I believe the immigration debate has been sparked in part by the lack of growth in real incomes over the past 7-years.
The bursting of the internet bubble combined with the advent of what Stephen Roach calls the "global labor arbitrage" has pinched real wage growth, especially on the lower half of the wage scale. This has frustrated people, especially those who's factory jobs have been sent to foreign countries.
The increased burdens placed on states by all segments of the population has become more acute by the mismanagement of receipts and the total lack of foresight.
There is no reason why civil servant employees compensation should be 40% greater than comparable private sector compensation. It is ludicrous. Pensions, benefits, and retirement dates all need to be overhauled for civil servants and even educators to get them competitive with the private sector. Immigration is not the only thing impacting civil budgets, but it's an easy target.
Most of the extensive studies I've read peg the economic impact of illegal immigration at around 1% of wages in those occupations that are at risk (low end service, construction, landscaping, etc). Adding in statistical variance and it becomes basically no impact. However, it has become a very emotional issue because there are some parts of the country that are getting the perfect storm of issues listed above.
When bubbles pop, their patterns repeat, and one of the things that emerged from the 20's market crash was isolationism. I think the immigration debate we're seeing is similar to the isolationism of the 30's. People feel threatened by the outside, so they're sounding off.
I don't think it's productive to get into the whole cult of fear, but I believe it is important to look at immigration as part of an economic policy debate. For example, Japan has virtually no immigration and a very homogenous society, yet their fertility rate is below replacement level, and their population may drop from 120-million to 86 million in 50-years if the current trends continue. That will wreck havoc on real estate prices, government budgets, and seriously impact their standard of living.
When the country has a low birthrate like the US and other western countries, immigration is a necessary component of growth. It could be argued that one reason we have a higher birthrate than the Europeans and likely better future prosepects than the Europeans is due to the higher birth rates of the immigrants.
While that situation may scare people and change the demographics, it should help our overall economy. In fact, one report I read speculated immigrant fertility rates are higher partially due to the optimism of their situation. When you are pessimistic about your future, you have fewer children the theory suggests. I'm not sure about that, but it's possible.
Since nearly all of us are descended from non-native American roots who started from extremely modest or below modest means (poor), I think it's important to look at this issue from all sides in order to understand it and deal with it in a fair, compassionate, and just manner that maintains the American dream for both existing Americans and those who wish to join us here. |
