Posted Content•
Is the New Immigration Really So Bad
01 Apr 2004-Research Papers in Economics (Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM), Department of Economics, University College London)-
TL;DR: This article reviewed the recent evidence on U.S. immigration, focusing on two key questions: (1) Does immigration reduce the labor market opportunities of less-skilled natives? (2) Have immigrants who arrived after the 1965 Immigration Reform Act successfully assimilated? Looking across major cities, differential immigrant inflows are strongly correlated with the relative supply of high school dropouts.
Abstract: This paper reviews the recent evidence on U.S. immigration, focusing on two key questions: (1) Does immigration reduce the labor market opportunities of less-skilled natives? (2) Have immigrants who arrived after the 1965 Immigration Reform Act successfully assimilated? Looking across major cities, differential immigrant inflows are strongly correlated with the relative supply of high school dropouts. Nevertheless, data from the 2000 Census shows that relative wages of native dropouts are uncorrelated with the relative supply of less-educated workers, as they were in earlier years. At the aggregate level, the wage gap between dropouts and high school graduates has remained nearly constant since 1980, despite supply pressure from immigration and the rise of other education-related wage gaps. Overall, evidence that immigrants have harmed the opportunities of less educated natives is scant. On the question of assimilation, the success of the U.S.-born children of immigrants is a key yardstick. By this metric, post-1965 immigrants are doing reasonably well: second generation sons and daughters have higher education and wages than the children of natives. Even children of the least- educated immigrant origin groups have closed most of the education gap with the children of natives.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The authors found that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to "hunker down" and trust (even of one's own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.
Abstract: Ethnic diversity is increasing in most advanced countries, driven mostly by sharp increases in immigration. In the long run immigration and diversity are likely to have important cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits. In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust (even of one's own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer. In the long run, however, successful immigrant societies have overcome such fragmentation by creating new, cross-cutting forms of social solidarity and more encompassing identities. Illustrations of becoming comfortable with diversity are drawn from the US military, religious institutions, and earlier waves of American immigration.
3,466 citations
TL;DR: This article found that both low-skilled and highly skilled immigrants strongly prefer highly-skilled immigrants over low skilled immigrants, and this preference is not decreasing in natives' skill levels, and that rich and poor natives are equally opposed to low skilled immigration in general.
Abstract: Past research has emphasized two critical economic concerns that appear to generate anti-immigrant sentiment among native citizens: concerns about labor market competition and concerns about the fiscal burden on public services. We provide direct tests of both models of attitude formation using an original survey experiment embedded in a nationwide U.S. survey. The labor market competition model predicts that natives will be most opposed to immigrants who have skill levels similar to their own. We find instead that both low-skilled and highly skilled natives strongly prefer highly skilled immigrants over low-skilled immigrants, and this preference is not decreasing in natives' skill levels. The fiscal burden model anticipates that rich natives oppose low-skilled immigration more than poor natives, and that this gap is larger in states with greater fiscal exposure (in terms of immigrant access to public services). We find instead that rich and poor natives are equally opposed to low-skilled immigration in general. In states with high fiscal exposure, poor (rich) natives are more (less) opposed to low-skilled immigration than they are elsewhere. This indicates that concerns among poor natives about constraints on welfare benefits as a result of immigration are more relevant than concerns among the rich about increased taxes. Overall the results suggest that economic self-interest, at least as currently theorized, does not explain voter attitudes toward immigration. The results are consistent with alternative arguments emphasizing noneconomic concerns associated with ethnocentrism or sociotropic considerations about how the local economy as a whole may be affected by immigration.
866 citations
Cites background from "Is the New Immigration Really So Ba..."
...3 For general reviews about the impact of immigration on wages and employment see for example Bhagwati (2002), Borjas (1999), Card (2005), Friedberg and Hunt (1995), and Longhi, Nijkamp, and Poot (2005)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, a redistribuição governamental através do sistema de benefícios fiscais afecta estas tendências.
Abstract: Será que a desigualdade de rendimentos aumentou durante os últimos tempos? Quem ganhou e quem perdeu neste processo? Este processo afectou todos os países da OCDE uniformemente? Em que medida é que maiores desigualdades de rendimentos são a consequência de maiores diferenças nos rendimentos dos trabalhadores e até que ponto são afectados por outros factores? Finalmente, como é que a redistribuição governamental através do sistema de benefícios fiscais afecta estas tendências?
635 citations
TL;DR: This paper showed that workers with below high school education are imperfect substitutes for those with a high-school education, while high school equivalent and college equivalent workers were imperfect substitutes, with an elasticity of substitution on the order of 2.
Abstract: Immigration is often viewed as a proximate cause of the rising wage gap between highand
low-skilled workers. Nevertheless, there is controversy over the appropriate
theoretical and empirical framework for measuring the presumed effect, and over the
precise magnitudes involved. This paper offers an overview and synthesis of existing
knowledge on the relationship between immigration and inequality, focusing on evidence
from cross-city comparisons in the U.S. While some researchers have claimed that a
cross-city research design is inherently flawed, I argue that the evidence from cross-city
comparisons is remarkably consistent with recent findings based on aggregate time
series data. In particular, cross-city and aggregate time series comparisons provide
support for three key conclusions: (1) workers with below high school education are
perfect substitutes for those with a high school education; (2) “high school equivalent”
and “college equivalent” workers are imperfect substitutes, with an elasticity of
substitution on the order of 2; (3) within education groups, immigrants and natives are
imperfect substitutes. Together these results imply that the average impacts of recent
immigrant inflows on the relative wages of U.S. natives are small. The effects on overall
wage inequality (including natives and immigrants) are larger, reflecting the
concentration of immigrants in the tails of the skill distribution and higher residual
inequality among immigrants than natives. Even so, immigration accounts for a small
share (5%) of the increase in U.S. wage inequality between 1980 and 2000.
613 citations
TL;DR: This article analyzed the effect of immigration on wages of native workers and found that immigrants downgrade considerably upon arrival, and that the overall wage effect is slightly positive, although modest, too large to be explained by an immigration surplus.
Abstract: This paper analyses the effect immigration has on wages of native workers. Unlike most previous work, we estimate wage effects along the distribution of wages. We derive a flexible empirical strategy that does not rely on pre-allocating immigrants to particular skill groups. In our empirical analysis, we demonstrate that immigrants downgrade considerably upon arrival. As for the effects on native wages, we find that immigration depresses wages below the 20th percentile of the wage distribution, but leads to slight wage increases in the upper part of the wage
distribution. The overall wage effect of immigration is slightly positive. The positive wage effects we find are, although modest, too large to be explained by an
immigration surplus. We suggest alternative explanations, based on the idea that immigrants are paid less than the value of what they contribute to production, generating therefore a surplus, and we assess the magnitude of these effects.
595 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: This paper analyzed the earnings of foreign-born adult white men, as reported in the 1970 Census of Population, through comparisons with the native born and among the foreign born by country of origin, years in the United States, and citizenship.
Abstract: The earnings of foreign-born adult white men, as reported in the 1970 Census of Population, are analyzed through comparisons with the native born and among the foreign born by country of origin, years in the United States, and citizenship. Differences in the effects of schooling and postschool training are explored. Although immigrants initially earn less than the native born, their earnings rise more rapidly with U.S. labor market experience, and after 10 to 15 years their earnings equal, and then exceed, that of the native born. Earnings are unrelated to whether the foreign born are U.S. citizens.
2,998 citations
"Is the New Immigration Really So Ba..." refers background in this paper
...Following Chiswick (1978) there is an extensive literature on the question of whether the immigrant-native earnings gap narrows with time in the US....
[...]
...Chiswick (1978) found that immigrant men earned as much as natives, despite having less education, and concluded that investments in on-the-job training made up for the gap in formal schooling....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors suggests that the rapid increase in the proportion of college graduates in the United States labor force in 1970s may have been a causal factor in both the decline in the college premium during the 1970s and the large increase in inequality during the 1980s.
Abstract: A high proportion of skilled workers in the labor force implies a large market size for skill-complementary technologies, and encourages faster upgrading of the productivity of skilled workers. As a result, an increase in the supply of skills reduces the skill premium in the short run, but then it induces skill-biased technical change and increases the skill premium, possibly even above its initial value. This theory suggests that the rapid increase in the proportion of college graduates in the United States labor force in the 1970s may have been a causal factor in both the decline in the college premium during the 1970s and the large increase in inequality during the 1980s.
2,000 citations
TL;DR: This article studied the earnings growth experienced by specific immigrant cohorts during the period 1970-80 and found that within-cohort growth is significantly smaller than the growth predicted by cross-section regressions for most immigrant groups.
Abstract: This paper reexamines the empirical basis for two "facts" that seem to be found in most cross-section studies of immigrant earnings: (1) the earnings of immigrants grow rapidly as they assimilate into the United States; and (2) this rapid growth leads to many immigrants' overtaking the earnings of the natives within 10-15 years after immigration. Using the 1970 and 1980 U.S. censuses, this paper studies the earnings growth experienced by specific immigrant cohorts during the period 1970-80. It is found that within-cohort growth is significantly smaller than the growth predicted by cross-section regressions for most immigrant groups. This differential is consistent with the hypothesis that there has been a secular decline in the "quality" of immigrants admitted to the United States.
1,783 citations
"Is the New Immigration Really So Ba..." refers background in this paper
...Subsequent research – most notably by Borjas (1985, 1995, 1999, 2003) – has chipped away at both conclusions and gradually led to a more negative picture of US immigration....
[...]
TL;DR: The recent rise in wage inequality is usually attributed to skill-biased technical change (SBTC) associated with new computer technologies as discussed by the authors, and the evidence for this hypothesis, focusing on the implications of SBTC for overall wage inequality and for changes in wage differentials between groups.
Abstract: The recent rise in wage inequality is usually attributed to skill‐biased technical change (SBTC), associated with new computer technologies. We review the evidence for this hypothesis, focusing on the implications of SBTC for overall wage inequality and for changes in wage differentials between groups. A key problem for the SBTC hypothesis is that wage inequality stabilized in the 1990s despite continuing advances in computer technology; SBTC also fails to explain the evolution of other dimensions of wage inequality, including the gender and racial wage gaps and the age gradient in the return to education.
1,608 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the recent theoretical and empirical research on immigrations impact on the income growth and labor market outcomes of natives in developed countries, focusing on developed countries.
Abstract: This paper discusses the recent theoretical and empirical research on immigrations impact on the income growth and labor market outcomes of natives. The geographical focus is on developed countries. (EXCERPT)
1,102 citations