Immigration is probably the biggest issue in the country right now, running up there with the economy. Recently, the Congressional Budget Office did a report on the effect of this rapid rise in immigration across our southern border on the economy.
Economic theory is pretty clear what’s going to happen, and CBO validated that. The first thing they noted is the economy will be larger. Well, yes, more workers, larger economy. The headline that you saw was a little bit eye-catching, and that’s how it was intended. Over the next 10 years combined, GDP, our size of our economy, will be $7 trillion higher than it otherwise would. Think of that as 700 billion more a year. So by the end of the decade, but they do over 10-year periods, we’re going to have a GDP that is 2% more than it otherwise would be. Sounds good, larger economy.
There is a catch. We’re going to have 3% more workers, 5.2 million more workers, 3% more workers to produce 2% more GDP.
Oops. That means less output per worker. We will be poorer, even though the economy will be larger. More precisely, we will be poorer on average, because the economy will be larger. Real wages, according to the CBO, will fall eight tenths of a percent. So right now, if you’re making say, $50,000, your purchasing power is gonna go down by about $400 as a result of the immigration.
Well, that’s a little bit of a mixed bag. There is a second drawback to all of this, and that is higher inequality. And I don’t think the public discussion focuses enough on this issue.
Few things happen. First, the people crossing the border are lower-end workers, not a comment about them as people, it’s common about the skill sets they’re bringing. You know, only 28% of American jobs are filled by people with high school education or less. Most have at least some training after high school, oftentimes an associate’s degree or a training in, say, carpentry or some skill. Most of the workers coming across the border do not have that. And so they’re coming into a market, which is not the whole economy, but less than a third of the economy.
More supply of those workers is going to push down wages in that sector, basic law of supply and demand. So lower-end workers in particular are going to feel the brunt of the decline in wages.
Second, because lower-end wages go down, employers are going to make less investment in labor-replacing capital, new technologies. You’ve probably gone to a computer to order in your local McDonald’s, for example. There’ll be less of that, because the workers are going to be so much cheaper.
So what we’re going to see is a decline in the amount of money going to labor and an increase in the amount of money going to capital. Well, labor is a lot more evenly distributed than capital. And so the returns, the extra returns to people who own capital, i.e. the rich people, are going to go up. That is one cause of more inequality.
The second cause has to do with what’s going to happen in labor income. As I mentioned, it’s really people in the bottom third or so of the workforce that are going to face the competition from all these extra workers. Their wages are going to go down sharply.
But if you’re not one of those workers, particularly if you’re at the top of the income distribution, having more of those workers around is a good thing, right? If nannies and gardeners and people who pick crops and what have you are more plentiful and cheaper, then the stuff you buy is cheaper as well. So we have another source of transfer from lower-income people to higher-income people as a result of the extra immigration.
So we have a larger economy, but one in which we’re on average poor, and one which is more unequal. You can choose which you think is most important. But simply having a larger economy really doesn’t make us better off. Our focus should be on raising wages and on making us a more equal country. I think that is the big import of the CBO report, that on balance, these extra workers are not good at helping America achieve its economic objectives.
Related
Larry Lindsey
President & CEO, The Lindsey Group
View Video LibraryCommentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
How could RFK Jr. impact 2024 election?
13 hrs ago
Peter Zeihan
Global warming won’t impact Russian-Chinese shipping
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
Can other nations replicate success of US shale revolution?
Wednesday
Peter Zeihan
Peace between Israel and Iran, at least for now
Tuesday
Peter Zeihan
Immigration will lower wages and cause more income inequality
Feb 19
By Straight Arrow News
The impact of immigration on the U.S. economy is a subject of continued debate following failed negotiations on immigration reform in Congress. Recently, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published a report that attempted to sift through the arguments and lay out precise forecasts for economic growth linked to immigration over the next ten years.
Straight Arrow News contributor Larry Lindsey reviews the CBO report and argues the United States should focus on reducing income inequality and raising average wages rather than just growing GDP. If those are America’s goals, Lindsey says, then the nation must oppose higher levels of immigration, even if that means accepting a smaller U.S. economy overall.
Immigration is probably the biggest issue in the country right now, running up there with the economy. Recently, the Congressional Budget Office did a report on the effect of this rapid rise in immigration across our southern border on the economy.
Economic theory is pretty clear [about] what’s going to happen, and CBO validated that. The first thing they noted is the economy will be larger. Well, yes, more workers, larger economy. The headline that you saw was a little bit eye-catching, and that’s how it was intended. Over the next 10 years combined, GDP, our size of our economy, will be $7 trillion higher than it otherwise would. Think of that as 700 billion more a year. So by the end of the decade, but they do over 10-year periods, we’re going to have a GDP that is 2% more than it otherwise would be. Sounds good, larger economy.
There is a catch. We’re going to have 3% more workers, 5.2 million more workers, 3% more workers to produce 2% more GDP. Oops. That means less output per worker. We will be poorer, even though the economy will be larger. More precisely, we will be poorer on average, because the economy will be larger. Real wages, according to the CBO, will fall eight-tenths of a percent. So right now, if you’re making, say $50,000, your purchasing power is gonna go down by about $400 as a result of the immigration.
Immigration is probably the biggest issue in the country right now, running up there with the economy. Recently, the Congressional Budget Office did a report on the effect of this rapid rise in immigration across our southern border on the economy.
Economic theory is pretty clear what’s going to happen, and CBO validated that. The first thing they noted is the economy will be larger. Well, yes, more workers, larger economy. The headline that you saw was a little bit eye-catching, and that’s how it was intended. Over the next 10 years combined, GDP, our size of our economy, will be $7 trillion higher than it otherwise would. Think of that as 700 billion more a year. So by the end of the decade, but they do over 10-year periods, we’re going to have a GDP that is 2% more than it otherwise would be. Sounds good, larger economy.
There is a catch. We’re going to have 3% more workers, 5.2 million more workers, 3% more workers to produce 2% more GDP.
Oops. That means less output per worker. We will be poorer, even though the economy will be larger. More precisely, we will be poorer on average, because the economy will be larger. Real wages, according to the CBO, will fall eight tenths of a percent. So right now, if you’re making say, $50,000, your purchasing power is gonna go down by about $400 as a result of the immigration.
Well, that’s a little bit of a mixed bag. There is a second drawback to all of this, and that is higher inequality. And I don’t think the public discussion focuses enough on this issue.
Few things happen. First, the people crossing the border are lower-end workers, not a comment about them as people, it’s common about the skill sets they’re bringing. You know, only 28% of American jobs are filled by people with high school education or less. Most have at least some training after high school, oftentimes an associate’s degree or a training in, say, carpentry or some skill. Most of the workers coming across the border do not have that. And so they’re coming into a market, which is not the whole economy, but less than a third of the economy.
More supply of those workers is going to push down wages in that sector, basic law of supply and demand. So lower-end workers in particular are going to feel the brunt of the decline in wages.
Second, because lower-end wages go down, employers are going to make less investment in labor-replacing capital, new technologies. You’ve probably gone to a computer to order in your local McDonald’s, for example. There’ll be less of that, because the workers are going to be so much cheaper.
So what we’re going to see is a decline in the amount of money going to labor and an increase in the amount of money going to capital. Well, labor is a lot more evenly distributed than capital. And so the returns, the extra returns to people who own capital, i.e. the rich people, are going to go up. That is one cause of more inequality.
The second cause has to do with what’s going to happen in labor income. As I mentioned, it’s really people in the bottom third or so of the workforce that are going to face the competition from all these extra workers. Their wages are going to go down sharply.
But if you’re not one of those workers, particularly if you’re at the top of the income distribution, having more of those workers around is a good thing, right? If nannies and gardeners and people who pick crops and what have you are more plentiful and cheaper, then the stuff you buy is cheaper as well. So we have another source of transfer from lower-income people to higher-income people as a result of the extra immigration.
So we have a larger economy, but one in which we’re on average poor, and one which is more unequal. You can choose which you think is most important. But simply having a larger economy really doesn’t make us better off. Our focus should be on raising wages and on making us a more equal country. I think that is the big import of the CBO report, that on balance, these extra workers are not good at helping America achieve its economic objectives.
Related
Biden’s EV math just doesn’t add up
In March, the Biden administration issued a new directive requiring U.S. automakers to cut the average carbon emissions of their fleets by almost 50% before 2032. That order is one component of President Biden’s larger goal to cut total U.S. carbon emissions in half by 2030. A primary method for reaching these goals will involve…
Monday
President Biden just isn’t cool
For some Americans, politics is only about policy, while others prioritize core values, ideas, aspirations or beliefs. Still, for others, politics may be a reflection of culture, where voting serves as a symbolic act to proclaim cultural group identity. But for some Americans, who they vote for and support is more of a popularity contest,…
Apr 15
Federal Reserve policy should be more restrictive
The American economy is booming, with high GDP growth, record-low unemployment, and wage gains for median workers. Over the past few quarters, U.S. economic growth indicators have consistently outperformed official projections. But the U.S. Federal Reserve recently conceded that its policies might be too restrictive, hindering the full potential of the U.S. economy, which the…
Apr 8
Celebrate tight labor market, but don’t cut interest rates
While President Joe Biden has been celebrating U.S. economic success, many Americans are still unhappy about the economy. So who’s right? The most recent jobs report for February showed that while the unemployment rate rose slightly to 3.9%, job gains were higher than expected, with the total coming in at 275,000 versus the expected increase…
Mar 18
Social and economic class will define 2024 election
Following in the footsteps of FDR, Democratic support in the past hundred years has drawn largely from working-class individuals, labor unions, and civil society organizations. Republican support, conversely, tended to rely upon larger corporate donations and the support of high-income individuals. In 2024, these traditional roles are evolving, and the new reality of campaign finance…
Mar 4
Underreported stories from each side
Biden’s 13th-Quarter Approval Average Lowest Historically
8 sources | 13% from the left
AP Images
Jamie Raskin Slams Supreme Court Over Trump Immunity Case: ‘Acting Like A Bunch Of Partisan Operatives’
6 sources | 0% from the right
AP Images
Latest Stories
Biden uses NFL draft ad to try to connect with young voters
Watch 2:16
8 hrs ago
Powering pot: Energy for US cannabis industry could electrify 13.5M homes
Watch 1:29
9 hrs ago
Allies plan for Trump to have more control over interest rates
Watch 3:07
9 hrs ago
FDA: Bird flu found in 1/5 commercial milk samples, suggests greater spread
Watch 1:21
9 hrs ago
China permanently deploys warships to second overseas base
Watch 2:58
9 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
House Speaker Johnson’s foreign aid bill shows a focused GOP
14 hrs ago
Star Parker
Trump’s own behavior betrays his guilt
15 hrs ago
Dr. Rashad Richey
Portraying far-left and far-right as equal in ‘Civil War’ is wrong
Yesterday
Jordan Reid
Who will Trump pick for vice presidential running mate?
Yesterday
Matthew Continetti