That must be the oldest line on the internet!
You haven't shown how many american born Latina women there are, so once again you're just making up #'sThe answer is staring you right in the face regardless of whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
There simply aren't enough Latino women having children out there to account for such a massive population increase using "native born" numbers alone. Most of that number is going to be due to immigrants bolstering the Latino community's numbers, or the first generation children of immigrants.
None of those people count as being a part of an established "native" cultural group. Culturally speaking, they are alien from the American cultural mainstream, and, as my other source pointed out, roughly half of them regard themselves as such.
And Latinos are more established, and for a longer time, than your ancestors are.
You're the one whose hysteria has made you repeatedly conflate words and #'s together as if they were all the same. You have demonstrated an inability to distinguish differences.Yes, it most certainly does, on both counts.
Again, Sangha, I don't know who you think you're fooling with all of this B.S. equivocation and semantic quibbling you're trying to pull out of your hindquarters here, but I can assure you that it certainly isn't me or anyone else with a functioning cerebellum.
And by claiming that people who are born in the US are not natives simply because they are Latino you prove your inability to understand the meaning of simply defined words. Anyone who was born in the US is a US native.....by definition.Not for so long as immigration continues to account for roughly 50% of Hispanic population growth rates.
Again, first (and even second) generation immigrants really can't be said to be from "native" American cultural groups either.
Americanization and assimilation take time; especially when you're talking about a group which can have a strong tendency to want to isolate itself from outside influences.
if they ever come to form the majority in a given area, it might very well never occur at all. There simply wouldn't be a pressing reason for it.
And I live next to a town that is majority Latino. Many are not citizens. Almost all of them speak english.
For one thing, with 64% of them born in the US, they "by and large" are native born. Also, 2nd generation means "born in the US"Because, by and large, they are.
36% of Hispanic Latinos are foreign born, and most of the rest of them are either first or second generation.
It's revealing that your beliefs are so bigoted towards Latinos that you can't acknowledge that people born in the US are "native born"
And another sign that your beliefs are so bigoted is your requirement that Latinos drop their old ways almost entirely when no other ethnic group has to do so in order to be considered "American"Unless they've become so Americanized as to have almost dropped their old ways entirely (which we have already pretty conclusively demonstrated is not the case a lot of the time), none of those people qualify as belonging to a "native" cultural group.
This isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but it does demonstrate that native cultural groups are in relative decline in comparison to Latino cultural influences.