Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Immigrants and Jobs
As we progress through the recent changes due to immigration reform, statistics like the ones in this article provide insight into how they might affect our economy. I thought this article brought up some good points for both sides (or all of the sides...) of the arguments for and against different aspects of immigration reform. What are your thoughts? How much weight do you think should be put on these sorts of statistics? Did any of these numbers surprise you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think there are certainly good arguments in either direction. The aregument against immigration stands off the basis that-There is a depression of wage rates. When immigrants will accept a 'w/p' that is less than it should be, overall wages decline for everyone.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there is also evidence that immigrants disproportionately are entrepreneurs, striving for innovation and arbitrage.
In terms of 'how much weight' should be put into these results, we must remember what statistics really are. Statistics are compiled and drawn by those who aim to illustrate specific results. Statistics can support virtually any point when painted in the right light.
I agree with Andrew that statistics can be molded for whatever the person is trying to show. As far as illegal immigrants go, we need to have some stricter laws to prevent them from living here, as they are willing to take ridiculously low wages. However, we need to make it MUCH easier to become a legal immigrant. We should welcome immigrants with open arms, but only if they follow the same process as everybody else. This way we will not have (as many) illegal immigrants taking low wages and hurting everybody else's wages.
ReplyDelete“Our economy is stronger when we harness the talents and ingenuity of striving, hopeful immigrants,” Obama said during his State of the Union address on Feb. 12. “Right now, leaders from the business, labor, law enforcement, faith communities, they all agree that the time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.” -- The article stated this in reference to the debate today. I feel that the lowering statistic of joblessness for those born outside of the US is a good thing, and obviously our president does too. As far as wages go, they obviously hold well below average wages. And as the article says, "Their availability 'lowers overall unemployment, and increases economic growth.'” So, Like Andrew says, I can see both sides. But I think this article is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Keaton. Statistics can easily show bias and can be swayed to favor the person trying to show them. I also agree that we need to to make it easier for immigrants to become legal. Their are too many illegal immigrants working in the US and they should be allowed to as long as they follow the system. Although, right now the system is hard to get around and should be made easier.
ReplyDeleteCurrently, the U.S immigration system is completely broken, but the problem isn't enforcement, it's that we don't let enough people in. It would be nice if everyone who wants to enter could through legal channels, but as the estimable cracked points out with some colorful language, the U.S system makes that extremely difficult. Worst of all, a side effect of our restrictive system is that it keeps out high skilled immigrants who would make the U.S more competitive. So, you end up with illegal immigrants working in an unregulated shadow labor market, an expensive border to patrol, and the lost opportunity to have more engineers, computer scientists, and doctors. If we had a more open policy where we reasonably allowed in the people who want to come here, the border would need less security, more immigrants would be incorporated into the regulated labor market, and we would be more competitive thanks to high skilled immigrants.
ReplyDeleteBut wait, you ask, what if we don't want all these immigrants in the first place? As students of economics, I don't think it should surprise us that the free trade of labor across borders is more efficient than a system riddled with government regulations. David Brooks and Greg Mankiw lay out the argument very clearly for why immigration is a net positive for the United States. Skilled immigrants start businesses, increase competitiveness, and make the U.S more productive.
There is not as much consensus on the issue of less skilled immigration, but I think there is still a compelling argument that we should be very open about letting unskilled immigrants enter our country. As David Brooks points out, unskilled immigrants boost the wages of most Americans and only have a small negative impact on the wages of male high school dropouts. In addition, in our increasingly aging society, we need an influx of young workers who will pay into Social Security and Medicare (and David Brooks also points out that even illegal immigrants are a net benefit to state finances, and would be an even bigger net benefit if legalized) and have more children.
I find it ironic that usual supporters of free markets who acknowledge the benefits of competition and the unfairness of the government picking winners and losers think that it's desirable for the government to have such a heavy hand in the U.S labor market. As Greg Mankiw writes, "Ever since Adam Smith taught us about the wonders of free markets and the magic of the invisible hand, we have been loath to prohibit mutually advantageous trades between consenting adults. If an American farmer wants to hire a worker to pick fruits and vegetables, the fact that the worker happens to have been born in Mexico does not seem a compelling reason to stop the transaction."
ReplyDeleteI find the argument that we should care about U.S workers more than workers from other countries morally repellent, but for the sake of argument and the fact that most people would disagree with me, let's say that we should care about the well being of an American more than the well being of a Mexican. Then, let's even say that we ignore all the other benefits of immigration and just focus on the cost to males without high school diplomas. Steven Landsburg, when making the same unrealistic assumptions that immigration is "harmful" to Americans that I did, finds that one has to value the life of an American 5 times as much as a Mexican to justify keeping immigrants out. And when we take a breath and recognize that immigration is beneficial to Americans, the entire argument that we must hurt immigrants to protect Americans breaks down! The fact is, if you care even a bit about the desperate poor of the world, allowing more immigration is one of the best anti-poverty programswe could design (and it helps us too!). A recent estimate says that if the global community adopted open borders, global GDP would jump by 50-100%.
I like what Keaton said, that it should be easier to become a legal citizen in the U.S. I remember talking to another K Student about her parents trying to become a legal citizen but failing the test because it was too difficult... it makes me wonder if I would even pass it. I also agree with Philip in saying that the argument of caring more about US workers than immigrant workers. I think that we should think about opening our arms to more immigrants.
ReplyDelete