Showing posts with label legal immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legal immigration. Show all posts

Saturday, February 22, 2014

59% Want Legal Immigration Cut in Half

Railroaded Immigration Increases Likely, But No Wage Hike
by w

“The reason that Americans are not getting a raise right now is because there are 20 million Americans unemployed”
--Heritage Foundation Economist, Stephen Moore. 

 

First, let’s take a look at how much value the minimum wage has lost over the years.  In 1964, the minimum wage was $1.25 per hour, at that time you could choose to take your hour’s pay in silver Quarters (1964 was the last year of silver coinage).    As of this writing, coinflation.com place the melt-value of a 1964 Washington Quarter at $3.95.  So the commensurate minimum wage today would be  $19.75 per hour, or five silver Quarters.  What the policy wonks are telling us is, that we cannot afford to bring your wages up to 51% of 1964 levels ($10.10)  and we need to increase labor competition through increased immigration.

In January, Jennifer Moore, a former Hollywood labor attorney turned Washington Post blogger, vouches for Stephen Moore’s credentials as a fellow pro-Immigration Reform wonk.  But what I really interesting today is a 1997 article co-written by, Moore, and former Cato Institute immigration propagandist, Stuart Anderson, “Cutting Immigration Myths Down to Size”. 

The final myth: Immigration must be reduced because Americans say so in polls. When polled within the appropriate context, Americans favor immigration.

Bringing your attention to, “When polled within the appropriate context,…”  is what these highly paid knuckleheads have been doing for the past seventeen years, designing poll questions that will not allow the majority of respondents to honestly answer due to an incomplete array of possible answers, and/or the question itself is not representative of the findings they will spin in the media. 

Fortunately, NumbersUSA conducted a recent poll that was examined by the Washington Times, which allowed the 1000 likely voting respondents a complete access to a complete array of possible answers.

Americans want legal immigration cut in half: poll

By Stephen Dinan The Washington Times Friday, February 21, 2014

You won’t find a link to the NumbersUSA poll but it is published here: https://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/FEB2014_NationalPoll_0.pdf 

NumbersUSA didn’t have to create questions “within the appropriate context,”  straightforward questions and wide array of answers, I’ll leave you with a few findings.

  • 59% want Legal Immigration reduced to 1/2 of current levels, 43% want Legal Immigration reduced to 1/10th of current levels. Only 11% are in favor of an immigration increase.

e* Currently the government allows one million legal immigrants each year. How many
legal immigrants should the government allow each year -- two million, one million, a
half-million, 100,000, or zero?

11% Two million
16% One million
16% Half a million
17% 100,000
26% Zero
14% Not sure

GROUPINGS
27% One million or more (keep same or increase)
59% Half-million or less (reduce by at least half)
43% Zero or 100,000

  • On the question of controlling access to employment, social benefits and self deportation…

m* Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose proposals to encourage most illegal immigrants to go back home on their own by keeping them from getting jobs and public benefits here?


41% Strongly support
22% Somewhat support
14% Somewhat oppose
14% Strongly oppose
9% Not sure

GROUPINGS:
63% Strongly or Somewhat SUPPORT

28% Strongly or Somewhat OPPOSE

  • Dream Act

h* Concerning young adult illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children -- are
you very sympathetic, somewhat sympathetic, not very sympathetic or not at all
sympathetic to their request for lifetime work permits and legal status?

28% Very sympathetic
35% Somewhat sympathetic
20% Not very sympathetic
14% Not at all sympathetic
3% Not sure

GROUPING
63% Very or Somewhat Sympathetic
34% Not At All or Not Very Sympathetic

  • Visa OverStay

i* Concerning adult foreign citizens who came here on vacation, as students or temporary
workers and then overstayed their visas -- are you very sympathetic, somewhat
sympathetic, not very sympathetic or not at all sympathetic to their request for lifetime
work permits and legal status?

6% Very sympathetic
21% Somewhat sympathetic
32% Not very sympathetic
38% Not at all sympathetic
3% Not sure

GROUPING
27% Very or Somewhat Sympathetic
70% Not At All or Not Very Sympathetic

In closing, I suggest that the American voters insist that any adjustment for those who are out of status (illegal), decrement the count of future available (legal) visas on a one to one basis.  Under a program where we sort out the mess first, before taking in new immigrants that will immediately need employment and housing. I contend we will get wages and spending up during a immigration moratorium and then re-examine job creation data to determine realistic legal immigration levels.

Saturday, July 7, 2012

The Migration Metric

We are a nation of immigrants!

We are also a nation that burned coal for home heating and continues to burn coal for electricity.  Just because we have “always” practiced something, does that mean we should continue to do it? Even after we have identified that the practice has problems?

Our open door immigration policy has created a “Catch 22” problem, spiraling housing costs, and the subsequent salary-requirement to service housing costs, have made the United States an unattractive destination for employment creation.  Immigrant competition for employment stagnates wages (as the US dollar devalues) and immigrants compete for housing, causing “sticky” rental housing rates, which reverberate throughout the housing industry.

The following tables demonstrate employment growth by presidential term since 1976. 
“Sample Population” is our control group, which references growth in persons that can only come from native births, or immigration.  The Migration Metric clearly shows that the immigration subsidy affecting labor and housing must be curtailed.



Jimmy Carter
Served 1977–1981
image




Ronald Reagan
Served 1981-1989
image



George H. W. Bush
Served 1989–1993
image



Bill Clinton
Served 1993–2001
image



George W. Bush
Served 2001–2009
image



Barack Obama
Served 2009 – Present
image
Data: January 2009 to June 2012

With only 11% of the added population counted as  entering the Labor Force, and only 24.6% of that new Labor Force finding employment, shouldn’t we stop “burning” our citizens with mass-immigration policy?

Addendum:
There seems to be some confusion about the Obama era and baby-boomers aging out of the work force. 

Through May 2012, the population growth for those 65 and over, grew by 3,924,000.  If we deduct this population from the “Sample”, we would also have to deduct the employment growth in the 65 and over age-group.  Deducting those  1,170,000  jobs from the “Sample” would put the Obama Presidential term employment growth at roughly –900,000 for those under age 65.

Source Data:
BLS  “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey”
Series title:         (Seas) Population Level -- Series Id:           LNS10000000
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level -- Series Id:           LNS11000000
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level -- Series Id:           LNS12000000
Data extracted on: July 6, 2012 (2:22:28 PM)

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Census: Three New Immigrants for Every New Job

For the decade, 6.9 million immigrants found employment while only 2 million jobs were created. There isn't really much to say except that people who are advocating more immigration must also be barking mad. 

Taken from Census CPS and BLS CPS data.
OccupationNewly Employed Immigrants
--
Percent of Emp.
Level Gain
Employment Level Loss/Gain
Arrived 2000 or later(2)(Avg. yr. 2010 - 2000)
.Management, professional, and related occupationsMajor1,629,000  (30%) 5,442,000
..Management, business, and financial494,000 1,347,000
..Professional and related1,135,000 4,095,000
.Service occupationsMajor2,106,000  (55%) 3,857,000
.Sales and office occupationsMajor985,000  (100%)+ (2,736,000)
..Sales and related600,000 (335,000)
..Office and administrative385,000 (2,401,000)
.Farming, fishing, and forestry occupationsMajor149,000  (100%)+ (181,000)
.Construction, extraction, and maintenance occupationsMajor977,000  (100%)+ (534,000)
..Construction and extraction817,000 (445,000)
..Installation, maintenance, and repair160,000 93,000
.Production, transportation, and material moving occupationsMajor1,068,000  (100%)+ (3,857,000)
..Production597,000 (3,465,000)
..Transportation and material moving471,000 (392,000)
Total (Employed) Immigrant Gain and Employment Level GainTotal 6,914,000 1,991,000
Percent of Employment Level Gain to New Arrival Immigrants % 347%

Maybe Stuart Anderson's, National Foundation for American Policy would like to respond to these numbers.

About the Data:
"Employment Level Loss/Gain" is BLS-CPS data where year 2000 avg. employment levels are subtracted from year 2010 avg. employment levels.

"Employed Immigrants" is the Census-CPS employment status of immigrants arriving after the year 2000.  
(2) The category 'Arrived 2000 or later' includes 2000-2010





Data:
Occupation of Employed Foreign-Born Civilian Workers 16 Years and Over by Sex and Year of Entry: 2010
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2010.
Internet release date: 9/2011
http://www.census.gov/population/foreign/files/cps2010/T2.7.xls

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Data extracted on: December 12, 2011 (11:55:42 AM) 

Series Id:           LNU02032201
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Management, Professional, and Related Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Management, professional, and related occupations (0008-3540)

Series Id:           LNU02032202
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Management, Business, and Financial Operations Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Management, business, and financial operations occupations (0009-0950)

Series Id:           LNU02032203
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Professional and Related Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Professional and related occupations (0999-3540)

Series Id:           LNU02032204
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Service Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Service occupations (3598-4650)

Series Id:           LNU02032205
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Sales and Office Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Sales and office occupations (4699-5930)

Series Id:           LNU02032206
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Sales and Related Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Sales and related occupations (4700-4960)


Series Id:           LNU02032207
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Office and Administrative Support Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Office and administrative support occupations (5000-5930)

Series Id:           LNU02032208
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations (5999-7620)


Series Id:           LNU02032209
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations (6000-6130)


Series Id:           LNU02032210
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Construction and Extraction Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Construction and extraction occupations (6200-6940)

Series Id:           LNU02032211
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations (7000-7620)

Series Id:           LNU02032212
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Production, Transportation and Material Moving Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Production, transportation, and material moving occupations (7699-9750)

Series Id:           LNU02032213
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Production Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Production occupations (7700-8960)

Series Id:           LNU02032214
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Unadj) Employment Level - Transportation and Material Moving Occupations
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Occupation:          Transportation and material moving occupations (9000-9750)

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

College Graduate Underutilization 20.2% (5.059 million Americans)

(Correction made on 8/28/11 see Notes:)

In 2006, the number of underemployed, native-born, college educated Americans (5.059 million) was roughly the same as the total number of foreign-born college-educated immigrants employed in the workforce (5.099 million). In this case, underemployed is defined as working as babysitters, telemarketers, dishwashers, cab drivers, and in other unskilled jobs.

A study created by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) in 2008, draws attention to the underemployed, foreign-born, college degreed persons employed in the United States. I could not find any reference in the text about the plight of underemployed, native-born college graduates, but the data tables in the study allowed me to extract some numbers for this article.

MPI focused this study on comparing the percentages of native-born (17.7%) and foreign-born (22.0%) working in unskilled occupations, stressing the need to avoid a condition of “brain waste” of the foreign-born -- without equal concern for the native-born. Displaying the percentage of underemployed in each group seems a bit dishonest without displaying the total underemployed of each educated group -- here are those figures:

Underemployed Level and percentage of each respective labor force:

Underemployed native-born = 5,099,094 (17.7% of employed)
Underemployed foreign-born = 1,121,263 (20.0% of employed)

MPI was kind enough to provide unemployment estimates of the native-born graduates 893,134 (2.6%) and the foreign-born graduates 223,031 (3.7%). For the purpose of this article let’s add these underemployed and unemployed figures and call it an Underutilization Level

Underutilization Level and percentage of each respective labor force:

Underutilization Level: native-born college graduates = 5,952,275 (20.2%)
Underutilization Level: foreign-born college graduates = 1,344,294 (25.3%)

Over the years that I’ve been researching the H-1B visa debate, I’ve had to read more economic papers than anybody should have to. The near identical number of underemployed native-born and the number of employed foreign-born graduates bring a couple of economic terms to mind. The first term is “Economic equilibrium” and the second is “Shocking the economy with immigration.”

The MPI data suggests that the High-skill employment sector has been shocked with immigration and that the U.S. and Global economies are not in a state of equilibrium. Most of the "pro" High-skill (H-1B) immigration articles I read now have a protectionist slant; we need to employ “them” so they won’t compete against us. The MPI study also mentions this pirating of foreign educational resources, claiming benefit to America because 54.3% of immigrants are educated elsewhere, at no expense to the United States.

It is completely naive to suggest there is no expense to the United States concerning High-skill immigration, these immigrants have displaced, or eliminated opportunities for, native-born individuals whom are most likely to be mortgage holders and student-loan obligees. Additionally, the suggestion that the housing market can be improved by increasing High-skill immigration in an economy where employment growth is negative in relation to increases in the workforce is absurd. Many U.S. employers seem to prefer temporary non-immigrants because they are mobile and do not have a salary-requirement that include a mortgage and student loan. Moreover, travel Per-Diem and moving expenses are trivial for employees with no ties to a specific community.

A second focal point of the MPI report observes that with the exception of Europe, foreign-born graduates of foreign colleges do not fare as well as the foreign-born graduates of U.S. colleges. A case in point is that Asian born immigrants represented 50% of the employed foreign-born (2,555,014); moreover, Asian immigrants generally represent about 50% of H-1B visas granted yearly.

The MPI study disaggregates employed immigrants in the following categories.

Foreign educated by place of birth: Recent arrivals (less than 10 years)
Foreign educated by place of birth: Long term (more than 10 years)
U.S. educated by place of birth

An observation of the Asian immigrant population suggests that as years go by, employers become disenchanted with the Bachelors degreed, Asian-born whom were educated abroad. MPI suggests that Asian colleges have improved in recent years and the movement of these graduates toward lower skill positions is not a trend. However, the MPI supposition does not take into account aging technical specialties, or consider that some immigrants leave the United States because they have found themselves working in unskilled occupation.

Bachelors Degree, Born in Asia

Foreign Educated: Recent Arrivals: (370,424)

Percent employed in high skilled 43.2%
Percent employed in skilled technical 26,7%
Percent employed in unskilled 30.1%

Foreign Educated: Long Term: (365,916)

Percent employed in high skilled 32.6%
Percent employed in skilled technical 32.8%
Percent employed in unskilled 34.6%

U.S. Educated, Born in Asia (685,970)

Percent employed in high skilled 53.5%
Percent employed in skilled technical 23.4%
Percent employed in unskilled 21.0%

The table above indicates that foreign-educated Asian immigrants are more likely to experience underemployment as they leave temporary immigrant status for permanent residency.

The policy implications of "shocking" High-skill occupations with immigration is not without risk, many Science and Technology degrees become obsolete within a decade. Loose High-skill immigration policy, which allows a foreign-born underutilization rate of 26.4%, removes the employer’s motivation to invest in the technical expertise of their human-capital (employees).

The U.S. is granting permanent residence for Science and Technology skills that are temporary. It is rather obvious that the minimum educational requirement for business-immigration to the United States needs to be raised to the postgraduate level.


Source:

UNEVEN PROGRESS

The Employment Pathways of Skilled Immigrants in the United States
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/BrainWasteOct08.pdf

Notes: Underutilization Levels were incorrectly divided by the number of employed.  Corrected levels are the divided by the number of employed plus the number of unemployed. 

Corrected:
Underutilization Level and percentage of each respective labor force:


Underutilization Level: native-born college graduates = 5,952,275 (20.2%)
Underutilization Level: foreign-born college graduates = 1,344,294 (25.3%)




Incorrect:
Underutilization Level and percentage of each respective labor force:


Underutilization Level: native-born college graduates = 5,952,275 (20.8%)
Underutilization Level: foreign-born college graduates = 1,344,294 (26.4%)



Monday, April 20, 2009

Something to Teaparty about.

Current U.S. employment growth is below the levels of the 1950's -- not just in percentages -- in real numbers.

Employment growth when divided by Population growth, to create a percentage statistic, is a meager 19.57%. This means that there has only been one job created for every five persons (16 and older) entering the workforce since Dec. 31, 1999.

How can we bring in over one million legal immigrants per year, if we can't create enough jobs to employ our own children? If this isn't a depression, the government seems hell-bent to create one.

The reason we Teaparty is because our Representatives appear to represent citizens of other countries and Global Corporate Citizens.

1950's
Population Growth = 11,516,000
Employment Growth = 7,215,000 (62.65%)

1960's
Population Growth = 19,449,000
Employment Growth = 13,862,000 (71.27%)

1970's
Population Growth = 30,811,000 (Depression in Mexico)
Employment Growth = 21,224,000 (68.88%)

1980's
Population Growth = 20,865,000
Employment Growth = 17,685,000 (84.76%)

1990's
Population Growth = 21,667,000
Employment Growth = 16,998,000 (78.45%)

2000's (Mar. 2009)
Population Growth = 26,254,000
Employment Growth = 5,137,000 (19.57%)


Avg for previous 1950'- 1990's = (73.20%)
Avg. employment growth for 2000's should/would have been: = 19,218,994

Employment Shortfall 2000-2009 (March) = 14,081,994


From David Ricardo. On Wages

The market price of labour is the price which is really paid for it, from the natural operation of the proportion of the supply to the demand; labour is dear when it is scarce, and cheap when it is plentiful. However much the market price of labour may deviate from its natural price, it has, like commodities, a tendency to conform to it.

It is when the market price of labour exceeds its natural price, that the condition of the labourer is flourishing and happy, that he has it in his power to command a greater proportion of the necessaries and enjoyments of life, and therefore to rear a healthy and numerous family. When, however, by the encouragement which high wages give to the increase of population, the number of labourers is increased, wages again fall to their natural price, and indeed from a reaction sometimes fall below it.

When the market price of labour is below its natural price, the condition of the labourers is most wretched: then poverty deprives them of those comforts which custom renders absolute necessaries. It is only after their privations have reduced their number, or the demand for labour has increased, that the market price of labour will rise to its natural price, and that the labourer will have the moderate comforts which the natural rate of wages will afford.


http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/ricardo-wages.html

Source Data:
BLS CPS Downloaded on 4/20/2009
http://www.bls.gov/data/

Formula: Each decade represents EOY Dec XXX9 to EOY Dec XXX9
Example: Decade of 1950's = Dec 1949 to Dec. 1959.

Series Id: LNU00000000

Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Population Level
Labor force status: Civilian noninstitutional population
Age: 16 years and over

Series Id: LNU02000000
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Age: 16 years and over