How does migration affect destination labor markets?
Simplistic Positions
Immigrants do jobs that natives don't want?
or
Immigrants steal native jobs and drive down wages?
Empirical question for neoclassical model
Compliments or substitutes?
Production Function
$$Q = f(X_1, X_2,...,X_j, K)$$
Demand Function
$$r_l = f_l(X_1, X_2,...,X_j, K)$$
Supply Function
$$X_l = S_l(r_l, Y_l)$$
Really ???
Homogeneous Labor
Heterogeneous Labor
Other Considerations
Natives may move
Immigrants buy things
Empirical Evidence
Any negative impact of immigration on natives appears to be small
Impact of immigration on immigrants is larger
Debate over distributional effects
Empirical Evidence: Problems
Hard to detect effects on low-skilled workers
Labor market influences locational choices
Mariel Boatlift
John Brousek, Against Wind and Tide: A Cuban Odyssey (1981)
Marielitos in Miami
May-Sep 1980: ~125,000 Cubans arrive in Miami. About half stay permanently there, representing a 7% increase in labor force overall; 20% increase in Cuban labor force.
Small (several hundred) group of inmates from jails and mental health facilities but rumors of thousands.
Lower education, lower English, more male, lower occupational attainment and attachment than existing population
34% wage gap with other Cubans in Miami (18% if we control for education, experience and gender)
Marielitos in Miami
50% increase in homicide rate
3-day riot in which 13 people were killed, driven partly by labor market competition from Cuban refugees
unemployment rose from 5% to 7.1%
Marielitos in Miami
Doesn't the rise in unemployment answer our question?
"The work of Card and Borjas is used to make general pronouncements about immigration policy, affecting tens of millions of people. But what do their rival results rest on?"
"[T]he Mariel of the economists is constructed around labour force data and economic theories that are designed to enable statistical logic to be brought to bear. But due to the fixation on the identification of causation they require Mariel to be torn out of its context and figured as a “natural experiment” a truly “exogenous event”. Furthermore, when examined in detail the identification of the effects that economists are fixated on, requires a treatment of data that turns out to be a strange form of anecdotage. It involves the calculation of confidence intervals for samples of barely more than a handful of respondents."