This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
After i analyzed different data from different materials the findings do not imply that policymakers can ignotr immigrants implication and their positive attitude that they bring to the labour market. Starting with the workers that are low skilled it can be observed that they confront huge obstacles to labour market success, and even immigration is responsible or not it is mostly comprehend to be a contributing factor. Numerous attempts to help these category of workers from becoming concentrated in low-skill jobs, and also to win the public trust in immigration system. Also efforts to raise employer-provided training can play a role in ensuring that immigration does not interfere with the training and promote of the native workers.
In the meantime, polling prouf brings on that the large public across UK and US believe that immigrants are responsible from taking away jobs from native born. In a very nearly dated poll a majority of US respondents think that immigrants are the cause of them not being able to get a job. In a similar survey this time accros UK, almost two-fifths of British respondents named as one of the first two causes of job loss immigration. Besides that more than 50% agreed that unskilled Britons wages are being cut off by immigration.(IMM AND LABOUR MARKET)
But these beliefs are in total contrats with the academic research. All the written evidence reflects that workers' wages ar not being reduced because of immigration. The same result is when it comes about the increase of unemployment rates. It is obvious that some forms of immigration are beneficial to the local population, whilst others are costly. But taken as a whole these effects mostly cancel out.
Unemployment and Wages
Basic laws of supply and demand agree that raising the supply of labour normally has to reduce wages for native workers for a short turn. The reason for this is that more people are able to supply their labour at a certain wage. If for any reason wages cannot adjust the result is not going to be a wage reduction but an increased unemployment. At the same time, businesses are expected to react to immigration with more jobs .They increase production of the goods that immigrants produce, raising the demand for labour and pushing wages again. In a economy like Britain has at one point wages are eventualy going to return to their previous level. This example reffers to immigrants and natives as they have the same characteristics. In reality though, they normally have different skills and abilities. Overall, the different they are the less competition will be among them in the labour market. This is the reason why immigration may lead to a slight reduction in wages and employment in this particular case of low-skilled jobs. It is because by their nature, this area needs less training or education compared with highly paid work, making it easier to replace immigrants for native workers. When you look to UK public sector statistics it is easy to notice that 31 % of immigrant women and also 16% of immigrant men works in the public sector. This numbers are similar for the UK-born. Of course that immigration will not have the same impact on public sector wages and employment as compared to the private sector. This is happening because in private businesses profit maximisation has the last word to say when it comes about hiring decisions.
The positive impact of immigration results in part from the fact that immigrants help to fill growing gaps in our labor force. These gaps develop as aging native-born workers, in larger numbers than ever before, succeed in attaining higher levels of education and subsequently pursue higher-skill, higher-wage jobs. If the United States were to reform the immigration system to better address the demand for foreign-born labor, largely through ensuring that such workers were a part of the transparent and competitive "above ground" economy, the economic benefits of immigration could be even greater than what we have already experienced. Immigrants and their employers would likely benefit from a more predictable workforce environment and less time and resources would be spent addressing the dysfunction that is a result of a strong demand for a labor force that our laws do not accommodate.
Undocumented immigration is largely the result of two opposing forces: an immigration policy that significantly restricts the flow of labor and the economic reality of a changing native-born U.S. population. The extent to which the U.S. economy has become dependent on immigrant workers is evident in the labor force projections of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). According to BLS estimates, immigrants will account for about a quarter of labor force growth between 2002 and 2012. Given that roughly half of immigrants now arriving in the United States are undocumented, this means that 1 in 8 workers joining the U.S. labor force over the coming decade will be undocumented immigrants. Many of the jobs that would be harder to fill without this labor supply are already associated with immigrant labor: construction, agriculture, meatpacking, and hospitality. A growing number of immigrants, however, are also filling jobs in fields that are vitally important to serving America's aging population, such as home healthcare. This indicates that while policymakers debate the relative merits of various immigration reform proposals, immigration beyond current legal limits has already become an integral component of U.S. economic growth and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future.
Latest Home Ofice report gives evidence that immigration is not influencing in a negative way local workers. Also you can notice that even if it is possible that immigration can lead to a lower employment for native workers, it is also probabile that wages for workers who keep their jobs will go up. The finding that immigration leads to higher money wages is at first sight surprising, but in fact it makes sense in the British context. The inflow of immigrants into an area may increase the demand for housing and push up the cost of living. To compensate their workforce many employers are likely to raise money wages. If the resulting increase in wages is less than the original increase in the cost of living, local workers will be worse off even though they are being paid more. Thus, the finding that immigration leads to higher money wages is plausible, but it is not conclusive proof that immigration is to the benefit of local workers.
Coming back to U.S. if i analyzed to high-quality data that studies offer i noticed that a 10% increase in the share of immigrants in the US labour force will usually change the average wages across the economy by only a few percent. However, examining the impact of immigration on average wages of all workers in an economy brings on an important fact. Not workers are affected proportionally by immigration.. Low skilled immigrants have to raise competiotion at the bottom of the draw, while high-skilled immigration should increase it at the top level. Because across US immigration is disproportionately low-skilled it is expected that the wage gap between the high-skilled and low skilled to grow. Also across US employment rates are not affected by immigration control policy.
The conclusion I draw from this literature regarding the UK area is that large scale immigration of unskilled labour does harm the local workers who compete with them, possibly by a large amount. Moreover, the workers who are harmed are not simply those in the locality where the immigrants arrive. They may also be located in other parts of the country. For example, an unskilled worker living in Clydeside may not move South in search of work, because jobs in the South have been filled by immigrants or housing costs have been pushed up and wages down by immigration. It is the conventional wisdom that such knock on effects of immigration are negligible. However, a very recent study by Tim Hatton and Massimiliano Tani finds that foreign immigration into the South of Britain has led to significantly reduced migration into the South from elsewhere in the country6. If their finding is correct, we should not expect to see the harmful effects of immigration to show up only in the South. They will also show up in the depressed areas of Scotland, the North of England and other places which have a surplus of labour that is deterred from moving South by competition from foreign migrants. It is often said that immigrants are needed to do the jobs that locals will not do. This may be true in a few cases, but in general it is false. In most parts of the country there are relatively few unskilled immigrants and it is the locals who do most of the jobs which British workers supposedly will not do. The problem in the end boils down to wages and conditions. When employers in the South of the country say that they cannot get workers to perform menial tasks, what they often mean is that local workers will not accept, or stay in, jobs at the kind of wages and conditions that they are offering. In this case, the problem is not an absolute shortage of labour, but a shortage of cheap labour. The most effective way to raise the wages of low paid workers is to maintain an artificial shortage of labour so that employers have no option but to pay more. This is inconsistent with the mass importation of cheap labour from abroad.
Immigration is a net positive for the U.S. economy and the presence of immigrants does not generally harm the native-born workforce. Studies that purport to demonstrate a negative impact on native-born wages and employment levels rely on an overly simplistic economic model of immigration and the economy. The most recent demographic analysis in conjunction with more sophisticated economic analysis reveals that most immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, do not compete directly with native-born workers for jobs. Instead, these immigrants provide a critical element of our nation's economic success and continued resiliency: a relatively young, willing, and dynamic supply of essential workers in areas such as healthcare, construction, retail, and agriculture. These are jobs that, once filled, enable our economy to continue the cycle of growth and job creation.
Indeed, this makes clear that the implication of the government's own BLS data cannot be ignored. To prosper, our economy desperately needs workers at both ends of the spectrum: young and less skilled as well as more educated and highly skilled. As a nation, we are in the midst of a slow-motion demographic cataclysm unlike any we have previously experienced. Immigration is not the only tool for seeing our way clear of the coming storm - but it is one without which we will not prosper. Without a continued and normalized flow of immigrant labor our workforce will fall well short of the numbers needed to meet the emerging demand for labor. The result will be an erosion of both the growth and increased standard of living that our citizenry has come to expect and to which future generations are entitled. Until the United States adopts a more articulated and thoughtful immigration policy that accommodates these economic realities, the insufficiency of current immigration and the problematic nature of undocumented immigration, in particular, will continue to hobble the economy