Skip to main content

tv   Brookings Institution Discussion on Migrants and Refugees  CSPAN  November 2, 2018 10:33am-12:06pm EDT

10:33 am
caiaphas been our timekeeper and just kept us on time and we appreciate that it also to cooper mckim and greg hessman for surgery on a panel. also also thank you to our wyoming broadcasting crew and a special thanks to kyle for handling the production. a quick aside, this little place has served for almost three decades for political events just like this one episode be the last as this little facility will be repurposed for student use central wyoming, and we will miss it. one final reminder, , you can se this debate again online at wyoming pbs.org and we'll make sure we see you two two days fm now ubuntu a general election debate and that will be from casper. the live stream will begin at 6 p.m. in the broadcast will begin at 8 p.m. right here on wyoming pbs. thank you all to her candidate interviews and listeners
10:34 am
watching and listening tonight. thank you and have a good evening. [applause] >> we are live for a conversation on immigration looking at migrants and refugees and impact they have on the use of economy. it's hosted the brookings institution live here on c-span2. we joined in progress. >> thank you, everybody. it's a pleasure to join you today and have a chance to talk with this book. it's been out for about a month, and i understood my marketing campaign is a little more juice yesterday when we're trading e-mails and i know the panelist for quite a long time and then he was singing when e-mail bill kristol with timmons that his book and andrew said what book? [laughing] okay, we need to work harder on that. but this will be a conversation
10:35 am
about high skilled migration around the world but particularly emphasis on the united states trying to describe where we are in terms of understanding data about this, what are some of the drivers and applications that talk about the future. what you share share with you a few highlights that come from this. one of the starting point is going to be to describe just how important high skilled emigration has been to our country over the last four to five decades. if you go back to 1975 few would have predicted how strong the growth would've been but i want to take throughout this very short presentation one example which will be about and fidgets. in 19751 out of every 12 inventions, that might've gotten a business week article but probably not of made this to the headlines of the magazine. come forward for decades and one out of every 3.5 venture is foreign-born. what you pick up from the chart
10:36 am
on the left hand side is a depiction across the six principles every. you may not pick take every sie one of these but this official use ethnic shares going up into six categories. the most important thing you can take from this is all of them are upward slope spirit it's not in confined to one particular technology and get into stronger in more advanced skills like computers and communications, electronics but even in traditional sectors like mechanical engineering we found an increase in the reliance on foreign-born. i match a question of who wants to ask is is your special or different in the space? the not so surprising answer to that is yes, it is special. we had seen higher rates of migration or high skilled migration to other locations as well. sometimes it's helpful and assuming the data to see just how unique and rhyme might be. given that we are you his focus
10:37 am
panel today let's talk about just how staggering this can look. this takes data from 2000-2010 about the debt migration of adventures around the world. the white lines that above the horizontal axis is when somebody has moved from a a foreign couy into a location in order to do inventive work. the lines unique that i would would someone of the country has moved at them. this is data developed and is over a ten year time frame. again given the size of the graph i'm not expecting you to pick out every single country but you probably notice on the right inside there is a noticeable outlier. that is of course the united states entering this time the united states received about 57% of all migrating inventors around the world. it's almost like a gigantic sucking vacuum that if you an inventor and mobile or moving around you are likely to come to the united states. going over to the side you can see some countries that have also received a lot, canada,
10:38 am
germany, have also had outflows oftentimes to the united states. sometimes they been net contributors to the global movement of inventors. one of the goals of the book is to bring together the data to understand this picture, academic research and business practice, we really gained a lot over the last 15, 20 us in terms of what we are able to measure so we want to characterize this and talk about some of the reasons why. some reasons are simple. michael has a wonderful paper that is able to document is receiving h-1b visas entered india just how much a wage gains can be when you come to the united states. there's also some more subtle reasons. for example, with what he is immigration policy gives employers a lot of power. that has led them to prioritize stem work or computer-related work for the activities. understand both the david datad some of the rationales but then importantly think about some of
10:39 am
what are the consequences we might not have otherwise understood. i want to continue but describe one of particular which is to think about the spatial concentration. go back to 1975 if you were to look at indian and chinese invention in the san francisco bay area, about one out of every two 220 pounds with either incented or coinvented by these ethnic groups. 2017, one out of every 12 patterns and america's either invented or coinvented by indian or chinese inventors in the san francisco bay area. this is an enormous spatial concentration of inventions connected to a global power. from the 1960s, '70s, '80s, they were becoming more spread out across the top cities but also development of company towns or suburban office parks. what we've seen in part is a dramatic preconcentration of
10:40 am
inventive activity. to give a sense of what out of what everyone else will these can massachusetts does account. new york does account for one out of every 12. if i was to start with the state to produce the least amount of patterns and progressively add states into this, 28 states can combine up to be one out of every 12. this has had a term its influence on a business about the location choices. it has implications for for a quality, a lot of things that we need to be considering and thinking through. part of the book is going through let us put together numbers, whether it's the students enter classrooms or the entrepreneurs come nobel prize winners but what are some of the ways this has influenced our lives in the business community. what of the things i want to emphasize that the book does is try to go and shine light on instead there's a gift of global talent. the u.s. has been a strong beneficiary that doesn't mean
10:41 am
everyone has in this country gained from this. there can be winners, also loses. let's all go and celebrate the cases where there's great big successes. to start with foreign students in enter classrooms, the ability to bring great minds and that places that can activate those passions and utilize their talents and train them, that's very powerful. that's one place we should celebrate. likewise we can go to some of our leading companies and look at the inventions that are going on inside his companies, breakthrough discoveries or how they can be more competitive in foreign markets. that's a place we want to celebrate. it's not just it's only a story about the united states and that if somebody comes, they necessarily are depriving their home region of opportunity. the book try to think about the global exchanges that can be connected to talent flows. one of those characters we meet in the book is a guy named dj lou, an entrepreneur that first
10:42 am
study in the united states in kansas and vented his early work here. then went back to his home city in southern china and worked to develop a company. the company today and for several thousand people and is sponsored local your universitd helped his home region develop. his office building does look like the starship enterprise. it is three football fields long and one football field wide and also just for the record they bought the rights to designed office building like the starship enterprise. but then there's of the cases of people that are tremendous influence can sometimes hidden while they are in the country come in the trend. the 2016 nobel prize in economics, all of his professional career at mit and that gil meche in northwestern turkey has had a significant it on his home country to helping university system with some of the ideas that we are developing, fostering business connections. he even went so far one example
10:43 am
of prompting the entrepreneurs and his home country to really develop a strong society, to try to push onto pollution in finland in a way press only an outsider could do. that group has grown and grown to the point today there's an event called slush that brings 18,000 people to the helsinki area for an extended conference about this. it is benefited a lot of local activity. slush has become so big harvard business school sent a delegation to it in order to be a part of it. just because people have come to the united states doesn't mean that it's best to a drain on the home country but we also know there's going to be cases where that is the case, that there's not a recent foreign economic exchange or business linkage to some integration that can advantage then. one of the places we going to vote is to look at who in the united states is not participating in this gift. there have been some high profile controversies or
10:44 am
scandals that of come about this. many were never in the 2016 presidential campaign and debate that there was a lot of discussion about the outsourcing that happened at this he were 250 i.t. workers lost their jobs and disney moved to a lower-cost indian outsourcing company. beyond examples like this there is evidence older tech workers in the united states can have their employment and wages opportunities that are reduced of young talent that is coming in. we want to shine a light to say that everyone within this industry thinks as a uniformly good thing. likewise, from a, just because you in one of these talent clusters of me to look upon this as always a great thing. there was a serious about four years ago of protests against the buses that tech giants used to ferry workers run the san francisco bay region. i've got an image of one of those on the right inside with a block the bus from proceeding but a lot of these protests
10:45 am
about the fact that look, it's almost like a two-tier system exists. the buses have wi-fi in and her condition and the view around on the campus is your free food and access to all the special things but we don't see the benefits as much. we pay higher rent and we face maybe even being pushed out of our traditional districts of places that we lived but how are we going to understand more? this is important to say that for the whole of the united states this is been a tremendous gift but it's not been a gift that is uniformly shared, medication can simply say always the rising tide lifts all boats. it's important to understand some boats get so in the process, overturned. why it's important is what whae talk about today, immigration is political. it's a political choice and you can in economics, business logic and so forth but at the end it is a political choice. one of the messages that come from this book is to say we need to understand who is when it was losing so perhaps we can design
10:46 am
the policies in a a better wayo tilt the even more in our defense, to make sure we get more of the winds and less of the losses. there's easy ways we can do that. it's also a bit of the message to business and to the tech community which i spent a lot of my time with both in this context and others to say this is like the world's most precious resource that's coming in and you getting preference or access to this talent but also to help make the case for the country and for the world as to why we should have this, what are the benefits that we are all receiving. as we look to the future i think the united states is going to face some headwinds. i'm always a fan of celebrating development around the world but when we think about our special position as being the leading edge for global talent, things are going to look different in the future then you look today and certainly than the way to look 15 years ago. in 2000, about two-thirds of the
10:47 am
young college educated workforce, so those between 25-34, for the oecd countries, with lookout to 2030 india and china will account for half of those young college graduates. western europe and north america which includes the united states but also the uk and canada and germany and france, that will account for 18%. we have to think of a world where talent is going to be distributed out more broadly and we will have to be evermore competitive and attract us a place for people to come to a both policy and business. part of the goal of the book is to highlight and understand what it is we're trying to accomplish, what we are right now and think about ways that we can approve going forward of use for the work as a whole. so thanks for the opportunity to talk a bit about and i look forward to the panel. [applause]
10:48 am
>> can you hear me in the back? good. well, thanks again everyone for coming. thank you for the great presentation. i think it really captures most of any messages. i think one message that i got through in reading it was something that we know but perhaps we does his often is that it's impossible all the time in the world in one place.
10:49 am
it spread around and the more talent can go to the place where that person can be more productive, if you dig in for all those but also there are winners and losers. many economic transactions, trade, always some will lose and question is how do we balance that? i think when it comes to high skilled migration, there is a much wider consensus that is a positive overall, that generates a positive take overall for the country where these people are coming and even for -- the debate is much more fierce. seems to be more of a disconnect between evidence and the political discourse. michael, you've done a lot of work on all migration including
10:50 am
refugees, low skilled migration but very different circumstances. and there are some people that would claim that night, high skilled migration something we want but low skilled immigration is probably more of a burden. i wonder if you can navigate, help us navigate through the, whether the statement makes sense or is true according to what you study. >> thank you. thanks a lot thanks to each of you for being here. we can talk hours about that which is procurement uncoated tundra something quite different than bill. talking fundamental workers, workers whose contribution might come from some formal training but mostly from innate talent a job expense, fundamental workers like care workers, cleaners, secured, farmworkers, construction. and when it comes to fundamental workers comp one of the greatest
10:51 am
and grandest old american traditions is periodically declaring that we used to need fundamental workers but we don't need fundamental workers anymore. anymore. so a bipartisan coalition in congress did this in 1870s and 1880s, and use that in part to push for absolute ban on chinese labor immigration that was to last de facto for 83 years here in 1911 the commission declared the u.s. does not need any more fundamental workers. that evidence was used to push a series of immigration restrictions calmative and 19 to four with a of most use emigrate out almost all of it from outside northern europe. in 1900 u.s. commission on immigration directed by susan martin declared that the u.s. does not need any more fundamental workers and, of course, today we have the three steves, miller, king and then
10:52 am
declaring the u.s. does not need economically anymore fundamental workers. i want, of course they use this explicitly to justify their proposal to decimate lawful immigration to use. the proposal on the table is to eliminate more than half of lawful immigration to u.s. primarily for that reason. now, i want to point out a few things about these repeated declarations which i really the same declaration again and again in different forms. the first is that it is fundamentally reasonable. it is not at all unreasonable. americans to fundamental work in the 1880s and in the 1910s and the 1990s and now are often the america to struggle the most and it can appear cruel to offer them more competition in the labor market. that is not a few the course any kind of racism or xenophobia to
10:53 am
believe. the second thing i want to point out is that it has been repeatedly incorrect, just factually incorrect. all of the above declarations come at the 1980s with decades of very large flows of immigration, the rate of an immigration was about triple the inflow of the population. most of it very low skilled, many of the grandparents, great-grandparents and great-great-grandparents people in this room include those people, including mine. of course after 1924 moderate incomes have shown that the de facto immigration shutout in 1924 actually cost americans jobs. they managed to crowd americans into some lower skill lower paying jobs after 1924 but overall reduced u.s. and obama and the long-term impoverished
10:54 am
the countess, hughes counties that were most affected by the immigration exclusion. and, of course, at the 1995 declaration that we didn't need fundamental workers anymore, those a decade a decade in which hundreds of thousands of fundamental worker immigrants successfully employed alongside americans in the u.s. labor force. so it was all these use reason of the time, absolutely but they're missing something. what what were the missing? they were making the correct assumption that the fundamental workers in the u.s. labor market are just pure cold hard economic terms a unit of labor for silva competes with other labor. that is true. but it misses other things. fundamental workers are consumers. they consume goods and services made by u.s. made by u.s. natives who work for each other.
10:55 am
and they are also factors of production just pure cold hard economic terms that are factors of productive. what i'm talking about is american master chefs literally do not have a job without dishwashers. there's no such thing. american cardiac surgeons literally have no job with the people keeping the hospital clean and sanitary. silicon valley certainly runs on engineers, many of them indian and chinese and many, many of the natives but also runs on vegetable pickers, child care workers, construction workers, security workers and others. it's not what with the other. it's both of them at the same time and deficit at the same time and that is why now in the information age if you go to the bureau of labor statistics website and ask for their projections of them on the growth in the united states over the next decade, the top 20 occupations, most of the jobs in those occupations are jobs that don't require a high school
10:56 am
degree. i'm talking about retail care work, warehousing, delivery, things that are necessary for silicon valley to work. that is why immigration for fundamental work was in the national interest in the 1880s and in the 1910s in the 1990s and now. >> before i go to anna maria i want to follow on one particular point which is one way, i think about the research of one of your can somebody we know, oh makes a claim that the entrants of immigrants allow the natives to experience upward mobility. so when you people doing dishwashing which are perhaps johnson migrants are willing to take, that allows natives to
10:57 am
actually move perhaps to the waiters and actually experience increase in wages. is that a story you think is fair and the context of america more generally? >> you want me to go for the? >> just quickly. >> absolute. there's one think of economics that is immigration i've ever seen except one has been common, and it's a study of the impact in immigration on cat aggressive people or people who live in a certain place. people like who have finished high school or people who live in a certain city. if you think about that means he missed the effects of people who changed the level of beverage station or change the place of the work it will change the job in response to innovation. there is one study which is different which is, this incredible study were some of they get data on every man, woman and child in denmark over decades and tracked their response to refugee inflows from iraq, the balkans and afghanistan. people who are exposed to the refugee inflows and that either don't with that in place or
10:58 am
changed jobs, change skilled levels, change location overtime and found you would've missed much of the benefit to them from displacement which as you pointed out earlier is difficult and has some losers and is a transition that just like the transition is becoming out of agriculture or the adjustment of may workers to -- always have people speeded or technology. >> absolutely need support. but they end up with proper social policy benefiting from it. it. if we just study categories without track individuals which only they had done, we miss that. there's a lot more research to be done in that area. >> anna maria, you've done significant and very influential research on a politically, of migration. and i think there is an understanding when you look at the evidence, of all type of migrants, we see besides the
10:59 am
fact that our winners and losers, we see that the effects are overwhelmingly positive. there's very little effect that by chris displaced workers, that they lower the wages. there's still some discussion -- most evidence shows that's not the case. what i call the $1 million dollars question, based on your work, how come we don't, how come the political aspect, migration is such a debate and hotly debated topic, and how migration in general effect these politics here or in any other country? >> thank you. so i have worked quite a lot on public opinion, i migration and actually on other aspects of globalization. what i can say is based on my work and other economies,
11:00 am
there's quite a lot of evidence that independently for what the impact of migration has actually been, people perceive that migration is add both negative and positive impact. so some people perceived to have been penalized by migration, both to the market drivers, changes in wages, changes in employment rates. some people perceived they have been penalized the changes taking place in terms of how the welfare state works either in changes to tax rates or the ability, debilitating capital benefits. so i want to stress that this is not telling us anything about the objective impact of migration but definitely public opinion seems to believe that there are winners and losers.
11:01 am
.. migration can produce very big gains. to the extent there are some losers, this -- grievances by one part of the electorate. otherwise we cannot make the policy changes we would wish for. what i am going to say is that first, one big issue, there are a lot of issues. public opinion, the groups of voters who from a certain point of you would want more
11:02 am
migrants, from other points of view want fewer migrants. let me be more explicit about that. let's think about somebody who is well-educated, have a high income, and low educated migrants and that person is not going to feel in cooperation with a group of migrants, you can hire them and there is going to be more ability of workers and wages and from that point of view, the person, high income high education is not going to feel opposed. but then, if we think about another big aspect of the impact of migration there is evidence that people perceive
11:03 am
migrants may affect the system so situations where low skilled migrants arrive, there is evidence that for example individuals end up paying higher taxes, higher taxes to -- to pay for public schools, to everybody. so from that point of view, the same person who wants more low skilled migrants to come in because the person can hire them and be complementary and at the same time there is evidence that that person perceives negative affects to another channel and i want to
11:04 am
stress this is based on data, public opinion, not based on data on the actual impact of migrants and michael will talk about that and i can talk about that, a science report came out last year about the fiscal impact but here i'm talking about public opinion. so you see have the same, low skilled migrants to give an example and based on what impact these low skilled migrants are thinking about you see it is hard to build a coalition of people who support change, to bring in more low skilled migrants because the same people feel sensitive about it thinking about this. the other issue that i want to discuss is when we teach our
11:05 am
students about economic changes, that produce aggregate gains of ten bringing about effects that create winners and losers, we always talk about the need for the government to come in, go to the winners to those who either are actual losers or perceived to be losers but here comes another challenge we face and it is the fact that when there's a lot of migration there is evidence that at the same time public opinion becomes more opposed and public opinion will respond to their migrants, low skilled
11:06 am
migrants, and appetite for distribution. you see we can potentially be caught in a trap in which we would wonder some of those games but at the same time, are opposed to increasing the extent of distribution, so you see how difficult the problem becomes from a political point of view. the other big issue is from a political point of view there are moving parts, we are talking at the same time, and automation and financial crisis that took place not long ago and the economic changes might have impacted them, groups of voters at the same time and it
11:07 am
is difficult to figure out what it cost, the deterioration, there is evidence that some groups of voters, deterioration in their living standards but waived the cost and it is difficult to get a definitive answer, it is difficult. we need to contribute more in terms of the search. and what different change has contributed, who definitely feel they have been penalized in the last two years. >> it is a fair point,
11:08 am
difficult for us but for politicians it doesn't seem very difficult to identify. i am glad we started with that policy, and just before, talk about redistribution and the perception and part of the, quote, burden of the negative affect. they pay less taxes than they receive in one speech out there and you talked about it and read about it. i know it is an unfair request. and the policy part.
11:09 am
>> and for migration, there's a lot to be discussed. in the united states it can start from various authoritative statements of those fiscal affect that were alluded to. last night you had, yesterday during the day the president going before the world saying immigrants cost taxpayers billions and billions of dollars. that is a talking point provided to the president by people who don't have any information on the subject. there is an authoritative statement last year the national academy of sciences brought together the leading immigration economists in the united states and some around the world across the political spectrum and wide range of views about migration, and a colleague, and they are interested in facts.
11:10 am
and immigration, you can turn to page 434 that report and find their bottom line on fiscal affects. the fiscal position, immigrant reflecting the age and skill composition, across all levels of government, federal, state, local combined. plus 259,000 plus $259,000, that is the bottom line. if there is a us fiscal problem associated with migration, there is not enough of it, that is the starting point. the report start about heterogeneity, different assumptions you can make to get different numbers, they get lower numbers by making
11:11 am
assumptions like average cost pricing of public goods which means if you assume each additional migrant costs in national defense for example the average national defense for the current population you can get lower position for a migrant, that is the assumption because the cost to wage a foreign war in defense of the united states is identical whether it is 339 million people, the marginal cost for national defense is close to 0 but different assumptions get lower values. that is the figure they consider the most reasonable face time or reasonable assumptions. it is an underestimate because jobs are not charity. when an employer employs a worker they do that always and only because they get more profits doing that and profits are taxed. the second effect on taxation
11:12 am
is never touted in the accounting exercises. it is benefits received by a person on the negative side, taxes paid by that person on the positive side in this commission's report and prior heritage foundation report on the subject. if you dig in they don't count them because they are difficult to measure. if you do the math in your head they are 50% more which gave the labor share and tax rates and corporate taxation but they are omitted. whatever the fiscal affect is you can count on it being more than $259,000. within that you can propose all kinds of interesting innovations. some from the hamilton project at brookings, the aforementioned has an interesting proposal for a bond to be posted by provisional people with provisional labor visas that become a contribution to the us treasury of people end up staying. that is the kind of innovation that could be useful and
11:13 am
address some of the concerns about the heterogeneity, that is a useful conversation to have. we get nowhere and certainly don't get useful innovation from starting with talking points based on this information. >> that is very complete, thank you. if you can share your thoughts in terms of policy. you write about it a lot and you have thought about it. the united states is in a position that has benefited from global talent and there are always ways to keep it that way. you have done a lot of work on visas, can you give some insight on the way this policy can be improved in the united states, to keep benefiting from these. >> thank you for the very
11:14 am
complex places in channels and i certainly agree the economic, cultural security can lead to political choices, they are not aligned often with some of the data we have and that is part of the overall responsibility, the competitiveness project there was a phrase developed about an economy doing half of its job and the half it wasn't doing his about the stagnating middle-class wages and efforts to make it where we can be more productive future and that plays been to any conversation. to simplify this a little bit to the high skill space to talk about possible h1b reforms and similar. this is a place where national immigration system is enormously complex, and had many iterations and layers of things placed on it but we can
11:15 am
isolate a couple places where on the high school friends we can get more bang for the buck. on the employer driven side, people of skill levels can come through other places. one of the starting points is to say we don't have to agree that we should expand to reduce the number of visas given for employment-based purposes but hopefully come to an agreement and say we get a bigger bang for the buck, or larger sort of gift if we utilize the capacity in a better way. in most years, whenever demand for the h1 b visa was high, the united states takes a bunch of applications over the next few days targeting april 1st, then needs to conduct a lottery over visas to allocate that. that is done at an individual level so one consequence of the lottery, 30% of the people in
11:16 am
the lottery get a visa and take these microsoft scenarios, microsoft puts in 100 applications, microsoft doesn't at the end get to pick the 30 that it would like to employ, but picks out 30 individuals. this is the consequence of us not using visas in an effective way. in the book i am trying to talk about pathways, the simplest pathway possible to make better use. for example i recommend wage ranking the visas that we start with people that have the highest approach and work our way down. to allocate these into more productive uses rather than allowing them to be used for any particular purpose under the program. there are other ways at the
11:17 am
hamilton project with this connection to brookings talking about how to auction off visas. either way, what we want to get to is something about if this is in scarce supply, how can we make sure they are utilized more effectively? i also think to agree we did this we could get closer to a place where we can all agree to increase skilled migration. one of the things i do at the end of the book is look at polling data. the polling data at this point in 2017, is not as frequent he polled but polling data came after the election, still suggesting the majority of americans support an increase in skilled migration, 3:1 ratio among those supporting versus those that are not. when asked specifically about the h1 b visa program, reviews are more mixed with many saying i want to keep the same size, or increase or decrease it but it was a noticeable difference between the skilled migration
11:18 am
so part of my hope is to show this is skilled and these skills are special for what they are something to accomplish. the more public support around expansion around this. they can place i want to shine a light on is we have ever-growing challenges with the school to work transition. many of our classrooms are chock full of people on visas or students that have come to the united states. universities have relatively unlimited supply, they expand the rains as they need to or 12. one of the challenges is we have a growing student population, trying to get out to an employer driven system. i try to give the image of several pipes that are different sizes. when you go from one to the next, you create these band-aids.
11:19 am
and to think about how to have this goes to work for ambition more effectively. and to get these policy environments, 15,000 questions that even with the simplest ideas come up, how do you think of wealthy coastal cities where wages are higher and palestinians in the interior with rage - wage ranking and other things. i would argue we have relatively simple stuff and a lot of people come on board and we are using the system data or increase that. let me get one final point which is i am also trying to say this isn't just policy. one of the end messages i tried to give to employers. i work at a business school and there are others i relate to. make this case better. it can't just be about these
11:20 am
policy reforms and it can't be your party line is to say we should have unlimited numbers because that is not selling very well. help us understand how this impacts the economy in productive ways and make the argument so it is on the employer's side as well as the policy side. >> i want to leave time for everybody to participate, a very short rounds -- i think some of the questions might come up. you talk in the book about the fact that you even say, let me quote it, you say -- top talent has been one of america's greatest strengths but in the future not the bacon program it.
11:21 am
a lot of things are happening out there, particularly coming out of the government. for instance, at the very beginning, things like a travel ban were put in place, went back and forth with the judicial system. donald trump says he wants to moderate the visa, i am one of the visas, i'm the worst of the worst. if you haven't met one, i am on the downside of distribution. a lot of things are happening right now, this week. there is a group of refugees walking miles, thousands of miles, day and night, from hunter is most of them, perhaps trying to seek asylum in the us. he called them invaders and friends military force, military personnel to deal with
11:22 am
5000 people, half of them women and children. time to end the birthday citizenship right. some people born in the us don't have a right to be citizens and that speaks to 11 million migrants in the country now. i want to take another question. i won't call on all of you but before we go to the q&a, if you can give us your reaction whether it is smart policy or affecting other aspects, how does this play in the future? >> i can start. i can talk about the birthright principle to citizenship. i think the discussion has been
11:23 am
driven by miscalculation, misunderstanding across this right that is produced in terms of political effects. it is quite surprising. there is not a lot of research for the united states on the impact of immigration in general election outcomes. i have been working on this topic recently quite a lot. before i start working on this topic, migration penalizes the republican party on average and what i find is i find in a paper, in places there was an increasing share of migrants devoting share to the republican party to increase.
11:24 am
and there was understanding circles, before we start working on this topic. the interpretation this was driven by the fact that naturalized migrants or their kids who had the right to vote as citizen, but what we find in our own work which is very detailed work that goes back, the united states in another level, and what matters for the political impact of migration is the skill level. and increasing the share of skilled migrants.
11:25 am
analyzing the republican party and increasing share of low skilled migrants. and that is a different result. and it is quite skilled, the misunderstanding in the political narrative it is coming from, the bottom line is the birthright principle, it is not clear this will affect political outcomes in the direction the republican party hopes for. >> you want away on this? >> i'm on his twitter follower
11:26 am
along with some things to say about the caravan, there are two points on this line, national security is certainly important, we spend so much time and energy on a political stunt. in part because there is so much work that needs to be done. there's a lot that needs to be worked on. i wish we were devoting that in a more productive way. and there is work on the employer side, the latest tweet to the h1b program.
11:27 am
and if you are focused on that, much of it is trying, how much security do people feel about it. it would be a very user-friendly immigration system but people are willing to make the investment for students or workers. a lot of challenges we are facing is the rhetoric is damaging to how much bait people want to put into the country and regardless of whether you investing, this is a very important thing for us. i worry a lot about that.
11:28 am
>> i couldn't agree more with what bill just said. there is so much to be done there are real problems, talking about the economic aspect of this, the polarization of the us and other labor markets is a very real phenomenon. there is a large negative shock since 1990 and demand for labor in the mid range of skill, cognitive and manual tasks and that will only get worse in helping populations adjust to that for young people in the room, the challenge of your lifetime, not something that will be solved anytime soon, not something that will be addressed at all by the snake oil being offered by many different world leaders, not just the ones -- we have to understand the frustration a lot of people feel from many sources. they remark negative shops
11:29 am
demand first and worker generating a situation in which populist politicians have an easy time, that migrants are to blame for their problems. and us history here. where the chinese exclusion come from. one of the most important sources was 1873 there was a bank crash, jay cooke which set up the longest economic depression in us history still today. we had chinese exclusion. we had the lehman brothers crash setting up a huge worldwide depression and economic frustration in 90 years later there was steve bannon in the white house sitting immigration policy. the real struggling and
11:30 am
suffering of many workers almost entirely unrelated to immigration creates a feeling which people are persuaded migrants are the problem and in that sense domestic, social policy is a form of migration policy. how do we defeat chinese exclusion. it is statistical studies saying chinese people do all this great stuff, not even slightly at all. it was through a massive project of social policies i would argue, things that didn't exist at the time. mass information infrastructure which meant telegraphs, the first labor protections, bankruptcy law, they developed to prevent the field to demagogues. that is where we need to focus now.
11:31 am
there is a whole lot there as well. that entire essential fruitful conversation dies when the entire focus is on the refugee flows cutting illegal immigration by half which is a conversation set at the moment. >> q and a session to the rest of the time. there are people with microphones and while they get to you, some gentlemen here, please make sure your question has a question mark. >> this is a jeopardy question. answer in the form of a question. there is a missing voice on the panel. i am with the center on n social equity. i started the project.
11:32 am
studies on inequality and advocating for the bottom half. the bottom half, no research is fighting for them on this panel. the one that comes to mind and i agree with most of what you are saying for the top half. george started teaching where i went to school after i was there. .. that is an important part of trump's constituency. >> i think, also the race a third of our kids in this country. so okay, i think michael's comments about moving up the ladder, and sticky labor market. my window and this is what with people with disabilities.
11:33 am
you've got a guy that is a dishwasher that has a disability and to look at his bad teeth. so the mexican guy comes and gets the job. so automatically he gets to be a waiter. he's a bit overweight. no, that could happen. the fact trump has run off a a bunch of illegals is helped his constituency. the one area i don't agree with almost anything is has done whe he is delivered. >> let's take a couple more. >> i'm lisa with the jewish federation of metropolitan chicago. as universal proposal from the trump administration to redefine or restrict the public charge policy. i was wondering which in effect targets low income immigrants, the families and also many of those people are workers, healthcare workers. i was just wondering if anyone is doing any kind of analysis or
11:34 am
numbers crunching to see what the fiscal impact would be if this policy goes into affect. >> i couldn't hear, what's the policy? >> public charge, which is been a policy is been in effect since 1882, for 136 years and it was basically was a guidance issued in 1999 to identify three pacifist and programs that would -- if they're trying to already in the country. what the trump administration is trying to do is to expand that to non-cash assistance programs of medicaid, parts of medicare and things like that. and in doing so they're also think if you don't have a green card in the subject to being deemed a public charge. it's really becoming very either
11:35 am
broad -- anyway, what we kind assess is that with the economic be both in terms of workers and for example, of these programs that would be affected, be included, would include hospitals, provide the services so their fiscal impact, there would be fiscal impact even because the workers they would have to lay off. >> i think we got it. thank you. let's get one more here and in the next round. >> first of all, i want to say no one, not human being is illegal to people who think about it believe twice to say, something like that -- in the country where we get all that the current we have is basis -- [inaudible] as a native american i'm really disappointed to see how we analyze the economy basis of
11:36 am
take control of the land of native people. look at yourself. you know who are family coming, bring your -- -- [inaudible] and really the basis of the point, how we can treat people who come into this country crossing the border looking for refugees. i got back to mexico. a conference about immigration border. thousands of people, under duress. do you know how many in the policy -- [inaudible] for use to central america last 100 years? 56 interventions. u.s. our tax dollars paying militaries good central america killing people and giving guns to the rebels and others. basis of that, how we can now think our economy, especially
11:37 am
u.s., basis of immigration and how many people -- maybe of your ancestors -- [inaudible] other issues and that was refugees coming and crossing to u.s. and now it has great invasion and companies -- >> thank you. sorry. i just want one more. i think we did get the question. why don't we start with this round? there's a question about the research. i'm going to let you all decide what you want to take. who wants to volunteer to start? [laughing] >> i want to begin by saying in the economic landscape there are various voices that i still disagreement sometimes but somebody's wage effects.
11:38 am
i think the majority of the studies are finding either that there are no wage effects. typically there's some consequences, negative consequences. at the and i come back to over a median horizon the economy here we don't live in a world where there are no jobs or their zero-sum game. i think we're going to see expansion of opportunities. first off, our unemployment rates are at historic low levels come to one of michael's earlier points. it's not that we are running at a child's. there's a question for future, when nuns on the phone with the gentleman that once the economic policy for michigan, and his response was detroit news more immigration. like our problem pub is we've t of these challenges. when you do people come in. they are big and important and hope we can always keep them in mind. i think we can see there's
11:39 am
certainly enough need in the long run a power. >> i don't think we were trying to ignore one part of the literature. i think we're all very aware that there are different voices in the literature, but i think the general theme here has been look, a potentially 30 big gains in the aggregate and there can be, even if the facts, can be negative effects on some groups of voters. but it's blocking migration that the right way to reduce these gains, the right way. and i would say most economists would say you know, that migration policy should not be used as a tool to redistribute income gains. so the are many other ways to do so. the challenge that i see, what i
11:40 am
mentioned before, at the same time there is an increasing opposition to carry out distribution which comes with the arrival of certain types of migration that they i see as ad stomach political point of view. >> about unauthorized immigration, the studies of the labor market are by design measure only that first role of workers that i mentioned, which is a unit of labor force in the markets, and hold the constant this is the point of the studies can hold constant those two other effects as consumers fostering investment and specialization by other workers and producing the things they consume, and factors of production working alongside them. you can get, if you isolate the
11:41 am
competition affect you can get a decrease in wages for natives from competition with unauthorized immigrants. but unauthorized immigrants are not just that. this shaped investment and productivity for workers for decades that is, many, many of the low skill jobs for americans in america right now exist only because of inflows of immigrants authorized and unauthorized in the 1970s and '80s and '90s. that together is the effect of emigration. it's not just a moment to moment holding constant all of the other things in economy, how many people are selling claver right now. that's why i think georgia which is one of the only states with the data to do such a study exists affirms that employ more unauthorized immigrants as they share of their employees have higher wages for the natives,
11:42 am
and employ more natives not fewer natives because they complement production in ways that creates jobs for natives and in those indirect effects had to be counted for, not set aside, not controlled for, not held constant if we want to understand the overall complex impact. on this question about fiscal effects, so if there are concerns about public charge, where's the lady who asked? yes. concerned about public charge can be addressed one of two ways. if you're interested in a limited immigrants from america you can a limited immigrants from america. another way to address those things is personal to take account of complexities. a cofounder of what's out one of the leading communications firms in america which i use daily and many people in this room use, was a refugee from ukraine who
11:43 am
lived on food stamps for some peers and would've been banned from giving a green card and ever become a u.s. citizen. outsourcing is unforeseeable and extremely blunt policy like manning immigrants from america because they ever took a food stamp et cetera, there's another margin of innovation other than blocking people from green cards and citizenship, and that is innovating on fiscal policy. so, for example, if you emigrate to the united states you can't get any sources. medicare and less you worked here for 40 quarters. that is a compromise. it's a debatable compromise but it is i think not a bad compromise between two extremes of extraordinarily lavish social benefits that could jeopardize the viability of the system and blocking of but just because they have fiscal costs. as a look, we insist that you pay in a a certain amount befoe you can benefit and that's a margin on which a lot of
11:44 am
innovation could occur, other than the administration stance which is look, if you ever took a dollar, it says right in the law, so why don't we just get rid of you? that such an unfruitful and is a case shows, overly destructive path that there are many, many of them are useful conversations we could be having. >> let's get another round. it will help if you direct the question to somebody on the panel. front. and if you keep it short, please, so we can all people join us. >> do my best. thank you so much. for ana maria, a question since you're really more, by the way, i am president of the global policy institute here in washington, d.c. as you were talking about perceptions, obviously, i think a component of public opinion perceptions about immigration is it seems to me the willingness,
11:45 am
ability and speed of assimilation what you don't think anybody really has talked about. how busy when you talk about high skilled immigrants that is kind of a moot point because that's easier, people are educated can have a lot of skills. i don't think they have a problem integrating but at a lower echelon i think that's an issue and i think that shapes perceptions. and if we could broaden the discussion which we are not come a look at the backlash against immigration in europe, this is mostly about the general perception that you millions and millions who cannot be assimilated. and, therefore, they are alien bodies in their societies. of course america's very different from this perspective but what is your general idea of perceptions based on the ability to integrate not people just as unit of labor, but as people, cultures, what they bring to the country and how alien or not alien they are perceived to be.
11:46 am
thank you. >> here and then somebody in the back. >> my question is to michael. i am from turkey and i came to this country as an immigrant also. and my question is, uscis data shows a bite american and higher american were orders signed by donald trump in 2017, and according to this agreement, now the denial rate of h-1b application in the third quarter, it was 15% and up in the fourth quarter it's 202% so it is increasing. although he is against the refugees and also immigration,
11:47 am
but now the denial rate is getting increased and what you think about this and how will affect the american economy and also labor skilled educated? thank you so much. >> in the back. my question is about the summer i think the department of homeland security proposed to increase the fees for the students and exchange visa program by close to think 75%. my question is about the presentation we had earlier, how do you think that might impact especially the auditors coming from abroad in the bay area? most of them are indian and chinese students. i wanted to know what impact that might have. >> that's a great question because bill does talk a lot about in the book about
11:48 am
entrepreneurship are quite a we start with that. >> i'm going to actually sort of slightly reinterpret the question here to be about immigrant entrepreneurship more broadly. raising the student visas i don't think, a target of exactly how they would impact downstream, probably there would be some connection but it'll take its first order. the biggest challenge to the united states is if you want to be an entrepreneur and andrew g out of your school there is really very limited pathways for you to accomplish that. we have an employer driven system that for like h-1b is used to get a job at an intel or a microsoft or so forth. it's not really set up for somebody to google to start their own business. other countries are becoming much more generous with allowing thesis for people that can have a certain amount of funding the fifth sort of established by their investor or their things they can do to prove the amount of employment they will they wn place. the u.s. doesn't have that. we have a challenge and the
11:49 am
number of -- my own student at harvard business school coming out of an mba program which is all about entrepreneurship but if they are foreign-born and they don't have visa status that will allow them to do this, they are often turn to to get some job to take for a little while in order to get ready for when it would be able to be lawful. first off let's go and try to figure how to repair that sort of particular need and it's a place i think we can could find dirty bipartisan support for this pink something we should work on. >> do you want to talk about assimilation? >> i agree that assimilation issues are -- as a matter fact, i just saw a pew survey of a european countries where it seems like public opinion is not as worried about the size of migrants coming in, but is really worried about the assimilation of migrants in
11:50 am
european countries. but i would say this is more of an issue i think for european countries and for the united states. and it's an issue, a self-imposed issue. let me give you an example. a lot of times they cannot work when they arrived to europe. so they cannot access level markets. i cannot assembly and the liberal bark and we know that that has an impact also on cultural assimilation, on the way immigrants perceive their new home and it creates a depreciation in their skills. on the other hand, in the united states i think the refugee resettlement program has done every good job because the city refugees arrive to the united states, they can work and there
11:51 am
is evidence that the program has been successful. i worked with refugee data, and three months after arrival, already one-third of refugees have work. and that's really a high fraction only three months after they have a right to the united states. so i would say this is more of an issue in europe than in the united states. and there's a large -- assimilation takes place, not immediately. there is a catching factor relative to natives but definitely this catching up affect exists takes place. >> before, i went to say i am the moderator, to say, there's another set of the coin and i think david rapoport who was here, i don't know, he is around, one of my co-authors, and he has reading but the fact that diversity within a country
11:52 am
actually also promotes economic growth. so i think that it's interesting to think in the sense that perhaps there's an optimal point of assimilation, maybe too much, there's something there i think there's a lot of research to be done. an interesting data point that a fortune a data point, there's a huge refugee crisis in venezuela was in south america were assimilation shouldn't be an issue for the most part. and then we see a lot of the struggle that immigrants in europe after we also see in there. i think that's a great question at i think one that asked for more research on that. michael, the question for you, please. >> i have to mention assimilation and integration as well. one of the prime bipartisan wildly popular gestation for chinese exclusion was they could not be assimilated. they were inherently incapable of integrating an assembly in american culture and its, anyone who's ever a chinese-american,
11:53 am
they were .2% of youth population at the time. was just as chris and yet it was possible for smart, reasonable brilliant people to walk through chinatown and san francisco and come to that conclusion. similarly, 1924th you could walk this east village in jerk city and come to conclusion that people couldn't possibly assimilate. no economic historians have done the first study of relative assimilation rates across history. the indicator pages is immigrants starting to give the children american sounding names in the 1920s that meant instead name their kid -- you name him steven announced that of naming them man well, you choose james. and the rate of of the kind of assimilation actually is the theme now as it was in only 1920. it's very, very common for americans walking around arlington you could come to the conclusion with all the central america tort the similarly picked the data shows that is aa
11:54 am
perception that we should be suspicious of because it is a constant perception use history overtime and it is actually not borne out by experience and dated. to the lady from turkey -- you asked about the economic growth effects of this war against legal migration and movie that's exactly what it is. the president campaigned on barring lawful most immigrants from the u.s. all of them he has proposed cutting lawful immigration by more than half. he succeeded in eliminating 75% of lawful refugee admissions over the last two fiscal years. it's a triumph of marketing over substance that somehow there's this perception that the administration is focused on unlawful immigration. it's exactly the opposite. the focus of actions has been on
11:55 am
lawful immigration. and studies from the imf and the oecd, recently published in science advances consistently show that more immigration does leave specific on asylum seekers and refugees produces more overall economic growth. that is something that confuse a lot of heterogeneity among countries and among social groups within countries that we have discussed but the big picture for the effect on the broader economy and thus the potential for redistribution, the potential for job creation, potential for investment for natives is generally positive for that reason. it is reasonable to expect that this all-out assaults unlawful immigration fee is which is very likely what already has substantially decreased migration is likely decrease it even more over the years to come
11:56 am
is going to harm you see, and harm it for a very long time. >> we will take one more question. here, , and then we running outf time. >> thanks. workers for the initiative teacher. first, thank you for your research and continued that evidence in this topic. my question is linked to the assimilation one. you probably share the frustration that even as you add more data to this come to this topic, it doesn't always translate in the political reality. although michael's research did help me tremendously, it advocated the political realm, the effects of foreign aid and migration. my question on future evidence is a little bit on the other side of the assimilation, which is if a lot of this rejection for immigrants that we've seen through history comes from the
11:57 am
psychology that we are just triable by nature, that we like to define ourselves when we defined the other. what has worked or can work to immunize populations to that mentality which gets quickly used in the political realm? i know the only thing that i see is that it places that have more immigrants, people tend to have less of this immediate reaction to this but but i don't know iu seen anything on that realm. thank you. >> so let's answer that and also make perhaps closing statements, if you have, which ever you want. i don't know if that question was for somebody or whoever. so whoever wants. >> i don't have a particular policy answer for that. i can dedicate my own personal experience. i grew up in alabama and a think the first real immigrant there was ever in my schooling system came allies like a in high school. and it was i think to a lot of
11:58 am
perceptions that were difficult about that time. it took a lot of time to make progress. as a matter fact my high school did it's a very different place and attitudes are very different. my personal attitudes, like it's not something that i think there's a magical policy silver bullet but it's one that we all should work towards your likewise, when i think about the ways we can come how to make our future better, most of my things often come back to both domestic worker that is moving up the skill letter, the immigrant that is moving up the skill matter assimilating. many of the things we should be doing like making community colleges stronger are going help those groups, help those groups integrate. >> i would add that there has been actually surprisingly given the political climate, change in
11:59 am
the united states, and i can refer you to the data. it's pure research center survey that shows there has been a steady increase in the fraction of americans who like increasing number of migrants, the number of americans who would like decreasing the number of migrants and there's been some study fraction of those who like the number of migrants. this is research that just came out. you can find in the website of the pew research center, but i wouldn't be so pessimistic in the sense that these trends show us that public opinion can move in some surprising ways. >> can't i just say this is
12:00 pm
something that sociologists know how lot more about that economists. it goes into the broad rubric of contact to become the people are more open to social interactions with people with whom that that social interactions. i think it's indisputable. for emigration, the heirs of the united states that are most suspicious of immigration are probably the areas that had the least of it in the past. it is really the case with the brags about what was written by immigration concerns, , deathly the case in germany where the hotbed of anti-immigrant sentiment company of east germany and where my father just immigrants have gone, and that's a reason for hope i think in this area. it is certainly a reason why change is slow but it's also a reason why more openness to interacting with people who are
12:01 pm
unfamiliar does accumulate over time and does, could be expected to change over time as it has been for the openness of americans to interact with other religious groups and other ethnic groups in the past which is also shared by social contact and also proceeded in acuity wave rather than some sort of sudden jump. >> we are running out of time. i want to thank you. .. beer will be signing books outside. there is a table and i hope you
12:02 pm
will stick around. thank you for coming in here. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
12:03 pm
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
12:04 pm
>> which party will control the house and senate? watch c-span live election night coverage starting tuesday as 8:00 pm eastern is results come in from house, senate and governor races, here victory and concession >> from candidates. wednesday morning at 7 am eastern we get your reaction to the election taking your calls during washington journal. c-span journal, your primary source. the midterm elections are just four days away, more live campaign 2018 coverage, political analyst charlie cook of the cook political report will offer thoughts and predictions, you can see live
12:05 pm
coverage at 12:30 eastern on c-span. former president barack obama will be campaigning in miami for bill nelson and andrew gillam who is running for governor. this is live at 2:30 eastern. on c-span, your primary source for campaign 2018. west virginia's incumbent senator joe mannchin faced patrick morrisey, the debate by west virginia broadcasters association in morgantown, west virginia. >> welcome to the west virginia broadcasters association senatorial debate between joe -- joe manchin and patrick morrisey. i your moderator for this evening. west virginia broadcasters association combines television and radio stations across the state, proud to bring this debate to west virginia tonight. we

20 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on