Americans Lose $68 Billion to Illegals

NewsMax ^ | 02/24/2005 | Donald R. Davis and David E. Weinstein

[Marine Inspector]

Americans Lose $68 Billion to Illegals

Using a new approach, Columbia University economists David Weinstein and Donald Davis estimate the net economic losses from immigration to Americans.

Unlike earlier studies, this new model does not treat the movement of immigrant labor into the country simply as a result of abundant resources and demand for labor, assumptions more appropriate to the 19th century.

Rather, the model takes into account globalization, the technological superiority of the American economy, and the resulting high standard of living.

Among the report’s findings:

In 2002, the net loss to U.S. natives from immigration was $68 billion.

This $68 billion annual loss represents a $14 billion increase just since 1998. As the size of the immigrant population has continued to increase, so has the loss.

The decline in wages is relative to the price of goods and services, so the study takes into account any change in consumer prices brought about by immigration.

The negative effect comes from increases in the supply of labor, and not the legal (or illegal) status of immigrants.

While natives lose from immigration, the findings show that immigrants themselves benefit substantially by coming to America.

Those who remain behind in their home countries also benefit from the migration of their countrymen. Donald R. Davis and David E. Weinstein are both professors of economics at Columbia University, as well as Research Associates at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).

[F16Fighter]

Try chumming the waters at the asylum.

They'll humor you.

[F16Fighter]

"And for the 501st time since you apparently don't already know me but I have the wrong plumbing to be a "Miss", if you check out my tagline you'll see that I was in the 5th Marines and FYI there are no "Misses" in the 5th Marines. LMAO but then you probably wouldn't know that either now would you..."

There WILL be a 502nd time.

There is an obvious synapse short-out between both brain cells.

[Cultural Jihad]

People who advocate against immigration, legal or otherwise, are for the most part Greens socialist types who whine that poor people that come here to be productive workers end up being consumers, too, and we all know how horrible it is to be productive and well-off!

[Always Right]

I don't assume it, I look at the facts and I know it. If I was wrong, wages would be rising rather than falling.

If you say so....

[skeeter]

Whats the 2004 PDI figure minus the month of december, or more specifically, the one time Microsoft dividend?

[monkeywrench]

"Bearing false witness is a sin. Name calling is just tacky and immature"

Actually, you're wrong on that.

"Mat 5:22 ... shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire

[monkeywrench]

"... due to our long history of encouraging and supporting immigration. Huddled masses and etc."

Those "huddled masses" were expected to have a sponser or support themselves. There was no welfare or socialist services to fall back on.

[PRND21]

Actually, you're wrong on that.

Name calling is a sin?! Thanks for the info.

[PRND21]

Try chumming the waters at the asylum.

Which one are you posting from? ;)

[Marine Inspector]

So far, this has been a remarkably SOIAL-free thread. Lets hope it lasts...

I won't hold my breath.

[Marine Inspector]

You could save Social Security too.

[Bikers4Bush]

"The purge was deserved"

It was and still is deserved, unfortunately the wrong group was targeted.

It's the illegal apologists that should go.

[Coleus]

Americans Lose $68 Billion A Year from Immigration; Study Examines Harm to American Workers

2/24/2005 10:22:00 AM


To: National Desk

Contact: Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, 202-466-8185 or sac@cis.org

WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Using a new approach, Columbia University economists David Weinstein and Donald Davis estimate the net economic losses from immigration to Americans. Unlike earlier studies, this new model does not treat the movement of immigrant labor into the country simply as a result of abundant resources and demand for labor, assumptions more appropriate to the 19th century. Rather, the model takes into account globalization, the technological superiority of the American economy, and the resulting high standard of living.

The Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder, "United States Technological Superiority and the Losses from Migration," is on line at http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back205.html. Among the report's findings:

-- In 2002, the net loss to U.S. natives from immigration was $68 billion.

-- This $68 billion annual loss represents a $14 billion increase just since 1998. As the size of the immigrant population has continued to increase, so has the loss.

-- The decline in wages is relative to the price of goods and services, so the study takes into account any change in consumer prices brought about by immigration.

-- The negative effect comes from increases in the supply of labor, and not the legal (or illegal) status of immigrants.

-- While natives lose from immigration, the findings show that immigrants themselves benefit substantially by coming to America.

-- Those who remain behind in their home countries also benefit from the migration of their countrymen.

About the Authors: Donald R. Davis and David E. Weinstein are both professors of economics at Columbia University, as well as Research Associates at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Both authors are recognized as among the nation's leading experts in international economics. This paper updates a June 2002 NBER working paper entitled "Technological Superiority and the Losses from Migration." The NBER is one of the nation's leading economic research institutions. For those wishing a much more detailed and technical explanation than the one presented here please see the NBER paper at http://www.columbia.edu/~drd28/Migration.pdf.

Harvard Economist George Borjas, who is generally recognized as the nation's leading immigration economist, stated "Weinstein and Davis' work represents an important new approach for calculating the net benefits accruing to the United States from immigration. As in earlier calculations, immigration does not create substantial net economic benefits for native-born Americans. In fact, Weinstein and Davis conclude that the effect on natives may be both large and negative."

Methodology: The model used in this study can be summarized as follows: High U.S. productivity motivates the entry of foreign workers and capital. As a consequence, the movement of foreign labor and capital into the United States expands U.S. exports and reduces exports by foreign countries, which now have fewer workers and less capital. This depresses the prices of U.S. exports while raising the price of its imports, which is bad for U.S. natives.

While the addition of immigrant workers makes the overall U.S. economy larger, natives in the United States are worse off because immigrants take not just the increase in income, but other income as well. This is because American workers are now competing with foreign workers who, because they have entered the United States, now have access to superior American technology, which is the primary source of American workers' competitive advantage in the international economy. In other words, American workers are better off competing with foreigners if the foreign workers stay in their own countries and don't have access to American technology. By allowing the foreign workers into the United States, Americans face competition with foreigners equipped with American technology.

Policy Discussion: The authors do not make any specific policy recommendations. They point out that non-economic factors should also be considered when formulating immigration policy. However, if the well-being of natives is a primary concern, then lawmakers may wish to consider the negative economic effects on native-born Americans.

[JustAnotherSavage]

BTT

[PRND21]

It's the illegal apologists that should go

Why do you supose they didn't?

[Bikers4Bush]

Because they suck up to Bush.

[PRND21]

Or, maybe they don't lie and continually break forum rules to push their agenda.

[Bikers4Bush]

Name the lies and the rules broken.

[Isabelle]

American's still continue to subsidies cheap labor for businesses. This is sickning.