Here’s the abstract of a new NBER working paper on immigration by Gihoon Hong and John McLaren:
Most research on the effects of immigration focuses on the effects of immigrants as adding to the supply of labor. By contrast, this paper studies the effects of immigrants on local labor demand, due to then increase in consumer demand for local services created by immigrants. This effect can attenuate downward pressure from immigrants on non-immigrants’ wages, and also benefit non-immigrants by increasing the variety of local services available. For this reason, immigrants can raise native workers’ real wages, and each immigrant could create more than one job. Using US Census data from 1980 to 2000, we find considerable evidence for these effects: Each immigrant creates 1.2 local jobs for local workers, most of them going to native workers, and 62% of these jobs are in non-traded services. Immigrants appear to raise local non-tradables sector wages and to attract native-born workers from elsewhere in the country. Overall, it appears that local workers benefit from the arrival of more immigrants.
Finally, social justice warriors always portray themselves – and seem to experience themselves – as actively suffering victims who need protection. Is that perhaps an invalid self-image? Are you [Noonan here is posing the question to politically correct college students] perhaps less needy than demanding? You seem to be demanding a safety no one else in the world gets. If you were so vulnerable, intimidated and weak, you wouldn’t really be able to attack and criticize your professors, administrators and fellow students so ably and successfully, would you?
Are you a bunch of frail and sensitive little bullies? Is it possible you’re not intimidated but intimidators?
Speaking of which, my Mercatus Center colleague Veronique de Rugy and her co-author Diane Katz tell us why export jobs in the U.S. won’t disappear if the that great geyser of cronyism, the U.S. Export-Import Bank, is shuttered, as it should be, for good.