Jenna Wilemon
The topic of immigration seems to be a never-ending political debate. On every major news channel, it is constantly arguedby candidates of all political backgrounds. While the topic of immigration is much more complex than anyone simple economic policy, I believe that it is important to keep this simple one in mind, the lump of labor fallacy. The belief that the lump of labor fallacy demolishes, seems to be a major concern and the most basic argument against immigration. Many Americans feel uneasy about mass immigration to the United States because of the belief that new immigrants will cause unemployment for current citizens, impeding economic growth. This sort of thinking exemplifies the lump of labor fallacy. However, in the long run, there are not a set number of jobs and therefore economic growth will not be impeded by immigration.
Many influential American politicians believe that mass immigration will cause current American citizens to lose their jobs and impede economic growth. The latest American president, Donald Trump, has been very vocal about his concerns for mass immigration to the United States. Trump states “They [immigrants]are taking our jobs. They are taking our manufacturing jobs. They are taking our money” (Schreckinger). Another influential figure, Lamar Smith, who is a member of the House of Representatives for Texas stated, “it [immigration] would cost Americans their jobs when they have to compete with millions of more [immigrants] for scarce jobs” (Bordelon).
However, the lump of labor fallacy has proved that this is not true. Charles Wheelan, a former correspondent for The Economist, stated that the lump of labor fallacy is “the mistaken belief that there is a fixed amount of work to be done in the economy, and therefore every new job must come at the expense of a job lost somewhere else” (132). This means that the unemployed will only be able to find a job if someone who is currently employed, works less or not at all (132). However, new immigrants coming to America means new people with new ideas who can create products that don’t exist or are more productive than the ones before. These new products create new jobs, and thus the economy is better off than it was in the first place. This idea is very influential in my life as I have seen it happen with my own family. My French grandma (ironic as the French believed lump of labor to be true) grew up in Algiers, Algeria. When news of World War II spread, she volunteered to drive ambulances for the French. On one of those trips, she met a handsome American named Norman. They quickly fell in love, and after the war ended, he brought her home to America with him. Upon arriving, my grandma took a job at an upholstery shop and began sewing French designs on American furniture. Her craft was greatly appreciated, and eventually, my grandma decided to open her own upholstery shop. Thus, creating several new jobs that did not exist before. In the short run, there were some negative effects, such as added competition due to more workers in the market, but more jobs were created than were negatively impacted. In the end, the economy was left better off than it was before. Of course, I wouldn’t expect anyone to believe this based solely on one personal example, so here are a few instances which prove that the idea of the lump of labor is incorrect.
Over the past three decades, millions of jobs have been created in the American economy to support the influx of female workers and the birth of the tech industry. However, unemployment remains relatively low (132). In fact,statistically, unemployment tends to be the highest when immigration is the lowest. In 1970, (a year with one of the lowest amounts of immigration in U.S. history)immigrants made up 4.7 percent of the total population, and unemployment was6.1 percent (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). However, in 2016 (one of the highest)immigrants made up 13.5 percent and unemployment was at 4.2 percent (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). This was not just a single fluke, as economists looked not only at singular years but trends throughout American history. David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, States, “During the years when immigration was above the historical average unemployment was 5.7 percent. During all other years it was 7.2 percent”.Of course, as I mentioned before, the topic of immigration is more complex than this one fallacy. If you are looking for more information on immigration, I invite you to dig through the 607 million results that appear when the word immigration is googled. However, I believe that it is important to simplify complex problems before searching for their answer. The simple belief that there are only a limited number of jobs in an economy, and thus in the long run immigrants create unemployment, just isn’t true. In fact, statistical data definitively proves that more immigrants create less unemployment.
Works Cited
Bier, David. “Why Unemployment Is Lower When Immigration Is Higher.” Cato Institute. July 26, 2016. Accessed December 10, 2018. https://www.cato.org/blog/why-unemployment-lower-when-immigration-higher.
Bordelon, Brendan, Casey Wooten, Alex Rogers, Ronald Brownstein, and Josh Kraushaar.”The GOP’s Great ImmigrationDivide.” National Journal – Log In. Accessed December 08, 2018. https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/663205/gops-great-immigration- divide?mref=search-result.
Schreckinger, Ben, Nick Gass, Jack Shafer, Ash Carter, and Max Blau. “Donald Trump Storms Phoenix.” Politico. July11, 2015. Accessed December 06, 2018. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/donald-trump-storms-phoenix-119989.
“U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Accessed December 10, 2018. https://www.bls.gov/.
Wheelan, Charles. Naked Economics: Undressing the Dismal Science. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010.
Bear Market 