As noted earlier immigrants arrive with less debt and therefore help deleverage the country. However, I want to focus more on the fact that immigrants are also customers because this is always a hard sell.
And, let me cut to the chase and say in the short term we are really talking about Mexican immigrants here, so I am going to focus on that. I am a huge supporter of not just allowing but strongly encouraging South Asian immigration to the United States but that’s a whole different story.
Now we address the issue at hand. Here is the US trade deficit with Mexico:

As you can see US exports to Mexico are less than US imports from Mexico, meaning we run a negative balance of trade. I apologize to my fellow economists for ignoring capital accounts and other details but I want to keep this particular post simple.
There are a of things going on here but one way to look at it is that Mexican labor is cheaper and so goods produced by Mexicans are cheaper. Thus its more likely that we buy from them than they buy from us.
If we move Mexicans to America their labor is still relatively cheap. Everyone experiences this.
However, now that they are in America they are buying American services. That means shopping at American stores. Renting American Apartments. Heating and cooling their homes with American power, etc.
So you can look at it this way. You can either have your turkeys gutted in Mexico and shipped to America. Or you can have them gutted in Texas. Either way the same guy is going to gut them. Immigration policy is not going to change that.
However, if he lives in Texas then at least his is renting a Texas apartment and shopping at a Texas Wal-Mart. And, if there is one thing the US needs right now its more housing demand and higher retails sales.

9 comments
Comments feed for this article
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Lord
We already import too much. We don’t need more importers. If we were exporting more, I would be all in favor. We don’t need balanced trade, but we do need more balanced trade. Importing more importers won’t fix that.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
db
This point cannot be emphasized enough. I worked my way through law school as a law clerk at a firm owned by a Korean immigrant that serviced almost exclusively Korean small business owners, mostly negotiating lease terms and navigating the small bore regulatory hurdles to opening dry cleaning shops and mom and pop restaurants. There are good jobs to be had in selling services to immigrants.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Morally Bankrupt (@groditi)
Important to note that this applies to non-employed family members of workers. X% of worker wages will be spent on his or her family. It will either be sent to Mexico via Western Union and spent there or, if the family is allowed to move, it will be spent in the US. Pretty simple.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
Lord
Most would not question they would consume our services, but have a lot of concern whether they would pay for them (education, healthcare). Most would have an idea of a threshold that those who pay more than that in taxes would be net contributors and those who do not would not, or even worse, would be for some 1%ers but not for rest of the country.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
jazzbumpa
Saying the same (or equivalent) guy will gut the turkey either here or there is an awfully broad based assumption — based on what?
And isn’t it true that migration has slowed to a trickle because with high unemployment here there is much less incentive to migrate in?
From what I’ve read about Wal-Mart, their presence in a community actually leads to a decrease in local standard of living.
If you want to make a case that high immigration will help solve the existing high unemployment – low aggregate demand situation in a rigorous way, then please do so. I’d like to see it.
So far, I haven’t. Assertions don’t count.
Cheers!
JzB
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Wonks Anonymous
If monetary authorities properly managed aggregate demand, there would be no issue of underconsumption. We would instead treat these things as scarce resources and other consumers as our competition.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
engineer27 (@engineer27)
Most of that trade deficit (at least in dollar terms) is oil. Maybe we should let in any Mexican immigrant who comes in with a barrel of oil?
Otherwise, the effect on the trade balance will be minimal.
Tuesday ~ October 25th, 2011 at 9:29 pm
prado
If the U.S. dismantled tariff and non-tariff barriers on agricultural products like rice, cotton, and sugar, many would-be immigrants from Latin America would stay in their countries and remain as agricultural producers.
Wednesday ~ October 26th, 2011 at 1:45 am
CGB
I like the idea, but way too simplistic. We move our factories to China for cheap labor, but moving some Chinese here does not mean we start producing things here again. We have minimum wage and minimum living standards we have applied in our society that would prevent the wage benefits from immigrating with the Chinese workers. Unless of course you are assuming the millions of new immigrants all remain illegal and not subject to our wage laws. In addition, the treatment of workers, pollution standards, and quality controls are much more stringent here. It has been said that many factories being operated for U.S. companies outside the U.S. would be illegal if operated here. The lawsuits against Wal Mart speak to that problem. Accepting immigration completely is accepting the legality of it and either nullifying the wage benefit here or denouncing our wage, environment, and worker protection laws.
I am also for opening up to more immigration, but I don’t buy into this one.