Immigration: Social Costs vs. Economic Benefits

Immigration: Social Costs vs. Economic Benefits

By Peter Zeihan

Its easy to sit up in an ivory tower and say immigration is always good because of the economic benefits; however, turning a blind eye to the social implications of immigration would be irresponsible in a well-rounded discussion. Here’s what Canada and Germany have going on…

More here >

Summary: The video discusses the pros and cons of mass immigration, particularly in countries like Canada and Germany.

1. Canada’s approach:
   • Canada recognized its demographic challenges 30 years ago and decided to become an immigrant country. They’ve welcomed 3-4 million immigrants, mostly in their 20s and 30s, to stabilize their demographics. They need to maintain high immigration levels due to low birth rates among native Canadians.
2. Economic benefits of immigration:
   • Immigrants generally generate more in tax payments than they receive in benefits over their lifetime.
   • They tend to be more skilled and educated, often boosting labor productivity.  Receiving countries benefit from educated adults without bearing the costs of raising and educating them.
   • Crime rates among immigrants are typically lower than those of native-born populations.
3. Challenges:
   • Not all immigrants are the same: family reunification policies can bring in older dependents, changing the economic calculus.
   • Gender imbalances in immigrant populations (e.g., Syrian refugees in Germany) can affect demographic outcomes.
   • Social cohesion can be challenging, especially for countries without a long history of immigration. The speed and scale of immigration can significantly alter a country’s social fabric.
4. Germany’s situation:
   • Unlike countries with long immigration histories, Germany has experienced rapid changes in its social character due to recent waves of immigration. To maintain its current demographic balance, Germany would need to bring in 2-2.5 million people under 30 every year for the next 20 years.
5. Conclusion:
   • While the economic and fiscal case for immigration is strong, the social and political realities are more complex.
   • The gap between the ideal economic scenario and the practical realities of immigration is where politics comes into play.
6. Full Transcript (lightly edited):
   

   Mass Immigration: Pros and Cons

   Introduction

   As more countries face aging populations, mass immigration is often proposed as a potential solution. This essay examines the pros and cons of mass immigration, focusing on countries like Canada and Germany.

   The Canadian Example

   Canada serves as a unique case study. Recognizing their impending demographic challenges 30 years ago, Canada implemented policies to become an immigrant-friendly nation. Under both the Harper and Trudeau governments, Canada opened its doors wide, welcoming an estimated 3 to 4 million immigrants, primarily in their 20s and 30s. This influx has helped stabilize Canada’s demographics, but only as long as the inflow continues, as native-born Canadians still maintain a low birth rate.

   Economic and Fiscal Benefits

   The economic case for immigration is compelling:

   1. Tax contributions: Immigrants, especially those under 40, generally contribute more in taxes than they receive in benefits over their lifetime.
   2. Labor productivity: Immigrants tend to be more skilled, educated, and motivated than the average citizen of their home country, often leading to increased labor productivity in their new home.
   3. Education savings: Host countries benefit from the educational investments made by the immigrants’ home countries, saving on the costs of raising and educating a person from birth to working age.

   Crime Rates

   Contrary to some perceptions, data consistently shows that crime rates among immigrants are significantly lower—typically at least a third lower—than those of native-born populations in countries that collect such statistics.

   Complications and Considerations

   While the economic benefits are clear, there are important factors to consider:

   1. Not all immigrants are the same: Family reunification policies, for example, can lead to an influx of older immigrants, changing the economic calculus.
   2. Gender imbalances: Some immigrant waves, like the Syrian refugees in Germany, have been predominantly male, limiting potential demographic benefits.
   3. Social cohesion: Countries with a long history of immigration, like the United States, Australia, and Canada, tend to assimilate newcomers more easily. Nations without this tradition may face more significant social challenges when rapidly increasing immigration.

   The German Situation

   Germany presents a contrasting case to Canada. Having experienced several recent waves of immigration (Bosnian refugees in the 1990s, Syrian refugees in the 2000s, and currently Ukrainian refugees), Germany is undergoing rapid social changes. To maintain its current demographic balance, Germany would need to bring in 2 to 2.5 million people under 30 every year for the next 20 years—a rate that would fundamentally alter the country’s social fabric.

   Conclusion

   While the economic and fiscal arguments for mass immigration are strong, the reality is more complex. Social cohesion, cultural adaptation, and the speed of demographic change all play crucial roles in determining the overall impact of mass immigration on a society. As Peter Zeihan notes, “If you look at immigration as purely a math issue, a fiscal issue, an economic growth issue, it’s a slam dunk case. But we don’t live in that world, and you know what we call the gap between the ideal and reality? Politics.”