NorthIowaToday.com

Founded in 2010

News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

Study shows that Mexican immigrants protected American workers from job losses during recession by returning to Mexico

MEXICO
MEXICO

A recent study shows that Mexican immigrants protected American workers from job losses during the “Great Recession” by returning to Mexico.

According to the study, the recession that began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, now commonly referred to as the Great Recession, represented the largest decline in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) since World War II. Total employment fell by more than eight million jobs, and unemployment rose by more than five percentage points.  In addition, there was substantial variation in the severity of the recession across geography, with some local labor markets losing more than 15 percent of employment while others experienced small gains.  These types of labor market conditions are of particular concern for workers with lower levels of education.

That’s where the study picks up, claiming that the Mexican immigrants – many of whom were unskilled workers – were mobile and ready to move to where the jobs were located at any given time, versus their skilled American worker counterparts, whom were likely to stay put.

“Natives (American workers) living in cities with many similarly skilled Mexicans were thus insulated from local shocks, as the departure of Mexican workers absorbed part of the demand decline,” the authors of the story, Brian C. Cadena and Brian K. Kovak, wrote.

They went on to say that this “Mexican mobility” served to equalize labor market outcomes across the country as the recession ran its course.

“Immigrants thus play a crucial and understudied role in increasing the overall geographic responsiveness of less-skilled laborers in the U.S., and this result adds a new dimension to the existing literature that focuses on workers’ responsiveness to demand shocks based on education and demographics,” they said.

5 LEAVE A COMMENT2!
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

That’s like the government called the deaths in Bengazie WORK PLACE INJURIES > no kidding !

Such bullshit. If the government is going to subsidize this industry then then the industry should pay a fare wage and we won’t need immigrants. Does anybody that can run a algebraic calculator understand what a higher wage means to our economy? You stupid politicians are worthless crooks. Each and every one of you. I wouldn’t take that job unless all 548 quit and were replaced with middle class citizens. This is exactly what America needs. You rich folk just cruise on down the line and let us middle class run this place.

This is yet another “economics major” study trying to define some sort of phenomenon they perceive to benignly exist which is then latched onto by some “journalist” crafting it to fit a narrative. The narrative is that the illegal is somehow not detrimental but even beneficial to our economy and that they even out the effects of an economic downturn.
What these morons simply fail to acknowledge (due to political positions they’ve assumed) is that while illegals are more likely to boogie on down the road because the job is gone (as they have no real stake in the community), they have also directly taken economic life blood out of our economy (wages & welfare) and shipped it off to Mexico (or wherever they are from).
There is nothing beneficial at all to the US and the study authors are decidedly too far up their ivory tower to even detect that fact.

@watchdog-you are absolutely correct. Also, it was because of the recession and not having any work. They did not go home to help the American workers.

What a crock!

There were so many unemployed Americans that wanted the jobs the employers had to hire American workers. To be exposed hiring an illegal Mexican would wreak havoc on the employer.

They went home because they could not FIND work!

You libs will say and do anything to promoted your nonsense!!!

Even more news:

Copyright 2024 – Internet Marketing Pros. of Iowa, Inc.
5
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x