The compassion for refugees – or, more generally, for
all immigrants – seems often to be dominated by the fear of immigration’s economic
consequences. That fear is understandable, but is it also justified?
‘If you put two
economists in a room, you get two opinions’, Winston Churchil famously said. He
then added: ‘unless one of them is Lord Keynes, in which case
you get three.’ It was therefore surprising when, in 2006, five hundred
economists agreed upon one thing: immigration is good for the economy. In an open letter to President
Bush they expressed their concerns about the fear of immigration. Concerns
about immigration are common and understandable: what if I lose my job? what if
my wage goes down?
Such fears,
however, are ‘exaggerated’ according to the letter’s signatories, who come from
widespread ideological backgrounds: among them were Gregory Mankiw (a former
economic policy advisor to George Bush) and Bradford DeLong (a progressive
economist and blogger). The economists’ letter was not based on political ideals,
but on scientific evidence.
Theory
First, there are
a number of theoretical arguments in favour of immigration. Immigrants might
‘steal’ jobs, but they also buy more products. As a consequence, the market
grows and more jobs are being created. We thus share the economic pie with more
people, but the pie is also larger.
No one doubts
the value of highly educated immigrants. Think of the Russian Sergey Brin, who
founded Google, or the Taiwanese Jerry Chang, who started Yahoo. And let’s not forget that immigrants
played a key role in the Dutch Golden Age.
What about
immigrants with a lower educational background? They can also make a valuable
contribution to society. For example, certain services will become cheaper, such
as childcare. In turn, this enables women to free up time for a job.
Practice
Nice theories,
but how does it work in practice? Mette Foged and Giovanni
Peri investigated the effects of immigration in Denmark. Many immigrants
have arrived there since 1995 as a consequence of political crises in Bosnia,
Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Foged and Peri found that those waves of
immigration didn’t have an impact on unemployment. Even more surprising: the
salaries of low-educated Danes increased.
The arrival of immigrants caused them to find other – better-paid – jobs.
Of course,
economists have a considerable blind spot: they tend to ignore social,
political and cultural consequences. Immigration might raise crime or change
cultural norms. Nevertheless, possible disadvantages seem to be outbalanced by
the benefits. German research shows that immigration
positively affects the local population’s happiness.
A toast
I’m completely
in favour of the moral arguments for immigration, but those arguments don’t
seem to hold water in the current debate. They lose ground against unfounded
populist arguments. That’s why this blog post shows: immigration is not only
good for ‘them’, but also for ‘us’.
So let me
propose a toast. To those who find their way to The Netherlands or other
countries. To those who wish to make their lives more beautiful and thereby
enrich our lives. A toast to freedom.
Want to read more?
The website openborders.info shows in a nuanced and
informed manner that open borders are a win-win-win situation: good for the
migrant, the home country and the country of destination. I can wholeheartedly
recommend this website, because both sides of the debate are represented.
