« More economists get picked up | Main | The case for economic turbulence? »
Mexican immigration
Here is my New York Times column; the topic is familiar but the slant is new: I consider the problematic incentives for Mexican education. Here is the beginning of the problem:
A high school diploma brings higher wages in Mexico, but in the United States the more educated migrants do not earn noticeably more than those who have less education. Education does not much raise the productivity of hard physical labor. The result is that the least educated Mexicans have the most reason to cross the border. In addition, many Mexicans, knowing they may someday go to the United States, see less reason to invest in education.
Here is another commonly neglected point:
Unfortunately, we cannot expect a wealthier Mexico to resolve migration problems, at least not within the short- or even medium-run. The evidence suggests that good times in Mexico give the poor the means to leave, while keeping the better-educated males at home in good jobs.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on November 30, 2006 at 07:44 AM in Economics | Permalink
Comments
The article does a good job of proposing a theory to blame Mexico's economic and educational problems for helping incubate migration to the
United States. The article attempts to grasp (albiet, a difficult task)em with no easy solutions. As the article states, one cannot shut out illegal immigration without strong financial and social consequences for the U.S.
However, what I would like to have seen the article touch on is the social inequalities prevalent in Mexico. Much like the United States, a large population is systematically discrimmated against, largely poor, rural Mexicans. Mexico is a rich country, with many natural rsources and labor capital. However, the wealth largely stays with within the higher classes, largely descendants of Mexico's Spanish colonizers. Mixed and and especially indigenous Mexicans have never benefitted from the Spanish invasion, with many never learning to Speak Spanish properly, due to the lack of educational and cultural assimilation in Mexico. The problem is that Mexico's social system offers no real advancement opportunities, in part because, as Mr. Cowen alluded to, educational opportunities.
If the United States government had serious intentions to address the illegal immigration issues, they would, as Mr. Cowen stated, look into Mexico's interiror issues, and invest in its neighbor. Not so much economically, but politically. Instead of supporting business conservatives, the United States should support social liberals and economic liberals, who want to provide the basics and means to get ahead for Mexicans. Alternative President-elect Lopez Obrador, who "lost" the election in July by less than 2 percent, sees illegal immigraiton to teh North as Mexico's shame. He wants to see Mexicans prosper in their own country. Conservatives, such as the PAN and PRI, would rather see poor, less educated "brown" Mexicans out of their country, but still see their remittances.
Anti-immigration proponents in the United States should look at long-term solutions, which include helping build Mexico's economic infrastructure to be more socially responsible. For years, the United States has helped foster the types of social inequalities in Mexico and Latin America by supporting conservative, fascit governments, who tend to oppress the poorer, indigenous masses, who in turn seek out a better way of life in the United States. The United States should put pressure on Mexico's Calderon to be more socially responsible, and provide better educational and financial opportunities for poor Mexicans.
Posted by: Pilsen at Nov 30, 2006 9:14:39 AM
Haven't we had hordes of the "least educated" coming from all corners of the globe for over 200 years? Journalists and academics have often written volumes about what a problem it is to have all these unwashed Irish and Italians arriving in great numbers.... but it has worked out quite well, hasn't it?
While the numbers of Mexicans arriving is quite remarkable, the benefits they provide are even more so. Why buy into the terminology that this is a problem?
I know some people who used to obsess about what a "problem" we have with Microsoft, but hardly anyone who considers the computer revolution to be a problem in general. Why then our new friends from Mexico?
Posted by: Dave Meleney at Nov 30, 2006 9:51:59 AM
It's unclear to me how requiring higher level of education will curb the demand for currently illegal Mexican labor if the current American labor market doesn't see the need for higher education levels. Such a restriction wouldn't seem to have much effect on illegal immigration since it doesn't reflect the market's demand.
This is one of the problems with American immigration policy now. The US has relatively high minded goals that a large segment of the labor market simply doesn't meet: a appetite for labor where education level is largely irrelevant.
Posted by: shecky at Nov 30, 2006 9:56:01 AM
Yeah. What Pilzen said.
I would also argue -- based only on my personal experience, which may _not_ be representative of the nation as a whole -- that not only the poorest, least educated do immigrate illegally. It is certainly true that most of them are -- I have taught their children, in fact -- but there are also many skilled workers among them, even some with good education. The face of construction work in my area on the California Central Coast is now largely Latino, with illegals being a significant percentage of that.
The local newspaper has interviewed the 60-100+ Latino casual workers who gather in front of the local lumberyard daily, waiting to jump in the back of pickups driven by contractors who offer $10-$12 an hour for under-the-table work. At least some of these workers do have good educations, even college educations. But they get better money doing manual labor here than skilled or white-collar work in Mexico (which is not always available in any case). I draw a parallel with the black Pullman porters of the 19th/early 20th centuries. Some had college degrees, but chose to work as servants because the money was better than they could make scraping by as lawyers or professionals in black communities.
Posted by: Jones at Nov 30, 2006 10:01:29 AM
What a terrific article!
Posted by: Bruce G Charlton at Nov 30, 2006 1:43:03 PM
Pilzen - you seem to be assuming that socialism is the best way to help poor Mexicans. What evidence do you have for that?
I agree that we should be putting pressure on the Mexican government to help the poor, but through the rule of law, private property rights and a better system for helping poor people support themselves (wihtout losing everything they've worked for through corruption). Socialism/communism only makes the entire country poorer over time, although there would be a short term benefit to some from increased handouts.
The US is going to be Mexico's neighbor for a long time, so encouraging long term poverty isn't a good solution. We should encourage stronger institutions, less corruption, better education and infrastructure, and basic rights for all. The poor of Mexico could work their own way out of poverty, if they had a good system to work in. They don't need handouts, they need opportunities.
Posted by: Ann at Nov 30, 2006 2:17:34 PM
Tyler writes:
"In contrast to the men, female arrivals from Mexico still have above-average levels of education for their gender. A woman who migrates is most likely to have eight to nine years of education."
Eight to nine years of education? And that's supposed to be the good news? Oh, man ...
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Nov 30, 2006 2:21:59 PM
Completely agree with Ann. I'm Mexican and voted against Lopez Obrador in this elections. The way out of poverty is not to give handouts, but to offer means for entrepreneurs to start their own business (yeah, sometimes this means money, but it's not for free), scholarships to young people who deserve them (in contrast to giving scholarships to anybody who attends a State University), and so on. Lopez Obrador economics ideas belong more to fairy tales than to real life. Anyway, as for the article: The US would benefit from better-educated immigrants, of course.
Posted by: Flor at Nov 30, 2006 5:07:49 PM
"At least some of these workers do have good educations, even college educations"
The majority of people with college degrees in Mexico make a lot more than $12 an hour, and for college educated mexicans it's not so hard to get actual visas into America, like I have done.
Posted by: Andrés Chavez at Dec 1, 2006 1:40:37 AM
Carol Nagengast's treatise study of Poland circa 1983 "Reluctant Socialists and Rural Entrepreneurs shwoed that families strategize in rural settings through emigration.
Most Mexicans also don't want to assimilate necessarily, or if they do, it's part of an effort to lift their families from a distance. Not that the situations are parallel, but coming across the border is entrepreneurship, whatever the level of education.
Having seen "Fast Food Nation" recently, the bleakness of life in Cody, CO does not demonstrate the various strategies behind emigration...
Like cheap oil imports, however, the US should strive not to become dependent on imported work--that is, unless we foresee going to a EU-style open border scenario, and instituting the high levels of EU human rights protections...
Posted by: Zapata at Dec 1, 2006 9:42:44 AM
What a good article! I don't know the latest stats, but in 1999, when I moved back from Mexico after seven years there, 75% of students were leaving school after fourth grade. My Mexican neighbors said it was because books were too expensive in public schools, and there were so many days off for holidays and pageant rehearsals their kids weren't getting much education. And, the village school had just allowed sex education classes, but only for sixth graders, the minority still in school. So poor families continue adding far more people than the nation's labor market can absorb.
Good treatment of a huge, complicated, issue.
Posted by: sophie jensen at Dec 1, 2006 11:48:39 AM
hispanic family values, long article a MUST READ.
Posted by: Sanjay at Dec 1, 2006 1:00:25 PM
An oft-overlooked cause of Mexico's problems is their public education system. The far-left teacher's union is all powerful. It is high in pay (at least as a % of the total education budget), and shamefully low in productivity. Mexican families with any money at all resort to private schools. Time to throw the whole system out and go to vouchers.
Posted by: EconBob at Dec 2, 2006 6:55:10 PM
All,
The invaluable Heather MacDonald has produced another gem on immigration, legal and illegal. See http://www.city-journal.com/html/16_4_hispanic_family_values.html for the article.
The sad reality is that by tolerating mass immigration from south of the border we are promoting the destruction of our society. A few quotes
"Runaway illegitimacy is creating a new U.S. underclass"
"Unless the life chances of children raised by single mothers suddenly improve, the explosive growth of the U.S. Hispanic population over the next couple of decades does not bode well for American social stability. Hispanic immigrants bring near–Third World levels of fertility to America, coupled with what were once thought to be First World levels of illegitimacy. (In fact, family breakdown is higher in many Hispanic countries than here.)"
"The government social-services sector has already latched onto this new client base; as the Hispanic population expands, so will the demands for a larger welfare state. Since conservative open-borders advocates have yet to acknowledge the facts of Hispanic family breakdown, there is no way to know what their solution to it is. But they had better come up with one quickly, because the problem is here—and growing."
Posted by: Peter Schaeffer at Dec 4, 2006 5:24:12 PM
Tyler, you tell us that "a [Mexican] high school diploma brings higher wages in Mexico, but in the United States the more educated [Mexican] migrants do not earn noticeably more than those who have less education."
You then write that many Mexicans wish to migrate to the USA, so they neglect education in Mexico because it will not reward them in the USA.
You propose to relieve two problems inside Mexico:
1. "[M]any Mexicans, knowing they may someday go to the
United States, see less reason to invest in education."
2. "[T]he migration-driven gender imbalance of rural Mexico. It is common for villages to have many unmarried young women, but virtually no young men. The women who are married often go without their husbands for years. The remaining men are more likely to treat their women badly, knowing they can always find another partner."
You propose to relieve only one problem inside the
USA: "Less-educated migrants are more likely to bring crime
and social problems, and they are less likely to ssimilate."
To fix the USA-side problem, You suggest we "tighten the
border." Then you go on to suggest that we admit
more-educated Mexicans legally, to give Mexicans an incentive to obtain more education in Mexico.
Well, if we only tighten the border (that is, exclude most would-be Mexican immigrants), that, by your reasoning, would solve the Mexican problems you identify. We wouldn't need to admit any Mexicans, high-schooled or otherwise.
Suppose we end most Mexican immigration. Mexicans will discover greater incentives to education (Problem 1), because (as you told us), educated Mexicans earn more in Mexico.
When we end most Mexican immigration, Mexican women will be able to marry Mexican men without following them North (Problem 2). The men will even be better-educated thanks to the shift in incentives.
By your own analysis, there is no reason to admit any significant number of Mexicans to the USA. When we admit more, we admit "crime and social problems" with them. When we admit more, we reduce their incentive to assimilate (since they can live in Mexican-immigrant barrios, and support rent-seeking "community leaders").
There's another reason to close the border. Since doing so would adjust incentives to produce happy, well-educated Mexican couples in Mexico we could then spare American taxpayers the cost of doctoring, educating, policing, and income-supporting those happy Mexican couples and their offspring.
As for giving American employers incentive to upgrade their capital investments to make better use of more educated workers... well, deprived of uneducated Mexicans they would be more likely to make that upgrade and then employ Americans (who are generally "better educated" than Mexican immigrants if only because they are native English speakers).
Posted by: Mark Seecof at Dec 5, 2006 1:42:31 PM
It's excellent
Posted by: Kenny Escobar at Dec 22, 2006 11:09:34 AM
Posted by: 鑽石 at Apr 3, 2008 2:15:58 AM
Mabinogi Gold
Mabinogi online gold
Mabinogi money
cheap Mabinogi gold
buy Mabinogi gold
Posted by: aion kina at Mar 20, 2009 10:48:36 PM
You raise an important issue. I agree it is better to get educated illegals than uneducated illegals. But both have a negative effect on us. Educated illegals usually have a higher self esteem. They set higher goals and dreams. They maintain higher ethics and morals than the uneducated. But once they settle, these are the ones who set up safe houses for the purpose of bringing in more illegals, usually endless family members. The uneducated illegals stay unstable in the work force. This leads them towards income from breeding, pushing drugs, thievery, and other criminal behavior.
I don’t see Mexico loosing it’s corruption. In Mexico, a fast talking shyster usually makes a good living. So do police, politicians, and drug cartels. I do not see the culture moving away from predator and prey. I don’t see it moving to modern society accept in the cities or tourist areas. Even there, the outskirts remain without what we would consider basic: running water, electricity, and indoor toilets. Education usually benefits those who come from the educated and privileged.
We have been unwilling to close the borders. We have been unwilling to punish employers. We have been unwilling to withhold benefits. We have been unwilling to stop anchor citizenship.
The window for stopping the Mexican invasion is closing soon. Whites will be a minority in the near future.
What is the answer? What is the solution? How do you make both countries do what they have no desire to do? We need to ensure Mexicans in the US benefit the US. We need to ensure Mexico invests in itself and it’s people. We need to assist Mexico become first world. We need to ensure Mexico benefits the US while benefiting itself.
Posted by: Dave Paris at May 14, 2009 5:02:37 AM
The far-left teacher's union is all powerful. It is high in pay (at least as a % of the total education budget), and shamefully low in productivity. Mexican families with any money at all resort to private schools. Time to throw the whole system out and go to vouchers.
Posted by: club penguin at May 19, 2009 9:35:41 PM
thank you. Beatifull Archile !
sohpet - muhabbet - sohpet-çet - sohbet - chat - sohbet kanallari - sohbet - kızlarla sohbet - sohbet chat - sesli sohbet - sesli chat - kamerali sohbet - kamerali chat sohbet - chat - sohbet - sohbet odaları - sohbet kanalları - mirc indir - mirc - bedava mirc - burç - burc - siir - haberler - Sohbet - sohbet siteleri - Müzik Dinle - mp3 Dinle - Dizi izle - Dizi izle - yonja sohbet - sohbet sitesi - sohpet sohbet - ajans
Posted by: bytamer at Jun 12, 2009 8:07:42 PM
