The economics of immigration are really quite simple. First, there are jobs in this nation that need to be done that native-born workers simply are not interested in doing, or there are not enough native born workers to fill those positions. Second, as a result, immigrants overwhelmingly do not take jobs from the native born, but instead, compliment the work done by those born in the nation. Third, various studies have shown that immigrants have a greater propensity for entrepreneurship than do the native born. That makes sense, as anyone willing to move to another country is a risk taker. Fourth, illegal immigrants in this nation who work hard and do not get into trouble are contributing to our society and economy, not taking away from it. Fifth, if we reduce or cut off the supply of immigrant workers, businesses and consumers will suffer accordingly.
To sum up, immigration is good for the U.S. economy.
What happens when immigrant workers are reduced or cut off is illustrated by a story in the April 2 New York Times titled “Immigration Issues End a Grower’s Season.”
The entire article warrants reading, but it is important to highlight the following here:
For 35 years, Keith Eckel, 61, one of the largest tomato growers in the Northeast, had the workers and the timing down to a T: seven weeks, 120 men, 125 trailer loads of tomatoes picked, packed and shipped. This year, however, the new politics of immigration — very much on the mind of many of Pennsylvania’s voters, even if overlooked by the presidential candidates campaigning in this state and around the nation — has put him out of business. State, local and federal crackdowns on illegal immigration have broken his supply chain of laborers…
This is the crux of a tense, if largely unspoken, conflict between politics and reality in a state with 40,000 commercial farms. On many of those farms, crops requiring hand-picking are either not being put in this year, or are being planted by farmers who cannot be sure they will have the workers to harvest them, farm experts say. Yet, in more than a half dozen state legislative races, getting tough on illegal immigration has become the premier issue in this state, as it has in many others…
“Over the last couple of growing seasons, farmers have been feeling a tremendous amount of stress over the way this issue has been playing out,” said Gary Swann, governmental relations director for the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau. “And if people think all we have to do is raise wages and hire local workers, they are simply mistaken.” Local workers will not do the job, Mr. Swann said…
A temporary federal guest worker program, which briefly made hiring migrant farm workers easier, was not renewed by Congress last year in the rancorous debate over border security…
“This is all about economics,” added Mr. Eckel, who served as president of the state farm bureau for more than a decade until the mid-1990s, and whose office walls are decorated with photos of himself shaking hands with Ronald Reagan and the two presidents Bush. “I’m not trying to make some political statement.”
But, of course, economics and politics often cross paths. And that most certainly is the case with immigration. The question is: Which wins out in the end – sound economics that changes the law to reflect reality, or bad politics that changes the law while ignoring economics and doing real damage to U.S. businesses and consumers?
And what kind of immigration reform acknowledges economic reality? While tightening up the borders for security reasons, it makes sense to expand legal avenues for immigration and offer a path to legalization for undocumented workers, who are working and staying out of trouble.
No comments:
Post a Comment