In a latest substack put up, David Friedman factors out an issue with judging immigrants solely by their fiscal influence. His evaluation is so clear that it’s value reposting a part of it. Right here it’s:
What’s weird about [Emil] Kierkegaard’s argument is that he identifies fiscal influence with contribution to society, writing, on the premise of calculations of fiscal influence:
There isn’t any age at which this group contributes extra to society than it receives.
What he means is “contributes extra to the state than it receives.” That’s not the identical factor.
Suppose the Danish authorities is operating a gentle deficit. A plague kills everybody in Denmark. Since no one is both paying taxes or receiving authorities providers, web authorities income has elevated from a detrimental worth to zero. By Kierkegaard’s definition, Danish society is now higher off.
For a extra real looking instance of the purpose think about that the US permits a number of Mexican immigrants. Their web fiscal influence is detrimental; my taxes go up by a thousand {dollars} a 12 months to cowl the fiscal loss. My skill to rent immigrants to wash my home, mow my garden, trim my bushes, restore my home, none of which was value the price of doing earlier than they arrived, makes me higher off by two thousand {dollars} a 12 months, and equally for different Individuals. The immigrants’ web contribution to society is optimistic though their contribution to authorities income is detrimental.
There could also be results within the different course as properly. If the immigrants commit a number of violent crime that decreases their contribution to society whether or not or not it decreases authorities income. Determining the online contribution of immigrants, or anybody else, to a society is a tough downside. That’s no excuse for calculating the contribution to web authorities income and utilizing that as an alternative.
Effectively mentioned.
The article “Immigration” in David R. Henderson, ed., The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics is by immigration skeptic George J. Borjas. He estimates each the positive aspects to “natives” from interplay with immigrants within the labor market and the losses to “natives” from greater welfare prices.
The pic above is of David Friedman.
