Hacker News Reader

Comment by dwallin | Hacker News Reader

Here's what you are missing, the relative populations of native born and foreign born have changed over that time period. If you do the same thing for the population data (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/seriesBeta/LNU00073413) you see that the graphs are almost exactly the same. % of foreign born population goes from 17.5% to 22%, versus the 18.3% to 23.7% you called out for job change.

View on HN

Yes I agree that the two align (and that I should have compared FRED to FRED vs bringing in Census data). But the best way I add what you wrote to what I wrote is would be:

"Immigrants are coming at a rate that increases their portion of the population and thus their portion of jobs" which squares pretty directly with the "they took our jobs" arguments?

But the data evidence we are discussing doesn't show any squaring of your statement at all. The only thing it shows is that the the amount of foreign-born individuals has increased, and that they hold down jobs at essentially the same rate as native-born Americans. If the data didn't look like that people would be complaining that immigrants are lazy, and don't work and are dragging down the economy. It's all a big nothingburger.

I don't see how you can possibly say that. If in 2007 you went to 100 jobs you would see 18.3% of foreign born people holding them vs 23.7% now. This is a change of nearly 30%. Of course people notice this and are concerned about it.

I am not arguing against immigration in any way (I am both an immigrant and a refugee), but I do recognize why someone who sees this on the ground feels the way they do.

But it just simply is an argument against immigration, which we can totally have but which Is a different discussion. Unless you are suggesting that you want increased immigration, but for them not to be employed, which I think would be an extremely niche position.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com