of money, and he seems to only be talking about the poorer immigrants.
his article pissed me off as much as it pissed everyone off, but you have to stop and consider that he comes from a completely different culture where there isn’t the same bullshit concept of being PC. a lot of his points are invalid but some of the stereotypes about poor people in the US are unfortunately true. live with it.
that and the comparison to the VT killer is not clever or funny. just because they happen to both be asian should not invite a completely insensitive ‘joke.’
October 9th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
Tsk tsk. Fools. White people look more alike than Chinese people. Read some Jared Diamond.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
“Does he realize that the “native Caucasian population” is not the native population of the Americas? Just curious on that one, since it might have something to do with immigration–some way some how.”
Anyone born here is a native. Or were you referring to American Indians? Because, if so, then they aren’t really natives either as they migrated here long ago as well.
October 9th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
It wasn’t supposed to be clever or funny, or even a joke. It was just an observation. Yes, both are asian, but both have close cropped hair and similar facial features, such as the clenched jawline.
Again, not trying to be clever or joking, just observing.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:06 am
Why would Yale publish this? Really, why?
October 10th, 2007 at 12:08 am
Again, 1st-generation Chinese (and those that have not assimilated) need to stick to math, science, and engineering. China + social commentary = disaster. Just saying. Love you, China.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:20 am
because the YDN needs to fill it’s op-ed page…and because the resulting controversy will easily create more filler in the shape of responses to the original
October 10th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Yes, 1st generation Asians (that includes you, Indians) should stick to math because native Americans are so good in the humanities, polisci, etc.. oh shit look at America today!
October 10th, 2007 at 1:23 am
Stupid Chinese idiot. What a commie, if he had his own dictatorship, he’d no doubt be killing all the minorities.
Oh, and “Big Red”, since they don’t teach you anything of substance at Cornell, minorities aren’t the “main recipients of government programs such as welfare”. Unless you plan on adding “as a percentage of that minorities’ total population, then get your facts straight.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:24 am
The kid has difficulty distinguishing real GDP from nominal GDP. He is hopeless.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:36 am
i’m more concerned that ivygate used the same picture twice.
October 10th, 2007 at 5:03 am
c07: hey, actually, immigrants contribution billions – yes, billions – to social security, but will never receive the retirement benefits. and if you consider the human rights violations…
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&position=&oref=slogin
October 10th, 2007 at 8:03 am
i mean… he kinda of has a point just in terms of sheer brutal callous and unhuman economics. more poor people generally means more uneducated people. and due to outsourcing, more jobs for uneducated people are fleeing america. therefore our unemployment rate will be affected and eventually our welfare state will balloon to the point where annual deficits will increase– increasing state borrowing and eventually “crowding out” private investment. this will eventually slow down our economic growth so it will simultaneously create a huge debt and destroy our ability to pay it off. in other words, we do need to curb our demand for uneducated jobs so that it matches the supply.
this isn’t to say that poor people are to be treated like cattle and thinned or anything barbaric. it is merely an academic point of contention.
October 10th, 2007 at 8:50 am
@Keggy: The kids at Cornell get a damn fine education, thank you very much. But whatever they teach you in Hanover, they certainly don’t teach you to spend 30 seconds google-ing before you start talking out of your ass.
Minorities are the main recipients of welfare. In FY2005, non-white recipients comprised close to 70 percent of the population on TANF.
http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/character/FY2005/tab08.htm
Have fun playing pong.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Um, satire? No? Swift references. The kids from China. I’d give him the benefit of a doubt before I got all riled up over an opinion piece…
October 10th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
I know I stand for a lot of people in saying that yalies neither approve nor agree with the arguments put forth in the article and it was a serious error on the part of the ydn to print it. However, what is even worse is that many of the people responding have turned it into an opportunity to say worse, sterotypical and racist comments that they have no basis for. I am appalled by some of the generalizations that have been made Xiaochen speaks neither for yale nor for all Chinese-Americans, so don’t try to use this as fodder for your racism and bigotry.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
I know I stand for a lot of people in saying that yalies neither approve nor agree with the arguments put forth in the article and it was a serious error on the part of the ydn to print it. However, what is even worse is that many of the people responding have turned it into an opportunity to say worse, sterotypical and racist comments that they have no basis for. I am appalled by some of the generalizations that have been made Xiaochen speaks neither for yale nor for all Chinese-Americans, so don’t try to use this as fodder for your racism and bigotry.
October 10th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
I can only imagine what Su plans to do after graduation! Would consulting or finance hire a guy who a simple Google search reveals to be an inevitable racial discrimination defendant?
October 10th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
I’m sorry, but… why do so many people care again? “oh shit, someone disagrees with me! GRARRRRRGGG!”
Personally I think they might’ve published it to incite animosity against China, since a lot of people aren’t too happy about our university’s uber-cozy relations with it.
But again, I ask… why the hell do so many people care what this kid thinks? Are y’all so paranoid that if you don’t IMMEDIATELY DENOUNCE THIS EVIL RACIST BASTARD that, gasp, /you/ might be perceived as racist, too?
I’m really kinda sick of the pc crap. If he’s stupid, uneducated, ignorant, etc- he’s not worth listening to or discussing.
October 11th, 2007 at 1:15 am
I’m sorry, but saying that China-born Chinese have a slightly skewed vision of socio-economic policy is about as racist as saying that black people appreciate the occasional hip-hop track or that Vietnamese people, more often than not, have really small bone structure. He can’t help his influences. That’s not racism. That’s realism.
October 11th, 2007 at 10:38 am
in response to Yale ‘11 — this is absolutely not just abou disagreement. Is is about journalistic responsibility and not being given free reign to offend entire groups of people without basis. This is only one example of a string of racially offensive things that have been printed in Yale publications recently, and it obviously indicates that there is a systemic problem. He may not be worth listening to but it is definitely worth discussing since people are affected by stereotypical viewpoints like his everyday (as demonstrated by some of the offensive things that people have posted on the blog).
October 11th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Here’s a question: why does anyone care? You all go to Yale; you have bigger image issues to worry about than what some guy said on a whim.
October 14th, 2007 at 6:41 am
What is funny is that Asian students use the good old foreign student loophole to get in when their English language abilities are not up to par. They also take advantage of liberal entry laws when other groups are turned away or have to live without the benefits of legal residence, i.e, financial aid, poverty programs, etc. Then they take advantage of the American system of education (as well as the economy, infrastructure and creativity) that they are lacking at home. Americans have always been willing to accept Asians just because they seem to be docile and meek and not a threat, neither adding or taking away from our political, cultural and social life. I always thought that it was good that a group of immigrants were given advantages. Now not so much.
October 15th, 2007 at 12:08 am
I may be missing something, but it seems that Mr. Su has a valid point. Removing the emotional element, it is true that population growth is concentrated amongst recent immigrants and the poorer classes of American society. Furthermore, it is also true that immigrants and poorer people tend to hold less well-paying jobs (duh) and depend more heavily on government handouts to support their children. Given these two facts, it does make sense to disincentivize poorer people from having children. Indeed, if a family cannot provide for several children, it is recklessly irresponsible to have several children. Having children is not a right that everybody is entitled to regardless of their situation – it would be nice if that were the case, but American hegemony will not last long if an increasingly large portion of the federal budget goes towards enabling people to make immature and irresponsible decisions.
And for the record, I myself am a minority from the poorer classes (also an only child).