|
Many have written, including myself, about how a flood of unskilled labour
into the US can drive down domestic wage rates. On this question Paul Krugman
appears perfectly sane, for a change, while the Wall Street Journal seems
to have gone loco, completely abandoning economic analysis in favour of wishful
thinking and phony moralising.
However, a consensus seems to have emerged that the benefits of importing
highly skilled labour are indisputable. Yet six years ago the National Research
Council, an advisory body to the US Government, issued a report showing that
the influx of qualified foreign workers into the US slowed down the rate at
which wages would otherwise have risen in high-tech industries.
The committee estimated that high-tech firms employed more than 5 million
workers in high-tech positions. About 255,000 of these skilled workers were
in the US under a visa program for skilled tech workers. A bill that had been
recently signed into law by President Clinton allowed more than additional
195,000 skilled technology workers to enter the US, raising the number of foreign
workers to about 25 percent of the high-tech industry's workforce.
Critics of the program complained that companies like Microsoft used the visa
program to keep wages down and avoid the costs of training labour, particularly
from minority groups. Alan Merten, chairman of the workforce committee and
president of George Mason University, argued that the country had become dependent
on foreign workers and their competition was depressing wages. The companies
responded by arguing that the industry could not have grown without these foreign
workers.
The economic aspect of the this problem is not as straightforward as it might
appear. It is true, as critics point out, that an increased supply of skilled
labour into a high-tech industry, or any other kind of industry for that matter,
usually tends to exert a downward pressure on wage growth. But the question
that needs to be addressed is whether this process harms consumers?
Employees in these industries are no more entitled to high wages as a matter
of right than their employers are entitled to profits. So long as highly skilled
foreign workers flow into the industry it will continue to expand, barring
recession. The flow of workers will also encourage the formation of new firms
that will compete for labour as well as customers. (It needs to be acknowledged
that these new firms need not be capital intensive).
Critics ignored the fact that as most of these workers are either Indian or
Chinese, they tend to show great entrepreneurial drive when left alone in a
comparatively free market. What was also missed is the enormous financial grants
that the Chinese and Indian governments were making, and still are, to America's
high-tech companies. These grants take the form of free education for their
own citizens who then take the fruits of their training to the US. Think of
it as foreign aid in reverse.
On the other hand, Alan Merten's argument was of a different degree. Though
the increase in high-tech workers will have helped high-tech firms to expand,
an overall increase in the workforce without any accompanying increase in investment
will certainly depress wage rates in general. Moreover, if the growth in the
workforce exceeds investment real incomes must fall. This process would first
make its presence felt among unskilled and semi-skilled labour.
Some commentators argue that this is now happening. Whether this is the case
or not it still needs investigating. But it should never be forgotten that
ultimately it is savings that fuel an economy and entrepreneurship that drives
it. If these vital ingredients are missing or are severely restricted then
no amount of highly skilled imported labour can save the day.
|