A study published by the Pew Research Center details what it describes as "the rise of Asian-Americans", a highly diverse and fast-growing group making up roughly 5 percent of the U.S. population. Mostly foreign-born and naturalized citizens, their numbers have been boosted by increases in visas granted to specialized workers and to wealthy investors as the U.S. economy becomes driven less by manufacturing and more by technology.
The Pew survey is based on an analysis of census data as well as interviews with 3,511 Asian adults living in the U.S., conducted by cell phone or landline from Jan. 3 to March 27. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.4 percentage points for all respondents, higher for subgroups.
Pakistani-Americans (pop: 409,163) are the seventh largest community among Asian-Americans, behind Chinese (3.8 million), Filipinos (3.4 million), Indians (3.2 million), Vietnamese (1.74 million), Koreans (1.7 million) and Japanese (1.3 million), according to Asian-American Center For Advancing Justice . They are still a miniscule fraction of the overall US population. However, their numbers have more than doubled in the last decade due to increased immigration, according to US Census 2010 data. With 100% increase since 2000, Pakistanis are the second fastest growing Asian immigrant group in the United States. With median household income of $63,000, Pakistani-Americans also earn more than an average American household. The most common jobs of Pakistani-Americans include doctors, engineers, accountants, salespersons, administrators/managers and financial analysts, and 55 per cent hold at least a bachelor’s degree which is higher than 49% of all Asian-Americans and almost twice the 28% of overall American population with college degrees.
Here are some of the highlights of Pakistani-American data from US Census 2010 as gleaned from a report titled "A Community of Contrasts Asian Americans in the United States: 2011" published by Asian-American Center For Advancing Justice:
1. There are 409,163 Pakistani-Americans in 2010, the 7th largest Asian-American community in America.
2. Pakistani-American population doubled from 2000 (204,309) to 2010 (409,163), the second largest percentage increase after Bangladeshis' 157% increase in the same period.
3. The median household income of Pakistani-American families is nearly $63,000 versus $51,369 average for all Americans.
4. 55% of Pakistanis have a bachelor's degree or higher.
5. 55% of Pakistanis own their own homes.
6. 6% of Pakistani-American population is mixed race.
7. 65% of Pakistanis in America are foreign-born. 57% of foreign-born Pakistani-American population is made up of naturalized citizens.
8. There are 120,000 Pakistani legal permanent residents of which 42% are eligible to naturalize.
9. There were 69,202 immigrant visas issued to Pakistanis from 2001 to 2010, the 5th highest among Asian nations.
10. 28% of Pakistanis have limited English proficiency.
11. 15% of Pakistanis are classified as poor; only 1% of them are on public assistance.
12. 8% of Pakistanis are unemployed, a figure lower than the general population of Americans.
13. Median age of Pakistanis in America is only 29 years, lower than most of the Asian groups and the national median age of 36.8 years.
Pakistani-American community is still relatively young when compared with other immigrant groups. More of the Pakistanis in America are college educated than the general population of whites and various immigrant groups. The youthful energy and higher education levels of Pakistani-Americans are opening doors for them to rise and shine in America, in spite of the current economic difficulties in their adopted land of opportunities.
Related Links:
Haq's Musings
Pakistani-American NFL Team Owner
OPEN Forum 2012
Pakistani-American Elected Mayor
Pakistani-American Entrepreneurs Catch the Wave
Khan Academy Draws Pakistani Visitors
Minorities are Majority in Silicon Valley
Pakistani-American's Game-Changing Vision
Pakistan's Demographic Dividend
Pakistanis Study Abroad
Pakistan's Youth Bulge
Pakistani Diaspora World's 7th Largest
17 comments:
A little correction
As of 2010
Pakistanis have a bachelor's degree or higher is 60.9%
http://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/839/1/196_oda.pdf
i think you forget your 5-6 children of pakistani immigrants.
Anon: "i think you forget your 5-6 children of pakistani immigrants."
I suggest you use math and data instead of bigotry to seek the truth.
Divide the household income by per capita income and it'll give you avg household size.
For Pakistanis, household income $63000 divided by per cap income $25000 gives you 2.52 persons per household.
For Indians, household income $87000 divided by per cap income $36000 gives you 2.42 per household.
Women in the labour force:
A key source of distinction between the immigrants from India and other South Asians is the higher participation of Indian women in the labour force. A much higher integration of women in the labour force is one of the reasons why immigrants from India have fared much better than others in the United States. Consider that only 42 per cent of the women from Pakistan were active in the labour force in the US compared to 57 per cent women from India. In fact women from Pakistan reportedly the lowest participation in the labour force in the US falling behind women from Egypt, Afghanistan , and Bangladesh.
Education matters the most:
It should come as no surprise that immigrants from India are one of the most educated cohort in the United States. Almost 42 per cent of immigrants from India over the age of 25 reported having a graduate (Masters) or a professional degree. In comparison, only 10 per cent of the native-born adults reported having a graduate or professional degree. Approximately 23 per cent of adult immigrants from Egypt and Pakistan reported having a graduate or professional degree.
I know for a fact that pakistanis are not issued visas frequently. So increasing population must be attributed to increased birth rate.
It is the ONLY natural conclusion.
Indian: "I know for a fact that pakistanis are not issued visas frequently. So increasing population must be attributed to increased birth rate.It is the ONLY natural conclusion."
Yours is a bigoted conclusion based on ignorance, not data or facts.
There is a class of countries called high immigrant source countries used by US to ensure diversity. Countries sending more than 50,000 immigrants in 5 years are in this group that includes India, Pakistan, Mexico, Philippines, etc.
The Diversity Visa Lottery is open to natives of countries that have sent fewer than 50,000 immigrants to the United States in the last five years. Countries that are the source of high numbers of immigrants are excluded from the lottery.
http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2010/September/20100928180627xlrennef0.4172327.html
Any crackdown on illegal immigrants abroad or restricting quotas to Indians are a major concern to India’s politicians. The latest statistics from US Department of Homeland Security shows that the numbers of Indian illegal migrants jumped 125% since 2000! Ever wondered why Indians migrate to another countries but no one comes to India for a living?
http://escapefromindia.wordpress.com/
The Indians, whose hiding space was furnished only with soiled mattresses, claimed to be on vacation. But authorities quickly concluded they were waiting to be smuggled into the United States via an 11,000-mile (17,700-kilometer) pipeline of human cargo — the same network that has transported thousands of illegal immigrants from India, through Central America and Mexico and over the sandy banks of the Rio Grande during the past two years.
Indians have arrived in droves even as the overall number of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. has dropped dramatically, in large part because of the sluggish American economy. And with fewer Mexicans and Central Americans crossing the border, smugglers are eager for more "high-value cargo" like Indians, some of whom are willing to pay more than $20,000 for the journey.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-07-17-illegal-immigration-indians_n.htm
Dr. Haq,
This is not at all surprising to me.
If you look carefully, you will notice something interesting about the trend. In general, the rate of increase appears inversely proportional to the magnitude of the already-existing population.
In other words, the smaller already-existing immigrant groups (Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Taiwanese, Thai, Indonesians) have higher growth rates ; While the larger already-existing immigrant groups (Chinese, Philippino, Indian, Vietnamese) have lower growth rates.
This is not surprising at all because it is an artifact of the Quota-System that was created under the American Immigration & Nationality Act:
http://alturl.com/7votw (See Acts 201, 202, 203)
As a result of this Act, immigrants from the countries with larger existing-populations tend to face the quota CUT-OFF. This leads to very, very long "waiting lists" and sets a limit on how many can come in any given year from those countries.
On the other hand, statistically, the countries will smaller existing-populations do not face these cut-offs and their immigrants can come in larger numbers (up to the cut-off) and so "waiting lists" are shorter (or non-existent) for these countries.
But this continues ONLY UNTIL they reach sufficient mass to hit the quota ceiling. After that, their rate of increase will also slow down like the others.
Note that this is a general observation of a general trend; it is not be offered as the Absolute Gospel Truth.
Example: The US has 1 immigrant from the Republic of Nauru. She applied last year to bring (sponsor) her 8 brothers and sisters to the US. These applications are quickly approved without any wait-list since they are nowhere close to the quota-based cut-off for Nauru. All eight of her sibling will come over this year.
THE RESULT: The population of immigrants from Nauru will increase by 800% this year! It will be the new fastest growing immigrant group! Stop the presses! Screaming News Headlines! Ooo! Aaah! Ooo!
Thank you.
HopeWins: "In other words, the smaller already-existing immigrant groups (Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Taiwanese, Thai, Indonesians) have higher growth rates ; While the larger already-existing immigrant groups (Chinese, Philippino, Indian, Vietnamese) have lower growth rates."
Except that Pakistan is already on the list of countries called high immigrant source countries used by US to ensure diversity. It's the countries which have sent more than 50,000 immigrants in past 5 years.
Dr. Haq,
Here is what I meant:
For the sake of simplicity, let us look only at only one category of immigration. The principle is general and can be trivially extended to the other categories.
According to the family-based (main program) immigration quota system, no more than 25,900 can be issued to any one country in any one year.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf
Size of Existing Philippino Immigrant Population: 3.5 Million
Size of Existing Pakistani Immigrant Population: 0.5 Million
As you can see Philippinos & Pakistanis have both reached the cut-off this year. Therefore, under the family-based general program a maximum of 25,900 (limit) pakistanis and 25,900 (limit) Phillipinos will get immigrant visas this year. The rest of the applicants will go into the infamous "waiting list".
Therefore, the percent increase in their immigrant populations due to THIS PARTICULAR family-based category of immigration this year will be:
Philippinos: 0.74% (25,900 Limit over a base of 2.5 Million)
Pakistan: 5.18% (25,900 Limit over a base of 0.5 Million)
You see what I mean?
So on a decadal basis, in THIS PARTICULAR family-based category of immigration, Philippines may see ~10% growth in the next 10 years, whereas Pakistan may see ~60% growth in the next ten years.
But once the base of the existing Pakistani immigrant population increases, and the annual quota limits stays the same, the rate of increase for Pakistan must fall.
I hope that helps.
Thank you.
Here's Google Chairman Eric Schmidt's assessment after his recent Pakistan visit--Part I:
Pakistan, a Muslim country, has spent about half of its independent life under military governments. Today, Pakistani leadership celebrates the ruling coalitions success in almost finishing the first five year term in history (previous leaders indicted by the courts, assassinated by extremists or brushed aside by the generals.) In meetings last week with the senior General, Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, they made the case for a new and updated image of Pakistan: one of the largest democracies in the world, with a vibrant and open press, an upcoming demographic dividend of hardworking young people, and a highly educated elite leadership of the country. Islamabad and Lahore, where we visited, were relatively safe and certainly safer than Afghanistan. It was clear to us that Pakistan has an image problem.
Pakistan also has a power problem, as in electric power. Power is now off two hours out of three all day and all night. Estimates are that the country has enough generation capacity (hydro and oil based) to handle all the load, but corruption, power stealing, poor payment rates and the classic mistake of underpricing power compared to its real generation cost means that industrial production is threatened. Everyone of means has a UPS, and the air-conditioning seldom works on a 45 Celcius day. Our meetings often were literally in the dark, a common enough occurrence that people did not even remark about it.
Pakistanis are on their way to full mobile penetration with more than 110 million users, and all effective political communication programs now rely on SMS. 3G licenses are underway and the start of a real software industry can be seen.
Against this backdrop, another side of Pakistan emerges. The consensus is that the military drives the foreign policy of the country with unforeseen consequences. Alleged use of extremist groups to fight in Kashmir enables a criminal element to flourish, and the hosting of the Taliban in the autonomous regions (called FATA) to the north and west in the mountains turned an ungoverned area into a very dangerous area. The Army Generals explained the difference between fundamentalism (which they support) and extremism (which they fight), and the political leadership explained that the extremism now comes from “seminaries” where youth are indoctrinated, housed and fed in the rural areas where there are no opportunities at all.
Until recently a strong US ally, Pakistan is now on very good terms with China, and has improving relations with India (with whom they have had three wars.) The development of a nuclear stalemate between India and Pakistan seems to have forced them to pursue accommodation and trade is now increasing rapidly. The press are generally hyper-critical of the United States policies in the region and take the view that the India-US relationship is driving much of our countries behavior. The drone strikes are universally condemned as a violation of sovereignty and their constitution and are subject to much negotiation between the two countries. The bin Laden raid is viewed with strikingly different perspectives in the two countries.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/104233435224873922474/posts/4UcNomnhipX
Here's Google Chairman Eric Schmidt's assessment after his recent Pakistan visit--Part II:
...We met a number of impressive Pakistanis, none more so than Masarrat Misbah of Smile Again. Every year, hundreds of young rural women have acid thrown on their faces by men as punishment for some dishonor, including being raped by the men who pour acid on her. This horrific crime, which often leads to death or blindness, requires painful rehabilitation and rebuilding of the woman’s life. Masarrat Misbah’s home in Lahore provides a temporary safe house. The perpetrators, most often direct family members, are seldom prosecuted and almost never convicted of anything. I will never forget the faces of these shy, young women so grievously injured in such an evil way.
Much of what people say and think about Pakistan is absolutely true for most of the FATA provinces (autonomous areas) and for Baluchistan. Pakistan's image problem results from the fact that people outside the country believe the realities of North and South Waziristan and Quetta are reflective of what the larger country looks like. Islamabad and Lahore are certainly safer than people realize, unless you are a politician (many prominent politicians still suffer assassination attempts and threats inside these cities).
Pakistan's major security challenge comes from having two many fronts. FATA represents a Haqqani network and Taliban problem, threatening the establishment in Islamabad. Baluchistan is a persistent separatist movement. Afghanistan is a threat because Pashtuns are allowed to go back and forth undocumented. All of this, including India, is simply too much for a government like Pakistan to take on right now.
We ultimately see three Pakistans: 1) The places where the security issues are true (FATA, Baluchistan, parts of SWAT Valley, and Kashmir); 2) the rest of Pakistan for the average citizen, much larger than the first and which is reasonably misunderstood and relatively safe; 3) The politician's and military's Pakistan, which whether in FATA or Islamabad, is turbulent, unsafe, and complex.
There is a good case for optimism about Pakistan, simply because of the large emergent middle class (#2). The country, vast, tribal and complicated, can follow the more successful model of India. Connectivity changes the rural experience completely.. illiteracy at 43% can be overcome relatively quickly, and providing information alternatives can dissuade young males from a life of terrorism. The well educated elite can decide to further reform the countries institutions to increase confidence in the government. The war in Afghanistan, destabilizing to Pakistan in many ways, winds down after 2014 and buys time for Pakistan to address its real and continuing internal terrorism threat (more than 30,000 civilian terror deaths in the decade.)
Technology can help in other ways as well. The power problem is mostly a tracking problem (tracing corruption and mis-distribution). The problem of extreme crimes (like acid, or stoning) in poorly policed regions can be mitigated with videos and exposes that shame authorities into prosecution. The corruption problem can be tracked and traced using mobile money and transparent government finances. We met with clever Pakistani entrepreneurs who will build large, new businesses in Pakistan in the next few years and global multinational will locate sales and eventually manufacturing in the country.
The emergent middle class of Pakistan won’t settle for a corrupt system with constant terrorism and will push for reforms in a burgeoning democracy. Here’s to the new civil society of Pakistan, who will use connectivity, information and the Internet, to drive a peaceful revolution that brings Pakistan up to its true potential.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/104233435224873922474/posts/4UcNomnhipX
Here's a Dawn article by Michael Kugelman on Pakistani-Americans:
...For sure, many if not most Pakistani-Americans and US-based Pakistanis retain strong links to Pakistan. Some do so by staying close to relatives still in the country, or via the Internet and the various Pakistani media outlets accessible in America. Others quite famously exemplify the diaspora’s “giving” bonafides. We often hear about the remittances sent back to relatives, yet it’s equally important to acknowledge the humanitarianism. This largesse can be seen in the work of groups like APPNA, but also from the quiet actions of individuals. I know of various Pakistani-Americans — who otherwise rarely visit Pakistan — spending extended periods in the country to provide relief assistance after the 2010 floods.
Then there are the many diaspora organisations dedicated to Pakistan. Some, such as the various chapters of the Pakistani American Association (from North Carolina to Florida), promote Pakistani culture. Others, such as the Pakistan American Business Association, advocate business ties between the two countries. Still others are unabashedly political.
In the context of politics, only in recent months have I begun to fully understand the considerable influence Pakistani politicians’ exercise over the diaspora. As I’ve suggested before (only somewhat in jest), Pervez Musharraf seems to have more supporters in America than he does in Pakistan (and he has an extraordinary public relations operation to sustain his apparent popularity here). Then there’s Imran Khan, whose PTI party was scheduled to hold a jalsa in New York City until it was abruptly postponed with no apparent explanation. When Musharraf spoke at the Woodrow Wilson Center last summer, many of the 400 people in attendance were Pakistani-Americans. I suspect a visit by Khan would draw many more.
Yet my main interest here is those diaspora members who decide to go back to Pakistan — and not simply to visit relatives or attend weddings. I’ve previously alluded to Ijaz Nabi and Adil Najam, long-time successful professionals in this country who returned to Pakistan to join LUMS. There are also the likes of Pakistani-American Nadia Naviwala, a Harvard-educated, one-time USAID staffer who not long ago decided to relocate to Pakistan to serve as the US Institute of Peace’s country representative there.
These are only the more well-known cases. I recently received an email from a young, newly minted law school graduate, born and raised in America, who had decided to move to Pakistan — where she had never lived before. I imagine there are other examples like this one.
So what inspires diaspora members to return to Pakistan? More than three years ago, a blogpost by Nosheen Abbas highlighted the various opportunities diaspora members perceive in Pakistan, and the sense of attachment that attracts them.
In truth, I doubt there’s one overarching motivating factor — and certainly not idealism. Several years ago I had lunch with a deeply cynical diaspora member who lamented — as many do — the hopeless state of Pakistan. Not too long after this conversation, he returned to the country to take a prominent position in government. He was likely drawn to Pakistan by a job, not by do-goodism.
Another question is how diaspora members are treated once they arrive back in Pakistan. Do they encounter hostility? Are they dismissed as out-of-touch outsiders? And, in the case of those born in the United States, are they tainted for being Americans?
On all accounts, I suspect the answer is no. Various Afghan and Iraqi diaspora members (from accountants to politicians) have returned to help rebuild their countries of origin, a process that seems to be encouraged in these countries......
http://dawn.com/2012/07/06/when-the-pakistani-diaspora-returns-to-pakistan/
Here's a Forbes excerpt on Pakistani-American Shahid Khan:
With flowing black hair and the thick handlebar mustache of a man used to leaving a lasting impression, the 62-year-old Khan, driving a shiny white Grand Cherokee, is a swashbuckling contrast to the desolation around him. While Danville and the rest of the Rust Belt were deteriorating over the last 40 years, Khan was moving in exactly the opposite direction. The sole owner and CEO of Flex-N-Gate, he built one of the biggest automotive parts suppliers in North America almost from scratch from his headquarters just 35 miles away and now employs more than 13,000 people at 52 factories around the globe. Sales reached $3.4 billion in 2011. FORBES estimates his net worth at $2.5 billion, placing him in the top half of the soon-to-be-released 2012 Forbes 400.
An enormous accomplishment for anyone, it’s more like a Mars landing for a middle-class kid from Pakistan who flew into Illinois for an engineering degree at 16 and never left. Khan’s is the kind of only-in-America success story that has filled boats and planes with dreamers for the past 150 years, one that gives a face to an ironclad fact: Skilled, motivated immigrants are proven job creators, not job takers.
Khan’s American Dream continued this January, when he purchased the NFL’s Jacksonville Jaguars for $770 million. In so doing, he became the first ethnic-minority owner in a league synonymous with cheerleaders and tailgate parties, Thanksgiving grudge matches and that most secular of U.S. holidays, Super Bowl Sunday. Buying into the NFL, he says, was a statement about the opportunity America offers.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2012/09/05/shahid-khan-the-new-face-of-the-nfl-and-the-american-dream/
Here's an excerpt of an ET piece by Shahid Javed Burki on Pakistani-Americans:
To appreciate the economic influence the Pakistanis living in America could exert on the country of their origin, we should have some idea about their wealth, sources of income and aggregate incomes. Their total annual income is of the order of $45 to $50 billion a year. The savings rate should be around 25 per cent of the income, which is typical of immigrant groups. This means that about $12 billion a year is being set aside and invested in the creation of assets. Since the diaspora was formed over a period of more than 25 years, I estimate the asset base of this community at about $175 billion. The income from this should be about $8 billion a year. Originally, salaries and wages were the main source of income. Now, with a sizeable asset base, one-sixth of the incomes are drawn from returns on investments. With these numbers as the background, we can begin to understand the source of remittances and other capital flows that originate from this particular diaspora.
In the last two decades, there was a 16-fold increase in the amount of remittances sent by Pakistanis living and working in the United States. These increased from $150 million in 1991-92 to 2.4 billion in 2011-12. This represents an increase of 15 per cent a year. The rate of growth in remittances from this particular source was almost four times the rate of increase in the national product. Another way of looking at this flow of capital is in terms of its contribution to the increase in GDP. Assuming that currently the incremental capital output ratio for Pakistan is four — meaning that it takes four per cent of GDP to be invested to generate a one per cent increase in the national product — about a 0.3 percentage point increase in national income could be attributed to the remittances from the United States. Could this amount increase even further and could it be used more effectively? I will take up these questions in the article next week.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/522240/the-economic-impact-of-the-pakistani-american-diaspora/
Take a look at the Table you have posted:
http://alturl.com/six37
It shows Pakistani-Americans at roughly 400,000 in 2010.
It also shows Indian-Americans at roughly 3,200,000 in 2010.
This sounds about right, given that India has about 7 times our population in the Old Country.
However, if you reckon that AT LEAST 10% of Indians are Indian-Muslims, then we get Indian-Muslim-Americans at 320,000 in 2010.
See Page 44: http://alturl.com/r5vgx
Neglecting Pakistani Non-muslims, this is very close to our Pakistani-American figure of 400,000!
Post a Comment