I think the numbers are biased because Somali refugees are new. The linked report says "And the Hmong are clearly still struggling after decades in Minnesota." The Somalis have not had decades to assimilate and establish networks and human capital infrastructure. (Though there some awesome restaurants on Riverside!)
An additional bias is that they landed in Minnesota with its very generous assistance programs. Texas received the "largest number of arrivals in 2014." I'm going out on a limb and suggesting that the Lone Star State did a better job putting them to work.
The 2014 report claims 8000 Somali refugees in 2014 for a total of 23,000 for the listed program between 2009-2014. If 36% are not in the labor force, we have imported 12,240 unemployed over six years.
You've made yourself quite clear. Old immigrants, good; new immigrants bad. Quite similar to the media and Republican Presidents: "If only Trump was as swell and kind and smart as that George W. Bush fellow...") Allow me to repeat:
Black teens born right here in the good old USA have similar, if not worse, labor force participation numbers. Should we prohibit reproduction from certain groups based on their statistical employment?
Refugees will struggle to achieve prosperity. I'll accede that some groups will do better than others. But -- as you point out -- Minneapolis is not a Sharia hell hole. I think our nation of 330,000,000 can accept a few thousand refugees. And, on the whole, they will eventually prosper in similar proportion to the native born.
My first impression of this post was, "What is so dramatically different about Somali immigrants from Mexican, Hmong or Vietnamese?" Allow me to explain.
First, I didn't read the article. Just nb's excellent post and the data in the table. If one observes the total percentage "not in labor force" without accounting for sex, all groups are comparable with percentages varying between 19 and 36. The real story is found in the percentage of unemployed males. Here, Indians are singularly completely industrious, with zero percent of unemployed males. Mexicans and Vietnamese are in the 10 percent range, which does not impress me as alarming. Hmong and Somali are 24 and 30 percent unemployed, respectively. Still not really alarming so much as evidence of an opportunity for outreach to those communities. Where Somali males are uniquely lacking, as shown by this data, is in finding work. Somali men seeking work represent 29% of that community, and only 11, 7, 6 and 3 percent of the other ethnic identifications. But they are looking. That doesn't sound like a welfare culture to me.
Let me also explain why I dismiss unemployed females. Because the two-income family is a much more western phenomenon than a universal condition around the world. Some see this as good and others as bad. Personally, I think it's best when it can be decided by each individual woman, and not become an economic necessity because individual income taxes and health care costs are so high - which, again, is more of a western phenomenon. I'm looking at YOU, Progressives.