Advantages of population migration

In different wealth times, population migration always follows three basic laws: first, population migration always flows from resource-poor countries to resource-rich countries; Second, population migration always flows from densely populated countries to sparsely populated countries; The third law is that the main body of floating population is the outstanding population with the most entrepreneurial ability.

Then, what is the wealth effect of population migration under the control of these three mobility laws on the places of immigration and emigration?

Wealth effect of immigrants' moving places

The most famous immigrant country in history is the United States. The history of American prosperity is not only a history of entrepreneurship and war, but also a history of attracting immigrants' wealth to continue to flow in.

From the discovery of navigation to the end of 18, more than 2 million Europeans moved to the new world. These people not only brought advanced science and technology, venture capital and production tools, but also bought more than 10000 slaves from Africa and other places, thus making North America rapidly evolve from the primitive hunting economy era to the agricultural (plantation) economy era, and mining mines, resulting in modern processing industry and corresponding. Immigration triggered the first wealth explosion in North America.

From the middle of19th century to the middle of 20th century, tens of millions of Europeans immigrated to the United States. Especially during World War II, a large number of Jewish businessmen and scientists persecuted in Europe immigrated to the United States. After World War II, the United States became the world's largest economic power, and accordingly became the preferred destination for international immigrants. Europeans, Mexicans and Asians all rushed to immigrate to the United States, which led to the promulgation of the new immigration law 1952. According to the new immigration law of 1952, from 195 1 to 1955, an average of nearly19.5 million illegal immigrants are deported from the United States every year. 1965 after the implementation of the new immigration law, the number of illegal immigrants from Europe to the United States began to decrease, and illegal immigrants from Asia increased even faster.

The above-mentioned immigrants to the United States, whether free immigrants in the early stage or legal or illegal immigrants in the later stage, are at least mature laborers, and more immigrants come to this country with technology, skills and capital.

Although the increasing population will bring some social problems such as employment pressure and public security, almost all immigrants have contributed to the wealth growth of this country.

Moreover, as an immigrant country, the United States not only gathered European Protestants and entrepreneurs in the early days of the industrial revolution, but also gathered outstanding elements from all ethnic groups in the world, such as Jews and China. These high-quality scientists, entrepreneurs, businessmen and laborers are the fundamental reasons why the United States has become the world's wealth gathering place.

In addition to the United States, countries that introduced a large number of immigrants in history also included colonial Australia, New Zealand and South America. Because of the introduction of entrepreneurial population and venture capital from developed regions such as Europe, immigrants have created the economic prosperity of these countries.

After World War II, due to the reconstruction of Europe, a large number of immigrants were needed, initially from within Europe, such as Irish immigrants to Britain, Italians, Portuguese and Poles to France and Nordic countries. Later, because the number could not be met, they began to immigrate from their respective colonial countries. Thus, from Maghreb to Guyana, from India to Maluku Islands, a large number of young and middle-aged labor resources were sent to Europe. 1970, the number of immigrants attracted by Europe increased from 4 million in 1950 to10/10,000.

In addition to the typical early colonial countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia, there is also a typical example that immigration has promoted the wealth growth of population-importing countries. In just a few decades, Jews gathered in Israel from all over the world built a rich country on that barren land.

Since the prosperity of so many countries benefits from immigration, why do more and more countries impose heavy restrictions on immigration? Because immigration is not only the creator of wealth, but also the consumer of wealth, and it will also have an impact on the resources, environment, infrastructure and employment of immigrant countries. The popularity of immigrants depends on the following aspects:

First, if an immigrant's wealth creation ability is greater than his wealth consumption ability, then we can call him a provider of product surplus, that is, a net contributor to regional wealth. On the contrary, immigrants are net consumers of wealth in the places where they move-only when the country faces insufficient demand and immigrants carry enough monetary assets can the migration of net consumers of wealth be beneficial.

Second, even the supplier of surplus products depends on whether the productivity of these new immigrants is higher than the marginal productivity of the people who moved in, and the bearing capacity of the environment and infrastructure.

If the expected labor productivity of new immigrants is greater than their consumption capacity and lower than the marginal productivity of the population in the immigrant area, then the wealth effect of immigrants is to increase the total wealth of the area, but it will reduce the per capita wealth of the area.

If the migrant population cannot find jobs quickly in a short time, or exceeds the carrying capacity of the urban environment and infrastructure, the quality of life of the original residents will be reduced.

In addition, developed countries will restrict many immigrants. Even if they can find employment opportunities, they will not exceed the capacity of the environment and infrastructure, nor will they reduce the per capita wealth of the places where they move. The reason is that immigrants may compete with local residents for employment opportunities and natural resources, reduce average wages and so on.

However, the research shows that due to the staggered employment structure of talents, the entry of immigrants has not significantly increased the unemployment rate in the population-importing countries. Immigrants can also increase employment opportunities in the host country by promoting international trade.

Through research, I think at least there is no necessary correlation between the increase of immigrants and the unemployment rate. Another empirical statistical analysis of European countries 199 1- 1995 shows that every 1 percentage point increase in a country's population through immigration will drive its GDP to increase 1.25%- 1.5%.

In a word, both historical and theoretical studies show that immigration means an increase in wealth in most cases. Although there are more and more restrictions on immigration in developed countries, they mainly choose high-quality population, technology carriers and capital carriers, but history will prove that this practice of excluding labor may not be conducive to the wealth growth of these countries.

Wealth effect of immigration on the place of emigration

Generally speaking, the influence of immigration on emigration is not conducive to wealth growth in the long run, except in the historical period when economic depression and other reasons have caused great population pressure.

15 After the "geographical discovery" at the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2006, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Britain and other countries successively established colonies in various parts of the world and immigrated there in large numbers.

Empirical studies have proved that many suzerain countries' fiscal expenditures in the colonies are not less than the fiscal revenues obtained from the colonies. As far as trade income is concerned, the close connection with colonial economy has indeed opened up the source of raw materials and the market of commodities for the domestic market, thus obtaining huge trade profits. However, as far as long-term immigration is concerned, especially in the case that the above-mentioned colonies have fallen one after another, completely localized immigrants have basically no wealth significance to the original sovereign state.

Undoubtedly, more than 60 million immigrants from Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Britain, France and other countries have created economic prosperity in most countries, such as Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the United States, Canada, South America, etc., and at the same time, they have caused inevitable wealth losses in their countries of origin, leaving only some cultural and blood ties.

There are also cases in history in which people are forced to move voluntarily. In Spanish history, Jews were wrongly expelled, and later Moors were also expelled. The persecution of German Nazis also caused many excellent Jews to emigrate to the United States and other countries, which was unfavorable to their wealth and economic growth.

For the sending countries, the real tangible benefit is the so-called remittance income of immigrants to the sending countries. According to the statistics of the World Bank, in 20001year, developing countries received 72.3 billion US dollars of immigrant remittances, accounting for 1.3% of their comprehensive GDP and 42% of the total foreign direct investment of developing countries. The above research only found one aspect of immigrant remittance, and did not compare the wealth value of money carried by investment immigrants and technology carried by skilled immigrants.

As far as China is concerned, in recent years, the accumulated wealth lost by so-called investment immigrants has exceeded $50 billion.

Unlike Mexico and other countries, China's immigration can't alleviate its population pressure. Due to/kloc-0.08 million Mexican-born population, about 8 million people now live in the United States-close to 8% of Mexico's population, which is not only huge, but also dominated by labor. For countries like China and India, the situation is completely different: the real surplus labor force cannot be exported because of the restrictions of immigration laws in developed countries; The serious scarcity of high-tech talents and the wealthy class carrying wealth are the mainstream immigrants in the above-mentioned developed countries.

China has a large population. Although 30 million to 40 million immigrants are not a small number, the proportion is actually very low compared with a big country with a population of 654.38+03 billion. Only the link of China's economic opening to the outside world is not enough to have an obvious negative impact on its wealth when a large number of European people migrate to colonies.

In short, in most cases, population migration is conducive to the optimal allocation of global production factors and the increase of human wealth. But for local regional economy, population migration itself is the loss of production factors, and population migration itself is the increase of production factors. Therefore, in the long run, population migration is more conducive to the wealth growth of population-importing countries, but not to the wealth growth of population-exporting countries.

For developed countries, we should not exaggerate the employment crowding-out effect of immigrants and set too many immigration policy obstacles; For developing countries, the so-called venture capital migration, skilled migration, and the overseas detention of international students have caused the loss of wealth in population output, which is far greater than the meager remittance income. Therefore, we should adjust the export structure of immigrants, encourage the export of labor services and retain the carrier of technology and capital.