Global
history
Real world
Country rating
New growth theory
Globalization
Malaise in Globalization
Mercantilism is back
World corruption
Migrations
1-BIG
PICTURES
2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS
3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS
5-CONCLUSION
Gender
World population
Modern
slavery
Ecology
Letter
to President Bush
New
war
Anti semitism
Reshaping
the world
European constitution
Global learning system
Global
coaching
INTERNATIONAL
MIGRATIONS
SUMMARY
The increase of international migrations is a global phenomena and a very debated topic. Many people exaggerate the scope of the migrations and claim that the flow is escaping to any control. On the other hand, there is an active pro-immigration lobby which pleads for a world without borders and posits that immigration has only positive effects.
Firstly, things are more complex. Obviously, international migrations have grown but they are not yet overflowing our societies. They remain under control both in the US and in Europe.
Secondly, according to our economic analysis, they can have either positive or negative effects. It just depends on the economic context of the receiving country. International migrations are an asset for the US economy. On the contrary, Europe would have better to limit the migrations and to tighten its controls.
Thirdly, in connection with the war on terror, the main hurdle is the rise of radical Islam among some migrants.
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
The statistics show that the stock of migrants in Northern countries is not as large as many people believe it. However, migrations are speeding up: Great poverty, wars and persecution notably in Africa and in the Middle East increase the number of people that view migrations as a mean of escaping their home country.
In Europe, economic migrations are more and more replaced by despair migrations. This fact would prepare huge flows in the future. Presently, the situation remains under control but what about to morrow?
Warning: It is quite difficult to calculate the numbers of migrants in the world: Incomplete data, difficulty to compare the statistics from one country to one another, impossibility to register illegal migrations.
Nevertheless, we have crossed many data coming from OECD, the US census, and some national resources. Thanks to hard work, we can present a rough description of the phenomena and its main pictures. However, we estimate that the following figures bear a margin of uncertainty + or - 20%.
11-Global stock
Globally the stock of migrating people is on the increase.( In Million)
DRAWING 1
Years ------1965----- 1985----- 1990----- 2000----- 2002----2004
Stocks------ 75------ 105-------120------ 150----- 175-----200
However, compared to the world population the ratio remains quite constant: 75 million in 1965 for a world population evaluated to 3 billion (2,5%); 150 million in 2000 for 6 billion (2,5%), 200 million in 2004 for 6.5 billion (3%).
One third of the stock is concentrated in Europe and the US. Consider the next table (in Million)
DRAWING 2
Years -----1991/92----- 1996----- 2001/02
Europe------ 19---------24-------- 29
US -----------20---------25-------- 31
Total--------- 39-------- 49-------- 60
-Interpretation
1-The figures represent the stock of migrants born in a foreign country. It means that they include the naturalizations over the period. However, they do not include the contract or seasonal workers that stay only for a short period or for a temporary contract.
2-In the US, the figures do not include about 9 million illegal workers. In Europe the figures include a major part of the illegal migrants through the asylum seekers: Few of them are accepted but as we take in account the demands and not the acceptances it means that those who stay illegally in the country are included.
3-The figures both in the US and Europe do not include the second generation, that is to say people born in Europe from parents born in a foreign country.
-Comments
There is a growing stock in the US and Europe. Compared to the country population the stock represents 11% in the US and 7% in the European community.
However, the figures would increase in taking in account the second and third generation: People born in Europe from parents born in a foreign country. This appreciation calls for more statistics detailed by origins.
12-Origins
1-In the US, the main flows are coming from Mexico, Central America, Asia and the pacific rim. Migrants from central America (Latinos) are mostly from European origin just like Spanish, Italian or French. What is more, they are Christians. The pacific rim and Asia provide the US with high qualified migrants with peaceful religions: For example, 34% of the American doctors in science are born outside the US just like 32% of the physic Nobel prize. Finally, naturalization implies a pledge of allegiance and patriotism is very embedded in the new citizens.
2-In Europe, Africa and the Middle East are the main suppliers. India and Asia are in second position. Few people come from South America ( To Spain notably ) and from the Pacific rim. It means that the origins of migrants are not the same as in the US. Consider the next drawing ( In Million ): The figures also include the people coming from the European Union and from other European countries such as Russia, Ukraine, ex Yugoslavia and so on.
DRAWING 3
Years--------------- 1991/92-------- 1996---------- 2001/02
UE-------------------- 6,2 ------------6,8----------- 7,1
Others Europeans---- 1,4------------ 1,6------------2,4
European subtotal---- 7,6------------ 8,4------------9,5
Third world----------- 11,4---------- 15,6-----------19,5
Total----------------- 19------------- 24-------------29
Roughly, we can consider that the flow coming from the third world is on an average of 1 million every year. Taking in account the second and third generation ( People born in Europe from parents born in a foreign country) we have to consider an average growth rate of 1.6% over 27 years ( Since 1975 ). So we may add 5 million and we get a global population of 24 million. Globally, within a margin of 20%, it means that the no European population inhabiting the European Union ( 25 countries ) is about 29 million ( Compared to 470 million inhabitants-Eastern countries have very few third world migrants ).
13-Conclusion
1-There is an increase in the last years notably in the US. This fact corresponds to a permanent trend in connection with the strength of the economy. The next table shows the migrants flows since 1961 (in Million- only legal and permanent migrants):
DRAWING 4
Period---------- 61-70------ 71-80----- 81-90------- 91-2000
Migrants-------- 3,3--------- 4,5-------- 7,3----------- 9
We must underline that this evolution results of the official policy: In 1965 quotas by nationalities have been suppressed in order to increase the flow of migrants and the labor force required by the economy.
2-Regarding Europe, we have only to take in account third world migrants. they represent 6.5% of the European Union ( 25 countries- 470 million inhabitants ). It means that until now migrations are not overflowing Europe. However, we have to pay attention to the recent increase due to the nature of these migrations
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
The main evolution in the recent years is the increase of family and asylum seekers at the detriment of labor migrations. This trend impacts mainly the European area.
21-Economic migrations
Most people migrate to earn more money in richer countries. Beside the gap in wages, many people are just seeking a job since their own country registers a high unemployment rates. For example, most of the migrations to the US are caused by the idea to improve a living.
After world war 2, the same analysis could apply to Europe because the reconstruction created a huge demand for workers. Many immigrants came from southern European countries such as Spain, Italy and Portugal. They also came from north Africa and Turkey but they were mainly recruited for temporary employment and expected to leave the country at the end of their contract.
Today, economic migrations should slow down in accordance with the globalization. Through Standard Free Trade Theory, globalization is expected to equalize the incomes and to reduce the need to migrate. Trade Theory posits that the richer countries, which have more capital, should specialize in the high-tech goods. Meanwhile the poor countries, with their cheaper workers, should specialize in the labor-intensive activities. The poorer countries should then be able to send goods instead of people.
Clearly, this success story is not happening for many different reasons (Too much risks for investors in some regions, wars, dictatorships and so on). On the contrary, we often observe a growing gap between rich and poor countries. As a result, the stream of migrants from third World countries toward the North does not stop. In fact, it increases in magnitude.
22-Family migrations
With the oil shock of 1973 and the beginning of a sluggish growth and structural unemployment, the European governments stopped the immigration policy. However, they authorized the migrants present on their territory to stay and they accepted their families to come.
As a result and despite the freeze on economic immigration, the flow of spouses, children and parents has never stopped until now. Most of the permanent an legal migration in Europe is today represented by the large third world families. Of course such a flow was not expected when the economic migration was authorized during the reconstruction period.
It means that an economic migration can evolve in a social migrations with uncertain benefits for the receiving country.
23-Asylum seekers
Many countries in Africa are returning to the Middle Ages and have no future. Globally wars and insecurity are on the increase and many peoples only want to join a safe harbor in Europe.
Populations are hopeless: Even rich people fear for their life and are deprived of any health support. They want to join Europe in order to get cure and relief. Beside material poverty, there is a psychological poverty. In the Middle east, people endure sexual frustration and taboo like virginity. Due to its sexual liberation, Europe appears like a paradise.
As a result, young people want to join Europe at any price. Polls suggest that 82% of Moroccan under 30 would like to join Europe. Let's suppose we suppress the visa, nobody would stay in some countries such as Algeria and Kurdistan.
Asylum seekers come mainly from black Africa and the Middle East (including north Africa). Firstly these two regions are badly managed through dictatorships. Secondly, they endure a lot of wars and genocide's. Thirdly, population is on the increase: Black Africa with 700 million to day is expected to reach 1,400 million before 2030. The Middle East (500 million today) is expected to get 1,000 million in 2030. Unfortunately, these two regions are on the borders of Europe.
As a result, over the period 1989-98, four million people applied for asylum in Europe. This facts is a long term challenge.
DRAWING 5
Moreover, there is a great difference separating economic migrants and asylum seekers:
-Economic migrants bring their strengths and want to build up something (For example a better living) through their own work. This situation is prevalent in the US in accordance with a high growth rate.
-On the contrary, asylum seekers are attracted by social standards such as health system, sexual liberty, and consumer practices. They want to consume and rely on compassion or sometimes violence. What is more, these migrants have never known peace and freedom and too often bring with them negative beliefs, violent behaviors or bad habits. Clearly, it can result in predatory behaviors. In this case, migrations would look like a silent invasion, notably through migrations of replacement.
24-Migrations of replacement
The European population is expected to decline in the next decades. Sustaining a population requires each woman on average to bear 2.1 children. In the European Union, the overall rate is at 1.5 a woman. The current population of 470 million could decline to 440 million by 2030.
241-Proposals of the United Nations
The United Nations have estimated that to keep the EU population at its present level until 2050, it would be necessary to greet 1,6 million of new immigrants every year, that is to say 80 million people. The same United Nation calculations states that the EU would need 13,5 million immigrants each year in order to maintain the present ratio between working and retired population. It would mean over 50 years an import of 13,5*50= 675 million !
The pro-immigration lobby endorses these calculations: Third world activists suggest a massive immigration in order to restore an acceptable ratio between the working population and the pensioners. They don't take in account that this massive immigration is expected to retire some day and that we should need again a new wave in order to keep the acceptable rate and so on. It's just like Gribouille who throws himself in the river for avoiding to be wetted by the rain!
These calculations are meaningless. However, since they are propagated on a large scale, European opinion is more and more prepared for huge flows of migrants. It just works like a misinformation campaign: For example, UNESCO compares the Europeans to the old parents occupying a too large flat. The young of North Africa are assimilated to the children. Indeed, UNESCO concludes that the Europeans have to greet their children in their rich home (The European territory)!
242-Pretexts for a silent invasion
All these arguments are constantly repeated through the media's. In fact, they are basically wrong:
1-The French population increased from 40 million in 1940 to 60 in 2001. As a result towns are crowded, pollution increases and so on. Other European countries have also registered large increase in the past years. An expected decline would only be a correction.
2-Even with a zero economic growth, you can improve your income per capita: Since the European population declines while the size of the cake remains constant, the number of dinners diminish and consequently each slice of the cake increases. A good example of that is given by the Japanese ( Go to China and North east Asia ). There is no immigration in Japan and thanks to a declining population, the citizens increase their individual income.
3-In fact, the level of unemployment in most European countries does not justify huge migrations. Shortages in some sectors are only due to bad regulations and could be met with a light entry of literate peoples gifted with skills. It is said that we need a young and dynamic population. In fact, we import young illiterate people and we export mature and highly educated persons: For example, 40% of all scientists working in America are Europeans. More than 70% of European students in the States do not plan to return to Europe!
4-The pension problem has nothing to do with migrations. We have just to work longer and to compensate the weight of the pensions on the active population by a decrease of taxes.
5-Let's suppose than some immigration would appear useful. In such a situation the new enlargement would offer an opportunity: Millions of Poles or Russians would enjoy to migrate in our countries and the recent history shows that these populations easily integrate. Surprisingly, the European Union imposed temporary limits on immigration from their new Eastern members: Eastern citizens have to wait several years before they can apply for work in Western European countries!
6-On the other hand, it can be said that such huge migrations would impede the development of third world countries. Once again and surprisingly, the third world activists do not worry about that and attempt to justify it. This fact illustrates that they do not care about the Third world. It's just a pretext. Their main motive is the destruction of our Civilization.
In fact, the migrations of replacement are just a new propaganda created by a powerful lobby. For the European civilization, the acceptance of this scheme would be a planned suicide!
Hot comments!
Do you agree? Do you not agree? Send your comments.
Click Here
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
Immigration can be an asset. It can also be a nuisance. It depends on the nature of the migration and the economic situation of the receiving country.
Unfortunately, the economic analysis of migrations is today limited to some arguments that are just nonsense's. The fact that these wrong arguments are constantly repeated do not provide them with a single bit of truth.
31-Wrong analysis
The only theory on migrations depends on the Standard Free Trade Theory. Despite globalization, we have seen that it does not explain today migrations.
1-Free trade activists and no border movements claim that the freedom of mobility of workers must be exactly the same as for goods and services: Absolute freedom. For example Johan Norberg in his book "The defence of global capitalism" complains that the EU governments are building high walls against the migrants.
In fact, we cannot compare an human being with a good, a service or a capital stock. A good is consumed. A good has no family. A good does not need education and health service. Regarding a migrant, we have to distinguish the work he brings (and this work is really a good as any other good) and the human being who cannot be treated as a merchandise. Look at the next drawing:
DRAWING 6/ 7
Consequently, it is absolutely fruitless to posit that since we are for free trade of goods and capital, we have to support unlimited mobility of people and the abolishment of all borders.
2-It is said that adding more workers and consumers through immigration rises the GDP. Of course, production increases by the growth of the active population and the consequent increase in the amount of work done.
Nevertheless, the real growth per capita will fall when the growth rate of the GDP is inferior to the growth rate of the population. If the number of slices of a cake increases more rapidly than the size of the cake itself, your share will be smaller and smaller.
This situation is experienced by many undeveloped countries. The countries with the lowest increase of GDP per capita are those with the highest birth rate
3-However, the main argument of the lobby is that the migrants do the low paid jobs and the difficult or dangerous works that the natives reject. The falsity of this "new law" must be carefully demonstrated.
-Regarding the low paid jobs, a labor is a good and the workers are the suppliers of this specific good. The law of supply holds that other things equal, the quantity supplied will rise as the price rises and will decrease as the price decreases. It means that the quantity of work will rise as the wages rise and inversely.
This law is illustrated by the supply curve (S). In our example, the graph shows an increase in quantity of work (Q1 to Q2) as the wages rises (P1 to P2) and a decrease on the contrary:
This curve means that a shortage of work is only due because the wages are too low. If the wages were higher, the quantity of work should increase.
Consequently, it is false to say that the migrants do the low paid jobs that the natives reject. In fact, the low paid jobs just exist because the migrants are present and ready to accept low wages. Without immigration, and according to the curve, the wages would increase and sure the natives would accept these jobs.
-Regarding the dirty, dangerous or difficult works:
1-In France, 57% of the migrants are employed in the services: Does it mean that the services are dangerous?
2-The dirty and difficult works are found in Agriculture. Most of our farmers are natives. It means that the hardness of some works is not rejected by our natives.
In fact, the benefits and costs of immigration only depends on the law of diminishing returns: When an increasing amount of one factor of production is used with fixed amounts of other factors, the increase of output becomes smaller and smaller. It means that an increasing amount of labor must be coupled with an increasing amount of capital and technology: In this case we have no diminishing returns.
So we must distinguish a situation where all the factors are increasing such as in the US and a situation where only labor increases while other factors remain quite constant.
32-First case: Availability of other factors and flexible wages
In this first case, we suppose that the economy is strongly rising. Capital and technology are available. The demand of labor is high. Consequently, the wages are increasing and according to the above drawing 8, the supply of labor by the workers is also rising.
However, such a rise in wages can impede the growth because it would result in a cost inflation and a fall of the consumers demand. Consequently, it becomes fruitful to import workers just like you import goods.
When you import new workers, there is a shift in the curve. A shift means that a change in cost is occurring: In this case, the migrants have a cost of living inferior to the natives and so accept lower wages. It results in a new supply curve S2:
Wages diminish, and nevertheless, thank to the migrants, the supply of labor increases. Costs and selling prices of goods are reduced. Consequently, the consumers demand increases. Since capital and technology are available, the global production rises. In a near future, wages will increase again and everybody is winner.
However we must underline three facts:
1-First this analysis implies that other factors such as capital and technology are present. Otherwise the diminishing returns would oppose a limit to the growth. It implies also that the level of wages is flexible.
2-This situation favors the consumers and the economic growth. It is not sure that it benefits to the native workers. I think that the decreasing part of the wages in proportion of the gross national income both in the US and Europe since the beginning of the eighties could be related to this situation.
3-This analysis does not take in account the migrant as human being. It always must be completed by a social analysis in order to have a full overview of the benefits and costs of migrations.
4-Anyway, in this example, immigration is an asset. For example, the US economy has benefited of immigration in the last ten years. It has prevented a rise of the wages and a cost inflation.
33-Second case: No available factors and floor prices for wages
We have to distinguish two situation: No available factors and secondly no available factors + Minimum wage
331-no available factors
Let's suppose an economy with full employment and an equilibrium between the supply S of labor and the demand through a basic price P (Level of wages). The first graph shows this situation:
DRAWING 10
Let's suppose that migrants are entering in the country. The second graph shows that the supply of labor increases from S to S+ and that the level of wages falls from p to p-. Once again, there is not any unemployment. But due to the absence of other factors, the increase of labor does not rise the production. So, the prices do not diminish for the consumers and the only result of the operation is the decrease of the wages for the natives and certainly a negative effect on the growth.
Third world activists contest this fact. They argue that many studies have found that immigration had no significant effect on the level of wages. Unfortunately, these studies regard the US or the UK that belong to the first case of our analysis. I think that studies in continental Europe would bring very different conclusions.
332-No available factors + minimum wage.
With a floor price for the wages, any import of workers results in a stock of unemployment. The next drawing shows the situation : As P is a price floor (minimum wage) it can't fall. As a result, all the increase of supply S+ becomes unemployment:
DRAWING 11
If the jobless receive handouts, the cost is transferred to the State and the taxpayers.
In such a situation, natives and migrants are in competition for jobs. Regarding the difficult or dirty jobs, businessmen may avoid to rise the wages in order to increase the supply of work because they have a large stock of unemployment. Such a situation is negative for the workers.
Europe endures this situation because it has a slow growth rate, a large unemployment and a minimum wage in most countries. What is more, western European countries have to manage the enlargement toward poor countries of eastern Europe with a large stock of unemployment.
In such a situation, there are no reasons to accept large flows of immigration. Moreover, the present immigration only results in a decrease of the productivity and delays the technical progress because the businessmen are not eager to invest. Finally, in a sluggish economy, Immigration results in an increase of social and public spending. As a result, the available savings for investments diminish and by the end the growth diminishes too and the unemployment rises. It is like a vicious circle.
Hot comments!
Do you agree? Do you not agree? Send your comments.
Click Here
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
A migrant is not only a good (the labor he brings). He is also an human being. Regarding migrations, any economic analysis must be completed by a social analysis.
41-Social impact
The welfare system is not in accordance with the Standard Free Trade Theory. If health and education were paid by the consumers like any other goods, the problem would not exist but in most European countries social services are partly free for the consumers and since nothing is free, these services are really paid by the taxpayers.
411-Do the migrants consume more social services than the natives?
Clearly the migrants are big consumers because they often come from countries where it is an habit to have many children. The Pro-immigration lobby constantly repeats that immigrants soon pick up local habits and opt for smaller families. Once again, it is a big lie.
1-In France, a survey shows that the fertility rate (Number of children per woman) of the foreigners remains higher (2,8) than those of natives ( 1,7). Moreover some women have a fertility rate higher than those of the women staying in their home countries. The next drawing shows some fertility rates of migrants in France:
DRAWING 12
Period-French natives-European-Turkish-North African-African
1981/82--- 1.84---------- 1.92------5.13----- 4.63------4.51
1988/90--- 1.71---------- 1.67------3.73------3.42------4.72
1998/99----1.72---------- 1.65------3.35------3.25----- 4.07
As a comparison, the fertility rate is only 2.3 in Turkey and 2.9 in Algeria. At the Beginning of their settlement, and since they enjoy health and free services such as education and nursery, the migrants tend to have more children in Europe than in their home countries. Of course, more they stay and more their fertility rate is going closer to the natives but since there is an increasing flow of new migrants, the global fertility rate remains high.
What is more, Europe receives a great flow of migrants coming from North Africa and the Middle East. Unfortunately, the Muslim countries have not yet mastered their fertility rates. Let' us take the example of Albania. It is an European country inhabited by Muslims. Its fertility rate in 2001 reaches 2.2 while the neighboring Christian Italy only gets 1.2!
2-As a result, in nurseries, health services, and schools, there are more migrants than natives in proportion of the population. In some districts, children from migrants represent 70% in elementary classes. In Brussels, the capital of Europe, Mohammed has been the most popular name for new born boys for the past four years.
3-In Europe, migrants consume large amounts of handouts for unemployment because their unemployment rate is higher than the natives. For young migrants under 24, the unemployment rate often peaks to 45%. In some suburbs, many young migrants are constantly idle and only receive handouts for their living.
4-Some surveys posit that because of the rate of delinquency, there is also a large expenditure in police and penitentiary services.
5- Studies have shown that a migrant who earns 1000 per year needs about 4000 in investments in order to greet him and his family. Of course, any increase in population results in a need for roads, public transportation, schools, health support and so on. Since a large proportion of the European population natural growth is due to the migrants, it means that a part of these investments is only the result of migration and does not profit to the natives.
412-Do the migrants contribute to social services?
Once again, the pro-immigration lobby claims that migrants more than pay their way and they refer to some UK or US surveys. In these countries the social security system is less developed than in Europe and no one could expect to live only with social aid.
The same studies in continental Europe with its high level of social security and progressive income tax would certainly show exactly the contrary. In most countries, social services are partly free for the consumers. Since nothing is free, a national solidarity between poor's and riches has been established. Thank to the payroll and progressive income taxes, a part of the social services is paid by few taxpayers.
Of course, the migrants pay the consumer taxes but in many areas, you may observe the development of a "migrant economy" (or more precisely a third world economy) based on the black market which avoids consumer and payroll taxes. In this market ( Drugs, garments and so on) you will find substandard working conditions and sometimes slave like working conditions.
Norberg answers that such a situation gives us cause to reform our social security system and labor regulation. It means that health and education must be considered like other goods and paid by the consumers and not by the taxpayers. Well, we can accept the theory but unfortunately our populations do not accept that because they want to maintain a national solidarity between riches and poor's.
Does it mean that the native taxpayers have to subsidize all the world misery? Obviously, we cannot harbor million of refugees and our social systems would not resist any more.
42-Externalities
Negative externalities (pollution, nuclear insecurity and so on) are a core topic for third world activists in their struggle against our free societies. Surprisingly, regarding immigration, they never study this fact. However, negative externalities are obvious in some areas: Roads and public transportation's crowded, noise pollution, habits and so on.
Hot comments!
Do you agree? Do you not agree? Send your comments.
Click Here
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
With the surge of international terrorism, we are obliged to take in account a security analysis regarding migrations. Europe is mainly concerned in connection with the important flow of migrants coming from hot places such as the Middle East and North Africa.
The pro-immigration lobby says that such facts are disturbing only if people choose to think so. It explains that only racists or elderly uneducated people can be disturbed by this situation. Truth is quite different. It is not a problem of races relations. It is a problem of resistance facing the surge of Islamism. Go to the Future of Europe and to new war.
Hot comments!
Do you agree? Do you not agree? Send your comments.
Click Here
1-BIG PICTURES 2-NATURE OF MIGRATIONS 3-ECONOMIC
ANALYSIS 4-SOCIAL ANALYSIS 5-CONCLUSION
Home page Legal advices Privacy policy Search engines Contact