The International Migration of People. Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister of France: If there were fewer immigrants, there would be less unemployment, fewer tensions in certain towns and neighborhoods, and lower social cost. Liberation [A Paris newspaper]: That has never been formally proven.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
The International Migration of People
Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister of France: If there were fewer immigrants, there would be less unemployment, fewer tensions in certain towns and neighborhoods, and lower social cost.
Liberation [A Paris newspaper]: That has never been formally proven.
Chirac: It is easy to imagine, nevertheless.
(From an October 30, 1984 interview)
Population Labor Force
Austria 9.1 9.9
Belgium 8.7 8.8
Denmark 4.8 3.2
France 5.6 6.1
Germany 8.9 9.1
Italy 2.1 1.7
Netherlands 4.2 2.9
Sweden 5.6 5.1
United Kingdom 3.8 3.9
Japan 1.2 1.0
United States 9.811.7
1The definition of “foreign” differs among countries; in Australia, Canada, and the U.S., the percentages are for “foreign-born” people, for the rest of the countries, the percentages are for people classified as ethnically-foreign
Source: OECD (2001), OECD Employment Outlook, Paris: OECD, June.
Decade Number (thousands) Rate1
1931-1940 528 0.4
1991-1998 (8 yrs.)7,604 4.1
1 Number of immigrants per thousand residents of the United States.
Source: United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States 1999, 117th Edition, Washington, DC, 1999.
year% of Populationyear% of Population
1850 9.71930 11.6
1860 13.21940 8.8
1870 14.41950 6.9
1880 13.31960 5.4
1890 14.81970 4.7
1900 13.61980 6.2
1910 14.71990 7.9
1920 13.22000 10.4
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, www.census.gov, March 10, 2001.
Owners of other (non‑labor) factors:loss of e + g! 87.50
Remaining workers:gain of e+ 75.00
Net change in real income:loss of g! 12.50
Workers originally in France:loss of E! 100.00
Owners of other (non‑labor) factors:gain of E + G+ 125.00
Net change in real income:gain of G+ 25.00
Loss of wages in Moroccoloss of h! 50.00
Gain of wages in Francegain of H+ 200.00
Net change in real income:gain of (H ! h)+ 150.00
World (1 + 2 + 3):
Net change in Moroccan real income:loss of g! 12.50
Net change in French real income:gain of G+ 25.00
Net change in immigrants’ real income:gain of (H!h)+ 150.00
Net gain:gain of (H+G) ! (h+g) +$162.50
In their survey of immigration research, Rachel Friedberg and Jennifer Hunt concluded that:
Despite the popular belief that immigrants have a large adverse impact on the wages and employment opportunities of the native-born population, the literature on this question does not provide much support for this conclusion. Economic theory is equivocal, and empirical estimates in a variety of settings and using a variety of approaches have shown that the effect of immigration on the labor market outcomes of natives is small. There is no evidence of economically significant reductions in native employment.
Source: Rachel M. Friedberg and Jennifer Hunt (1995), “The Impact of Immigrants on Host Country Wages, Employment and Growth,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9(2), p. 42.
There are several reasons why the relationship between immigration and long-run economic growth will be positive in the destination country: