Legal Immigration

Some opponents of immigration attempt to hide behind an opposition to solely illegal immigration (the "wait your turn" argument). It makes them look civic, rather than xenophobic. 

To supplement my previous post about the benefits of immigration, a nice flow chart of just how cumbersome and lengthy the legal immigration process is can be found here. Many people without direct family in the U.S.A. who would like to immigrate have no legal avenue, especially the poor and unskilled. See also, Franz Kafka's Before the Law.

Migration and its Benefits

Lower barriers to migration is by far the best policy option to increase economic growth, and reduce poverty. Yet there’s still debate and hypocrisy. How can a country, or person, who espouses the benefits of free markets be against the free flow of labor? It’s half the basic production function[1]. Anyway, if you click “read more” I intend to show that the evidence is overwhelmingly in support of freer migration. And opposition is only possible through ignorance, hypocrisy, or malice for the poor. Here are the basic conclusions showing freer migration, of both skilled and unskilled workers, is the single best policy option for the world economy.

1. Complete reduction of barriers would increase world GDP by between 67-147%. Even a small reduction in barriers would lead to welfare gains larger than the complete elimination of remaining barriers to goods and capital flows.

2. Migrants from the developing world themselves are the largest beneficiaries of migration. At the median, a migrant to the U.S. will experience a wage increase of around 4.11 times their pre-migration wage.

3. Immigration increases productivity and employment levels for all workers, including native workers.

4. No study has found large negative effects on GDP, wages, or government finances/service provision due to immigration.

5. Emigration from developing countries puts upward pressure on domestic wages, increases incentives for education, and leads to remittances. All of which make emigration a net benefit for poor countries.

Gender Differences in Developing Countries

Well this is pretty shameful:

Yet...

Innovation and Patent Laws

Believe

September Jobs Report

There's some unusual news in the area of unemployment statistics. First, in late September, the BLS issued a preliminary revision to their March 2011 – March 2012 numbers; they underestimated job growth by about 20%. In a way this is news only a statistician could love, the effect of these job gains won't change because the measurement is more accurate. And it does make the apparent slowing down of the economy look more pronounced. But it's still good news that we weren't doing as poorly as thought. The figure below shows the gains since March starting from where the revision put the total increase in jobs ending March 2012. 

The news for September in particular is complicated. The increase in total non-farm jobs was reported at 114,000. A lame number, not terrible but not any good either. The numbers would be terrible if the government was still shedding jobs, instead government employment is creeping up. On the good side the numbers for July and August were revised upwards by a total of 86,000 jobs. 

Further complicating things is the fact that the unemployment rate dropped, from 8.1% to 7.8%, and not from people leaving the labor force. It is the first time the unemployment was below 8% since January 2009. The unemployment rate is calculated using a different survey, of households rather than businesses. The household survey shows an astonishing 873,000 more jobs than in August. The household survey numbers are volatile, and the two numbers often diverge, but over time are similar in aggregate. As Floyd Norris (Chief Financial Correspondent for the New York Times) points out,
“A year ago, the the establishment numbers were looking better than the household numbers. Now the reverse is true...Over the last 24 months, however, the two reports are virtually identical, showing an additional 3.6 million jobs and workers." 

I really don't have the expertise to shed any more light on the confusing batch of statistics today. But the take away message seems to be that the economy is and was doing better than we thought, but it's still slowing down.

Rating Politicians

I was drunk during the debate, just like in '08. It helps you pay much less attention to what's being said, but notice how it's being said. Mitt Romney said everything better; Obama seemed like he forgot he had the debate that night. Also the format was terrible.

Anyway, to help judge the candidates by what they actually say and do, The Economist has (un-scientifically but whatever) polled hundreds of professional economists in the United States.

Overall Obama seems to have a lead over Romney when it comes to economic policy. Though Romney is slightly favored by business economists. The results are typically much closer on the specifics, though Obama opens up wide leads on certain issues.

The best part of these polls however, is how the economists identify themselves politically. The largest group, at 50%, is independents, followed by Democrats, with 43%, and only 7% of economists polled are Republicans. This result is nearly identical to when the same polling was done four years ago. It warms my heart to know that half of economists are independents and only 7% Republicans.

Art for Tired Eyes

Economists

"I don't know what to do
But I know what not to do"

- Volcano!