***I calculated this wrong. This was the only number I took the liberty of calculating and it blew it up in my big, dumb face. So let’s go to Borjas’ textbook and see why I scored a 1030 on my
SATs: (pg. 35 -
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/gborjas/publications/books/LE/LEChapter4
.pdf) I thought the number was presented as a total percentage of wage loss after 20 years. But it’s just the average, placing Borjas’ number at around $700. (
Prof.
David Henderson guides you through my
error on his blog: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2016/02/comedian_tackle
.html -- he was kind enough to take time out of his day to explain over the phone where I went wrong, which was well appreciated.) Had I calculated this correctly the first time, I would have instantly starting campaigning for
Trump. Kidding. I certainly would have presented the correct information and also made more of an effort to highlight other economists like Card,
Ottaviano, Peri (people I only mention in passing), who come to vastly different conclusions about the wage impact on high-school dropouts: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14188. It also wouldn’t change the premise of the talk: that when we compare the benefits to the migrant to the costs to the host country, we’re left with an easy moral choice, and that this is just another problem we would need to solve.
Nevertheless, I’m completely embarrassed by my liberal-arts-math and offer my full apologies to the viewer.
For notes and references please visit: http://www.stevegerben.com/immigration/
Chapters
1.
Introduction /
Basketball Story
2.
Jobs (
Costs) - 3:
30
3. Welfare (Costs) - 5:26
4. Benefits to Migrants - 10:50
5.
Undocumented Immigrants - 15:45
6. Jobs (Solutions) - 20:53
7. Welfare (Solutions) - 25:51
8. Vaginas - 27:14
9.
Closing Remarks - 28:40
Disclaimer: I do not discuss
Syrian refugees. This talk primarily addresses the economic concerns surrounding immigration that have existed before the
Paris attacks, and that will continue to exist long after the
Syrian crisis ends.
A lot of questions in the
Q&A; revolved around the
Brain Drain.
Michael Clemens speaks to this concern more eloquently than I ever can, so please watch him here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKDQp
...
I'm generally an idiot, so everything I discuss comes from the work of people far more intelligent than myself. I tried, as best I could, to present their research and/or arguments as accurately as possible. Predominantly I pull from the work of Michael Clemens,
Lant Pritchett,
Bryan Caplan,
Alex Nowrasteh, Philipee Legrain,
William Easterly, and
Gordon Hanson.
Although many friends and family members helped by critiquing multiple drafts of this talk, two people deserve special mention:
Mike Rainey wrote the bulk of jokes for the show. I’m lucky to have access to a writer that any writer’s room would be lucky to have. He is head-to-toe, hip-to-hip a pro.
Chris O’Connor devoted an enormous amount of time helping me work through the structure of the show; without his insight and wit the talk would have been a scatter-brained, hour long screed. He also hosted the show and was absolutely hilarious.
All that said, nothing diminishes the time, effort, and jokes also contributed by: Tim
Butterly,
Chip Chantry, Darryl
Charles, and
Natalie Wilson. I'm honored and grateful to have had their help.
- published: 28 Jan 2016
- views: 5724