----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 12:38 PM Subject: Re: Race to the Bottom
> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The white median income rose 17.1% between '80 and > > '01 (the last year in > > the table). The white non-Hispanic income rose > > 19.7% during that same time > > period. There is a difference, so at least some of > > the disparity is due to > > immigrants making lower wages. However, the mean > > income of the top 5% rose > > 94% during that same time period. So, only a small > > fraction of the income > > disparity can be traced to the lower income of lower > > skilled recent > > immigrants. > > > > Dan M. > > I'm sorry Dan, I don't think that addresses his point, > because the rest of the disparity could be a product > of the drag on incomes produced by the simple presence > of a large number of lower-skilled immigrants. Well, then his point is broader than I remembered it from previous posts. > problem is that the inflow affects different classes > in disparate ways. It helps wealthy and high-skilled > people - decreasing costs for them. It hurts > low-skilled people - by increasing the competition for > their labor. But, the median wage is not a measure of low skilled workers; it is a measure of medium skilled workers...at least insofar as skills and income coincide. Further, the pool of available workers grew faster from '57 to '80, while the income disparity was decreasing. So, I could see why the influx of poor workers would keep the poverty rate up. But, I think the effect on middle skill workers would be less. >Borjas estimated (IIRC) that the end > result of large-scale low-skilled immigration since > 1980 has been a transfer of >$150BB from employees to > employers - largely from low-skilled, low-wage > employees who have seen their wages driven down > relatively to employers. That would be about half of the increase in the income of the top 5% that came from above average growth in income. So, in all likelihood, if his estimates are correct, that did have a big influence. That is consistent with the idea that changes in the balance of supply and demand for labor has influenced the price of labor. But, even with the immigration, the increase in the labor supply has slowed down. So, I'd argue that, instead of looking at how fast the labor supply has grown since '80, we should ask why the increase in the demand for labor has slowed down so much since 1980. Dan M. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
