What can government policy do about widening income inequality in the United States? Critics of the country’s current immigration policies want to severely restrict low-skilled immigration. That may make a dent in inequality, but the effect is likely to be small. Meanwhile, restrictions on low-skilled immigrants themselves raise tricky political and moral issues.
The reason that low-skilled immigration needs to be restricted to a reasonable amount is that if we allowed every unskilled Tom, Dick and Harry to come here if they find the means we would end up with a flooded market for labor of marginal value. We're fortunate right now in that we haven't received that many immigrants from Mexico, compared to what we could receive from all across the world if open borders immigration were officially implemented.
As I have pointed out about Africa, and its relationship with China, a key problem with open borders policies is that a country like China would have both the means and a motivation to exploit them. The fact is, China is already doing this to Africa, by exporting literally hundreds of thousands of workers that are displacing native Africans. If our government were either that weak or unconcerned about immigration, it would be entirely feasible for the Chinese to send workers here by the thousands.
Kling is an economist, so I can't fault him for thinking of the moral value only in terms of economics. There is also a serious question of national sovereignty which is overlooked by the typically myopic supporters of open borders immigration policies. In fact, I have never met a single supporter of open borders policies who ever had more than a basic, almost farsical, appreciation for how national sovereignty and individual sovereignty relate regarding liberty and the maintenance of a free society.
All Comments
The reason that low-skilled immigration needs to be restricted to a reasonable amount is that if we allowed every unskilled Tom, Dick and Harry to come here if they find the means we would end up with a flooded market for labor of marginal value. We're fortunate right now in that we haven't received that many immigrants from Mexico, compared to what we could receive from all across the world if open borders immigration were officially implemented.
As I have pointed out about Africa, and its relationship with China, a key problem with open borders policies is that a country like China would have both the means and a motivation to exploit them. The fact is, China is already doing this to Africa, by exporting literally hundreds of thousands of workers that are displacing native Africans. If our government were either that weak or unconcerned about immigration, it would be entirely feasible for the Chinese to send workers here by the thousands.
Kling is an economist, so I can't fault him for thinking of the moral value only in terms of economics. There is also a serious question of national sovereignty which is overlooked by the typically myopic supporters of open borders immigration policies. In fact, I have never met a single supporter of open borders policies who ever had more than a basic, almost farsical, appreciation for how national sovereignty and individual sovereignty relate regarding liberty and the maintenance of a free society.