re: A deported Somalian has a mental breakdown begging to come back to the USA

quote:

---

I’ll give you $1,000

---

Already spending your "tariff rebate check" I see.

quote:

---

Find me the Venezuelan who considers themselves not a Venezuelan from Venezuela but an American from the continent of south America.

---

Youre really bending yourself in a pretzel. Its not that serious.

I ran your source through Grok and ChatGPT

quote:

---

Why I’m Doubtful This is a Reliable or “Accurate” Source for Our Purposes

There are several serious issues with using ZipAtlas data to claim anything definitive about welfare use or poverty among Somali Americans.

Lack of transparency about data sources and methodology.

The ZipAtlas page does not clearly explain where its data comes from (which surveys, what years, how respondents are identified). I see no references to primary sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau, the American Community Survey (ACS), or administrative data from welfare agencies.

Without knowing how they identify “Immigrants from Somalia,” how they sample, or what “government assistance/food stamps” includes, it’s impossible to assess reliability or sampling bias.

Potential sampling and classification problems.

“Immigrants from Somalia” is a very small and mobile population in the U.S.; large-scale public datasets (like ACS) often have very small sample sizes for such groups, which makes any statistics subject to high sampling error. does not discuss or quantify such error.

The site seems to treat “immigrants from Somalia” separately from “Somali ancestry” or “Somali Americans,” which may or may not overlap. That means its data do not necessarily reflect the broader Somali-American population (including U.S.-born, second generation, etc.).

Implausible internal contradictions / “too neat” categories.

For example, ZipAtlas reports an unusually low unemployment rate (5.3%) for immigrants from Somalia.

That seems at odds with many academic / journalistic reports indicating relatively high underemployment, limited job opportunities, and economic hardship among Somali refugees in many communities.

The “13.7% on government assistance / food stamps” figure seems suspiciously low compared with academic studies we reviewed earlier (some found ~ 65–80% of small refugee samples using public assistance).

No peer-review or documentation; no acknowledgment of limitations.

Academic studies dealing with Somali refugees often explicitly note the challenge of small sample size and limited generalizability. The ZipAtlas page has none of that nuance.

There is no published methodology, no margin-of-error, and no way to audit or verify the data.

In short: the ZipAtlas page looks more like a “data-aggregation website” offering nice-sounding snapshots — but lacking the transparency, rigor, or documentation needed for credible academic or policy claims.

Compared to the Academic Literature: Very Different Picture

In the academic studies we reviewed, public assistance usage among Somali refugee samples was often very high — e.g. ~ 64.6% in one Midwestern refugee sample.

Another small study of Somali refugee mothers in Maine found 77% on food assistance (SNAP/WIC) and high food insecurity.

By contrast, ZipAtlas’s 13.7% “on government assistance / food stamps” is much lower — a big discrepancy.

That divergence suggests that either:

ZipAtlas is undercounting welfare use (or mis-defining “government assistance”), or

The academic studies — which rely on small, local, often refugee-heavy samples — reflect pockets of high need that do not represent the broader Somali immigrant population.

Given the methodological opacity of ZipAtlas, I trust the academic studies more — albeit with their own limitations.

My Verdict: The ZipAtlas Page Is Not a Dependable Evidence Base for “Somalis on Welfare”

You can treat the ZipAtlas numbers as very rough, provisional estimates — not as evidence. They do not provide a credible foundation for making strong claims like “only 13.7% of Somali immigrants rely on welfare.” Using them for that purpose would be misleading.

---

In short, your link has no sources or peer reviewed studies and stands in direct contrast to other verified statistics and peer reviewed studies.

If your numbers were accurate, that would make Somali immigrants more successful than all Asians and Indians.

quote:

---

If your numbers were accurate, that would make Somali immigrants more successful than all Asians and Indians.

---

If your source were accurate, every somali would be on welfare for 20 years.

I'm still waiting for an actual source for your OP. There isnt one, the influencer you people are addicted to, lied.

Tell him he needs to find another tit

Maybe if he hadn't been living on welfare for so long he might know how to take care of himself in a strange environment.

No

Go bang a goat, you POS!

quote:

---

If your source were accurate, every somali would be on welfare for 20 years.

---

Based on the sources I did provide, statistically, there are better odds they are on some form of assistance for 20+ years than there is that they aren't. That guy could have spoken hyperbolically, but based purely on data, he had a great shot at being correct. Way more correct than your 15% lie.

Again, only 10% of all immigrants ever become net positive contributors, and I bet a large percentage of that number are H1B visas in tech with higher-paying jobs.

You would have to be naive to think that Somalians, with an average IQ of 68 (look it up), are more successful as a group of immigrants than those from East Asia with an IQ over 100 on average

Retarded is anything 75 and below, so on average, Somlaians are all classified as retarded.

You don't understand how averages work, and those can be used to make safe assumptions to spur conversation.

Acting as if you won here, when your 15% was proven a lie, is silly even for you.

You are as retarded as the average Somalian you are defending.