U.S. Net Employment Gains Since 2000 Have Gone to Immigrants

This is astounding.

It seems a study done by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that immigrants have gained more jobs than people born in the U.S.

It's complicated but could be accurate.

We have been hearing and seeing this trend for a long time, even more so since the financial crash a few years ago.

What does all this mean ?

A new study of government data has found that all of the net domestic gain in employment over the last 13 years in the United States has gone to foreign-born (legal and illegal) workers.

The same study found that the number of working-age native-born Americans has declined by 1.3 million over the same time period and the changes have impacted native-born Americans of every race, gender, education level and age, particularly men, blacks, and Americans of Hispanic descent.

Steven Camarota and Karen Zeigler, of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), found that between the first quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2003, the working-age native-born population increased by 16.4 million and accounted for two-thirds of the overall growth in the "working-age population (16 to 65)." Yet, there were 1.3 fewer native-born Americans who were gainfully employed in the first quarter of 2013 than were in the first quarter of 2000.

The results of this study, "Immigrant Gains and Native Losses In the Job Market, 2000 to 2013," come after the Congressional Budget Office determined two weeks ago that the Senate's immigration bill, which would flood the labor force with immigrant labor, would decrease wages and raise the unemployment rate. The Senate bill would in fact award more green cards in the next ten years than the country has awarded over the past forty years in addition to granting at the very least 13 million illegal immigrants pathways to citizenship.

Study: U.S. Net Employment Gains Since 2000 Have Gone to Immigrants

from the study link;

Among the findings (all figures compare first quarter employment):

* Between the first quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2013, the native-born population accounted for two-thirds of overall growth in the working-age population (16 to 65), but none of the net growth in employment among the working-age has gone to natives.

* The overall size of the working-age native-born population increased by 16.4 million from 2000 to 2013, yet the number of natives actually holding a job was 1.3 million lower in 2013 than 2000.

* The total number of working-age immigrants (legal and illegal) increased 8.8 million and the number working rose 5.3 million between 2000 and 2013.

* Even before the recession, when the economy was expanding (2000 to 2007), 60 percent of the net increase in employment among the working-age went to immigrants, even though they accounted for just 38 percent of population growth among the working-age population.

* Since the jobs recovery began in 2010, about half the employment growth has gone to immigrants. However the share of working-age natives holding a job has remained virtually unchanged since 2010 and the number of working-age natives without a job (nearly 59 million) has not budged.

* The decline in the share of natives working, also referred as the employment rate, began before the 2007 recession. Of working-age natives, 74 percent had a job in 2000; by 2007, at the peak of the last expansion, just 71 percent had a job, and in the first quarter of 2013, 66 percent had a job.

* The decline in employment rates for working-age natives has been nearly universal. The share of natives working has declined for teenagers and those in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s from 2000 to 2007 and from 2007 to 2013. The decline has been especially pronounced for workers under age 30.

* Like age, there has been a decline in work for all educational categories. The employment rate for native high school dropouts, high school graduates, those with some college, and those with at least a bachelor's degree declined from 2000 to 2007 and from 2007 to 2013.

* The number of adult natives with no more than high school education not working is 4.9 million larger in 2013 than in 2000, the number with some college not working is up 6.8 million, and the number with at least a bachelor's degree not working is up 3.8 million.

* The decline in work, which began before the Great Recession, has impacted men and women as well as blacks, Hispanics, and whites. The fall in the share of working-age natives holding a job has been most pronounced for men, blacks, and Hispanics.

* During the five years prior to 2013 (2008-2012), about 5.4 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) of all ages arrived in the United States. In the five years prior to 2007, about 6.6 million new immigrants arrived. Thus, during the worst economic slowdown in the last 75 years, immigration fell by only 17 percent compared to the economic expansion from 2002 to 2006.

The Study

How does this affect the future of the United States ?

reply to post by xuenchen


I think the numbers are fouled. Though it does account for illegal workers, it does not take into account those workers hired illegally by companies. There is really no way to know for sure what those figures are exactly.

I do agree that we are losing our jobs at an alarming rate, but, the problem is that I think no one cares. If they did they would be doing their part to go out and get those jobs.

What I am seeing in my area are tons on jobs that pay minimum wage that offer less then desirable work. Which basically means those companies want you to "Earn" what they are paying you. Most of it is hard labor and with today’s society everyone wants to get a paycheck, but they want to do the least work possible to get it.

America is pretty much a land of immigrants though and many immigrants are way more qualified thanks to the rubbish education system the US has to deal with it thanks to all the money spent on pointless wars and the systematic dumbing down of people. 'Let's all watch American Idol for the 43904390th time'. Sure some of the low wage work is going to immigrants but then I'm pretty sure it's 'Native (not really) Americans' giving those jobs away so the immigrants aren't really at fault. As for the more brainy work, perhaps the talent pool of 'Native' Americans isn't all that deep, and those that are skilled, charge a lot more than immigrants and this is a perfect example of how Capitalism - long championed by the US, works. Perhaps rather than focusing on external factors affecting your lifestyle and economy, you should look within, at your own government and the indifference suffered by many.

reply to post by ragsntatters


This is not an example of Capitalism.

This is an example of Govt running rampant with power and money, and Corporations exploiting those in power.

The whole indifference thing is about as moronic sounding when spoken out loud, as it is typed on a keyboard.


Companies, crushed by taxes and regulation, will always seek out the method to reduce costs.
Hiring illegals, reduces those costs.

These statistics might be true, although the reason lies probably in the immigrants being less picky. They accept less-paying jobs, often blue-collar. At least that is how it was round here.

There was enough places, although especially non-specialists suffered a lot. There was a deficiency of specialists, while all the blue-collar/low-paying jobs cut down their salaries. Most locals were too proud to pick these jobs after they had lost their jobs, on the other hand immigrants (legal ones) were more than happy to take those jobs, sometimes even two, as it was better than nothing.

I believe this might also be one of the reasons why immigrants got more jobs compared to locals. Many people who lost their jobs were middle-level and had a pretty good salary before. They did not go back to the bottom, yet there were no job offers in the middle, while immigrant were less picky and took whatever was offered to them.

Originally posted by xuenchen
What does all this mean ?

This is another symptom of allowing national corporations to drive out local businesses and hand them a monopoly in small communities all over the country.

WallMart doesn't care about a local economy or local community, they care about paying as little as possible to whoever will do the job. This allows them to drive down pay and benefits to the bare minimum, while a smaller business employing locals would have some responsibility to the families they grew up with and the customers they rely on.

Nothing is going to change until people stop buying the cheapest trash from gigantic corporations at the expense of smaller businesses.

People are so ignorant today, they just want the cheapest thing they can get, and then they all complain about the rise of corporations and the worst pay and conditions. You can't have it both ways. If people want to keep buying rubbish for a $ from a national or global corporation with no loyalty to the people of their community then they are directly contributing to this continued slide.

Stop supporting the massive corporations, start supporting small and local businesses, and then things WILL change.