The cost and Benefits of Immigration

This week’s readings were focused on the factors that have influenced the changing dynamics of the different demographics within the United States. The readings discussed the exponential growth of the country’s GDP while, in comparison, the median household income has barely grown. Following this change in economic disparities, politics has become increasingly less representative of both economic and racial minorities, leading to unrest within the middle class. This situation has also been caused by the globalization which allowed the outsourcing of jobs particularly in manufacturing. Combining the technological advances, in the last two decades in particular, with the reduction of border barriers has meant that the middle class has been losing its standard of living, while the wealthy are becoming more and more dominant in politics and business. The chapter also discusses the American mentality towards individualism, freedom and religion which affects the country’s reputations within the international sphere.

Currently the topic of immigration has come to the forefront of the news in many high income countries throughout the globe, and often with negative sentiments towards the individuals who immigrate. It has been seen in the US towards Hispanics, Mexicans in particular; the UK towards Eastern Europeans, the polish in particular; and the Germans towards the Turks. However, during this anti-immigrant surge, locals are often forgetting the dependence on immigrants within the economy. Many of the countries which have been seeing a significant influx of immigrants, also have a severe aging population.Therefore, having immigrants of a working age coming into the workforce, is a huge benefit to the home country as it helps the dependency ratio.In 2013, more than 64% of immigrants were between the ages of 15 and 64, during a time in which dependents are growing, and having more working aged people is vital to a country’s economy.

Yet people are constantly complaining of the strain of immigrants on the US economy, in health care, the job market etc. Theoretically, economies are most prosperous in perfect competition, which among other factors requires having many competitors and no entry barriers. Economists would argue that people are rational, and therefore hire people who are most skilled for a particular job. Therefore, having immigrants essentially only increases competition and factors out the least efficient (or in this case, skilled) competitors. This implies that when immigrants have jobs in the united states, it is because they were better suited for that position then the other applicants, regardless of nationality. Therefore, looking at the country’s economy as the standard of evaluation on immigration reform, implies that removing the 11.3 million illegal immigrants in the united states, would not only cost the country $114 billion but would also reduce the efficiency of the country all together.

President Trump is hoping to curb immigration in the coming years, in particular low skilled immigration. While there is a cap on the number of people that can come into the country, due to resources, space, jobs and housing, the current increase in deportation of undocumented immigrants is costing the country much more then it is saving it. Therefore, regulation will have a much greater benefit on the United States then deportation, especially considering the threat of deportation has not been a significant deterrence for the millions already in the US. Rather than spending some much additional national revenue on deportation, Trump should find better alternative through initial regulation.

4 Responses to "The cost and Benefits of Immigration"

Declan Horrigan says:

September 24, 2017 at 11:37 pm

I think you make many interesting and insightful comments about how immigration is affecting not only the United States but the world as a whole. I think that today, especially in America, there is a majority of people that agree with Donald Trump’s proposed policy changes that will curtail the amount of immigration into the country immensely. I think many of these people, not all of them, but definitely a decent sized portion, don’t take into account all of the positive aspects that immigration has to our country. I think you did a very good job illuminating these positives of immigration, specifically the fact that the immigrants add to the workforce while much of the population is aging rapidly. Immigrants contribute largely to our economy and without them, we would suffer great economic loss. However, I do understand the argument contrary to that, which you did mention, of how the immigrants are taking jobs from the struggling middle class of America. Even though it does increase competition and therefore the productivity and efficiency in our country, middle-class citizens can find themselves jobless while an immigrant has one. I can see how this may be frustrating because people believe that they, as natives in America, have a right to these jobs before the immigrants, especially the illegal ones. Many people only see and focus on the negatives of immigration because they are simply unaware of all of the positive things it brings. I think that if many people were educated on all of these benefits of immigration, their minds would be changed, or at least they would begin to reevaluate their mindset and look closer at the issue rather than condemning immigration for superficial reasons.
Helen Spiller says:

September 25, 2017 at 1:15 pm

According to a United Nations report, the United States and Germany take in the most immigrants of all countries in the world. And, as you noted in your blog post, there has been an increased level of resentment towards immigrants and immigration in general. President Trump has passed several types of legislation slowing down and forbidding some foreign immigration. While I do agree with you that there is better options from Trump than deportation, such as regulation, and that many of these immigrants work and abide by the law and help our country, there are also stronger counter-arguments than you have expressed.
There are many sound arguments against allowing immigrants to flow into our country that are left out of the discussion. First, many would argue that immigrants abuse the welfare system and take more from our government than they put in. Some would argue that immigrants make our country too crowded and increase pollution and traffic. And, the most common argument, is that immigrants take the jobs of hard-working Americans. All in all, I agree that Trump could certainly attempt to regulate the immigration system more and create an overall better feeling towards immigrants. But, I also think that there are many more sound arguments against immigration that are left out of the discussion but are critical to discussing the problem at hand.

Nowrasteh, Alex. “Common Arguments against Immigration.” Cato Institute, 8 Aug. 2016, http://www.cato.org/blog/common-arguments-against-immigration.

Kirk, Ashley. “Mapped: Which Country Has the Most Immigrants?” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 21 Jan. 2016, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/12111108/Mapped-Which-country-has-the-most-immigrants.html.
Alexandra Friedman says:

September 25, 2017 at 8:07 pm

Your blog post put immigration in a different light than we typically view it. I particularly found your side by side comparison of the US with Germany and the UK. Immigration is such a pervasive topic in our country right now that i think we sometimes forget how widespread it is. This is true in the context of the world today, but also in the context of history. This point reminded me of a point we talked about in class. Throughout history, all groups of immigrants, have always been treated horribly at first. Many groups that we now consider average Americans immigrated at some point; for example catholics were treated horribly when they first arrived here. Thus, it makes me wonder: why? We know the value of immigrants, as you pointed out, but we also know that immigration is not a new trend or one that will ever end. Immigration is an inherent part of a successful nation.

Obviously, as citizens of the US, we are entitled automatically to certain rights and privileges. But, as a country founded on the principle of equal opportunity and the view that all men are created equal, immigration should be something we embrace. While i do strongly believe this, I know that it is easier said than done. If everyone who wanted to immigrate here did, the country would not be able to sustain it. Instead, I think we need to apply this concept in recognizing how lucky we are. We have more opportunities than the majority of the world based simply on where we were born. So, when immigrants do come-this is inevitable- we should do everything we can to help them thrive and make them feel at home.
Marcin Jerzewski says:

September 27, 2017 at 1:39 am

Alice, the implications brought about by current migration policies in the United States has been a topic I have looked forward to discussing the most in the context of this class. Consequently, I am very glad that you decided to focus your blog post on the issue of migration. I very much agree with your conclusion that attempts to deport undocumented workers from the United States would prove to be inefficient, and that immigration reform should be more substantial than mere politics of fear. I believe that, given its considerable supply for migrant workers, and in particular labor shortages in sectors where it is difficult to recruit enough workers among U.S. Americans, the U.S. should significantly expand its H2-B visa program. Simultaneously, the government should expand programs such as DACA, and even provide options for long-term undocumented migrants who have resided in the U.S. for a substantial amount of time, contributed to the society by paying taxes and Social Security contributions, and enriched their local communities in various ways. While I do not argue that the juridical status of international borders should be amended, I strongly believe that in an increasingly globalized world, and particularly in the United States, the current hegemon and driving forces behind many processes of globalization, (highly-demanded migrants!) ought to be provided with some form of political membership regardless of their citizenship or national origin. Hannah Arendt once used the term “worldlessness” to define those conditions where a person doesn’t belong to a world in which they matter as human beings. It occurs to me that we may draw on Arendt’s locution to effectively conjure the plight of many immigrants presently living in the United States. As we consider migrations across international borders in the modern state system, we come across a juxtaposition of two moral and legal principles. On one hand, the human right of individuals to cross international borders whether for economic, personal or professional reasons or to seek asylum and refuge is guaranteed by Articles 13 and 14 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. On the other hand, Article 21 of the declaration recognizes the principles of internal sovereignty, stipulating that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.” Seyla Benhabib, a political theorist from Yale, also considered this issue and averred that, given that the international system is still based on the Westphalian model of nation-states, the basic right to self-government discussed in Article 21 includes control over borders as well as determining who is to be a citizen as distinguished from a resident or an alien. I would argue, however, that in the era of globalization, the concept of nation states which exercise such strict supervision over borders is becoming somehow obsolete. This is primarily for two reasons. Firstly, the rise in prominence of international organizations and non-state actors (including transnational diaspora communities), as well as a growing number of international agreements encouraging mutual accountability through networks of supranational authority has already eroded sovereignty of states understood in the traditional sense. Secondly, processes of globalization contribute to making international borders more porous. However, the American state seems to fail to find a valid response to this state of the matter. I believe that the solution which I have proposed earlier, i.e. to expand the options for (highly-demanded!) migrants to arrive to the United States in a regulated manner, combined with providing them with an option to have a more prominent say in the affairs of their local communities in the U.S. will facilitate “a decoupling of national and cultural origin from the privileges of political membership” (Benhabib 2004). The U.S. government needs to realize that its country is becoming increasingly diverse, and should celebrate this diversity by expanding the rights to political memberships to individuals based on residence, rather than citizenship or national origin.

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/the-politics-of-immigration-and-membership
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/whos-on-trial-eichmann-or-anrendt/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&module=BlogPost-ReadMore&version=Blog%20Main&action=Click&contentCollection=The%20Stone&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body&_r=2&

Comments are closed.