Order 2148040: immigration
tutorthammy
ImmigrationintheU.S.1.docxSahar 4
Fawad Sahar
Professor Kathleen Martins
English 101
November 23, 2019
Immigration in the U.S. Consequences and Compromise
Immigration has been one of the contentious issues that demand policymakers in the United States (U.S.) to make rational decisions. Research on migration shows that there is are both positive and negative aspects of the issue. On the one hand, the U.S. can implement stringent policies as a way to retract immigration into the country. On the other hand, the U.S. can employ lenient policies that allow for a level of immigration into the country. Under this case, the country will be comprising the issue of immigration. Regardless of the policy stance in the U.S., it has to face various repercussions. Implementation of stringent or lenient immigration policies by the U.S. as a way to retraction or expand on immigration results in either compromises or consequences, which this essay analyzes.
Opening the U.S. economy comes at the cost of decreased safety and security. The world currently is not devoid of conflicts, which are primarily caused by diversity issues. Immigration results in the introduction of new ethnicities and cultures, which inhibit different ideologies and perspectives into a community that is already established, a phenomenon that can cause friction (d'Appollonia 34). For example, the interaction between Islamic immigrants in the U.S. creates much tension between the two groups. The native population is often afraid of the unknown, which creates a general fear associated with immigrants by the host community (d'Appollonia 34). This contact explains the reason behind negative interactions between the U.S. government and its population with immigrants within the country. Consequently, this type of communication increases tension between the groups, which results in false reports and at times, altercations (d'Appollonia 35). The U.S. government is coerced to increase its level of security monitoring over as a way to prevent the occurrence of trouble.
Opponents of immigration advocate for more stringent policies that aim at minimizing the inflow of immigrants into the U.S. The significant consequence of implementing such systems is on government expenditure. Rowthorn claims that immigration has an effect of increasing the population of the host country (561). With this increase, there is more pressure on social services, such as public transport, schools, and hospitals (Rowthorn 561). The government has to spend more to provide these services for the increased population. Therefore, stringent rationale policies reduce pressure that the community exerts in the consumption of these resources. With fewer consumers, the government does not have to spend much of its revenue on offering these social services. Additionally, the U.S. population can continue to enjoy the quality of public amenities that the government provides without foreign competition (Rowthorn 572). Therefore, stringent immigration policies check on government expenditure and ensure the quality of services the government offers.
Implementing strict immigration policies compromises the wage of Native American workers. A bulk of academic research and prediction by the economic theory stipulate that over the long-term, immigration impacts the wages of native laborers positively (Ottaviano and Peri 156). Immigrants termed as imperfect substitutes for native workers in the U.S. labor market. The rationale is that immigrants and these native workers do not compete for the same work opportunities, which puts little or no downward pressure on the income of native workers (Ottaviano and Peri 156). Studies reveal that immigrants increase the supply of labor for low-end jobs, which drives up the demand for work for high-end jobs. By implementing policies that curb immigration, there will be a low demand for labor from native workers to occupy high-end employment. In effect, there will be a reduction in the average wages of these native workers.
When making immigration laws, policymakers open the U.S. economy and population to various consequences while at the same time, compromise other aspects. Comprehensive immigration policies have the propensity to increase the U.S. GDP but compromises local safety and security while lenient policies reduce the level of government expenditure but reduce the level of wages for Native American workers. Given the two-sided attribute of the immigration issue, it is essential for policymakers to critically analyze the implications of each before reaching a solid conclusion. The U.S. Government needs to fund research on the long-term impacts of immigration, which could be a good source of insightful information and serve a basis for decision making.
Works Cited
Boubtane, Ekrame, et al. "Immigration, unemployment and GDP in the host country: Bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis on OECD countries." Economic Modelling, vol. 33, 2013, pp. 261-269.
d'Appollonia, Ariane Chebel. Frontiers of Fear: Immigration and Insecurity in the United States. Cornell University Press, 2012.
Docquier, Frédéric, Çağlar Ozden, and Giovanni Peri. "The labour market effects of immigration and emigration in OECD countries." The Economic Journal 124.579 (2013): 1106-1145.
Ottaviano, Gianmarco I., and Giovanni Peri. "Rethinking the Effect of Immigration on Wages." Journal of the European Economic Association, vol. 10, no. 1, 2011, pp. 152-197.
Rowthorn, Robert. "The fiscal impact of immigration on the advanced economies." Oxford Review of Economic Policy 24.3 (2008): 560-580.
