Illegal  (UNDOCUMENTED)

Immigrants Aren’t the Same as Home Invaders

WHERE US LABOR AND FREE MARKETEERS AGREE

By James Pethokoukis

AEIdeas

September 23, 2024

For people enthused about the idea of deporting roughly 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States, this seems to be their drop-the-mic argument: “If someone invaded your home, you would call the police to have them removed, right? Well, America is my home. Let the removal begin!”

This is a very bad argument. It’s even maybe a worse analogy than comparing the budget of a government to that of a household. (Among other differences with a family budget, governments can print money, tax citizens, borrow at lower rates, and have longer planning horizons.) And that’s saying something.

Where to begin? 

• For starters, a country is a public entity, while a home is a private space meant for exclusive use of the owner. A country consists of public lands, shared infrastructure, and communal spaces that are meant to be used by all members of society. It’s fundamentally a place of interaction: culturally, economically, and politically. A country is governed by collective decision-making processes, such as democratic elections, while a home is under the sole authority of its owners.
• There’s also a big difference in motivation: Most immigrants are seeking better lives, safety, or economic opportunities, not to commit crimes. Not to hurt you or take your stuff. Immigrants often contribute to the economy through labor and taxes, even if undocumented. A home invader doesn’t provide economic benefits to the homeowner. A home invader doesn’t sneak into your house, clean it from top to bottom, cut your grass, repair your roof, and then leave money on the kitchen table. Also: Immigrants typically aim to become part of the community long-term, while a home invasion is a brief, isolated incident.
• Immigration law is complex, with various statuses and paths to legal residence. Trespassing laws are much simpler and don’t capture this legal complexity.
• Finally, the country-home argument is often a bad-faith one since many immigration restrictionists want less immigration of all kinds, both unauthorized and authorized.

Rather than comparing illegal immigration to a home invader, maybe it’s more like a group of people sneaking into a large, understaffed amusement park with long entry lines. Like these nefarious park sneakers, most immigrants come to participate and seek opportunities, not to cause harm. They often contribute to the economy once inside, similar to buying food or souvenirs in the park. Importantly, unauthorized entrants don’t inherently make the park more dangerous (mirroring data on immigrant crime rates). Over time, these entrants may integrate, becoming indistinguishable from other park-goers. While imperfect—I think the statistics tell a pretty clear story—this comparison better captures the nuances of immigration far better than the simplistic and misleading home-invasion analogy.

Anyway, when thinking about immigration of all kinds, this Penn Wharton analysis makes for a good starting point:

Economists generally agree that the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy are broadly positive. Immigrants, whether high- or low-skilled, legal or illegal, are unlikely to replace native-born workers or reduce their wages over the long-term, though they may cause some short-term dislocations in labor markets. Indeed, the experience of the last few decades suggests that immigration may actually have significant long-term benefits for the native-born, pushing them into higher-paying occupations and raising the overall pace of innovation and productivity growth. Moreover, as baby boomers have begun moving into retirement in advanced economies around the world, immigration is helping to keep America comparatively young and reducing the burden of financing retirement benefits for a growing elderly population. While natives bear some upfront costs for the provision of public services to immigrants and their families, the evidence suggests a net positive return on the investment over the long term.

I would also recommend this Cato Institute piece, “The 14 Most Common Arguments against Immigration and Why They’re Wrong” and my essay/interview: “The new book ‘Streets of Gold’ shatters myths as it makes the case for a nation of immigrants.”