March 14, 2006
Fuzzy Data, Flawed Economics, Underlie H-1b, Outsourcing
Enthusiasm
We've heard
it all before: arguments for increasing the number of
H-1b visas granted to
foreign engineers and
scientists. Assurances that, at the end of the day,
offshoring is good for the economy.
How valid are the
pro-H-1b, pro-outsourcing, briefs?
Assertion:
In both numbers and quality, the U.S. lags in
engineering personnel. "Last year [2004] more
than 600,000 engineers graduated from institutions of
higher education in China. In India, the figure
was 350,000. In America, it was about 70,000."
[Broad
Federal Effort Urgently Needed to Create New,
High-Quality Jobs for All Americans in the 21st Century,
National Academy of Sciences press release, October 12,
2005)
Fact:
These widely circulated figures rely on data from the
education ministries of the various foreign countries.
But much of what qualifies as engineering programs in
Asia would not make the cut in the U.S. "As
a result, any bachelor's or short-cycle
[2-3 year] degree
with ‘engineering’ in its title is included in these
numbers, regardless of the degree's field or the
academic rigor associated with it. This means that the
reported number of
engineers produced by China in 2004 may very well
include the equivalent of motor mechanics and industrial
technicians." [Framing the Engineering
Outsourcing Debate, Duke University School of
Engineering report, December 12 2005 (PDF)]
China has roughly four times the population of the
U.S., and
India is about three times as large. If you adjust
the official engineering degree numbers—overstatements
and all—for population size, this is what you get:
Obviously,
our lead would be still larger if comparable
"engineering degree" definitions were used.
Assertion:
H-1bs are preferable to outsourcing. "In
my view, the H-1B visa category, if properly
administered and monitored, can be an antidote to
concerns about overseas outsourcing. Use of H-1B visas
encourages work in the United States and thus can help
keep and grow jobs in the United States."
[Congressional
testimony of Mr. Stephen Yale-Loehr, Immigration
Lawyers Association, September 16, 2003]
Fact:
Far from being an alternative, H-1bs facilitate
outsourcing. Indeed, a just-released study lists
immigration—together with cheap global
telecommunications, advances in information technology,
and the free market economy—as a major enabler of the
outsourcing phenomenon:
"…In
concentrated high-tech regions of the United States,
most notably in Silicon Valley, communities of Indian
high-tech entrepreneurs emerged and bonded with other
Indians in the high-tech community, and similarly for
the Chinese. In many cases, these technical
entrepreneurs were the ones who started offshoring
companies or who were the go-betweens to ease the
difficulties of doing business across so many miles and
such different cultures. U.S immigration policy,
especially the H1-B and L-1 visa programs, have enabled
Indians and other foreigners to gain valuable experience
and contacts in the United States before returning to
their home countries.
[Globalization
and Offshoring of Software,
Association for
Computing Machinery]
Assertion:
Outsourcing is good for profits, thereby enabling U.S.
corporations to create more jobs here than they shift
abroad. Alleged evidence: "Despite all the publicity
in the United States about jobs being lost to India and
China, the size of the IT employment market in the
United States today is higher than it was at the height
of the dot.com boom." [Study
says U.S. tech hiring grows, CNNMoney, February
23, 2006]
Fact:
From the University of California-Davis’ redoubtable
Norman Matloff: "The highlight of the study….is
that computer-related jobs are more numerous today
(actually in 2004) than in 1999, the height of the
dot-com era. That is highly misleading….because they
are including job categories which are not suitable for
computer science graduates, e.g. computer support
jobs [sales, accounting, etc.] (Worse, they
include such a category for 2004 that didn't even
exist in BLS data in earlier years.)" [Matloff’s
H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter,
February 24, 2006.]
Another sleight of
hand stomped on by Matloff: "They chose 1999 as their
base, even though the numbers peaked during 2000-2001,
with figures about 30% higher than 1999." [H-1B/L-1/offshoring
e-newsletter, February 24, 2006.]
Assertion:
Globalization rules! Even if jobs are lost to
outsourcing, the resulting price reductions and profit
increases will increase demand and investment stateside.
Eventually U.S. incomes will recover and expand.
Fact:
The
globalization happy-talk may not be relevant to a
high-wage economy like the U.S.
Economics Nobel
laureate
Paul Samuelson has noted that
classical economics long assumed that, while some
groups are hurt by free trade, "…the gains of the
American winners are big enough to more than compensate
the losers".
But, writing in 2004,
Samuelson questioned whether the classical result holds
when the trading parties are as different as the U.S.
and China. According to Samuelson, a low-wage country
that is rapidly improving its technology, like China or
India, has the potential to
reduce American wages in outsourced fields like
call-center services and
computer programming. [Where
Ricardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of
Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization,
Journal of Economic Perspectives, Summer 2004]
"Being able to
purchase
groceries 20 percent cheaper at
Wal-Mart does not
necessarily make up for the wage losses,"
Samuelson said in an interview. [A
Dissenter on Outsourcing States His Case,
ECT New Business Desk, September 7, 2004).
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.