Immigration
is a hot-button issue politically, with many supporters and opponents of it,
and economically, immigration can create greater wage and labor imbalances
between the country losing migrant workers and the country gaining them. While
immigration does encourage economic growth, it may not boost growth in terms of
wages as fast as we might think for the country that is gaining the immigrant labor.
Immigration to the U.S. produced a small increase in the average wage(s)
of American-born workers (home labor) between 1994 and 2007. In terms of the
concept of human capital that we discussed in class, education levels were
somewhat of a factor for existing foreign-born workers in the U.S. in
determining how much their wages dropped by as a result of new immigration.
Conversely, education levels were really not much of a factor in determining
the percentage gain in wages for American-born workers in the U.S.. Immigration
essentially increased wages for American-born workers of all education levels
by percentages that are within a very close proximity to each other. Even
though existing foreign-born workers (earlier immigrants) had obviously already
assumed moving, opportunity, risk and assimilation costs before new immigrants,
they were the socioeconomic group that was affected the most negatively because
they had the highest level of substitutability for newer immigrant labor.
Furthermore, I think that the newer immigrants had (and still have) an advantage over the existing foreign-born
workers because they were and are less likely to be separated from their
families because they had spent less time away from their families in their
countries of origin compared to existing foreign-born workers. Thus, it would
seem that they would be more likely to send remittances to their families in
their countries of origin. In essence, newer immigrants have closer ties with
their families than previous immigrants do with theirs. Now, going back to my
earlier point that immigration does not boost wages as fast as we might think,
we know that the long-run impact of immigration in relation to the change in
wages (and in labor) is zero. Since none of the changes in wages for any of the
labor were zero between 1994 and 2007, it is safe to say that that particular
time period was a short-run period. Since it is now 2012, the U.S. is probably getting
closer to the long-run 'equilibrium' period where labor and wages have balanced
out whereas no real changes in wages or labor have occurred, but whether or not
the U.S. is at the long-run stage of immigration impact is difficult to
calculate.
Source researched:
http://www.epi.org/publication/immigration_helps_boost_relative_wages_of_u-s-born_workers_at_all_lev/
It seems to me that earlier immigrants are the ones who are getting hurt by new foreign immigrants to the U.S. Their jobs are more easily taken by the new immigrants that are willing to work for less, because the newcomers have many of the same skills. Even the earlier immigrants that have a college education are losing wages. Yet immigration has helped to raise the wages of American born employees. This is a big problem for the earlier immigrants and I think something should be done to help protect them. These individuals have been in the U.S. the longest, and have assimilated themselves into the culture. They have also spent their money on goods and services in the U.S., which helps out the economy. They should be protected because they have been here the longest, and are a part of the United States community.
ReplyDelete