June 28, 2006
Feeling good yet? How Immigration Hides Our Productivity
Problem
Why do Americans
feel so insecure in an economy that, by most
standards, is chugging along just fine?
Public opinion polls may
themselves be to blame. Respondents are usually more
optimistic about their own economic prospects than the
country’s—a bias that invariably skews poll results
downward. Moreover, as Steve Sailer
notes re
immigration polls, wording matters greatly.
On the other hand, the economy may simply not be as
healthy as the economic statistics indicate. A recent
memo by the Economic Policy Institute titled
What’s Wrong with the Economy, highlights
areas in which economic weakness coexists with
ostensibly strong economic data.
“Profits are up, but the wages and incomes of
average Americans are down. Inflation-adjusted hourly
and weekly wages are below what they were at the start
of the recovery in November 2001. Yet productivity—the
growth of the economic pie—is up by 14.7%.”

Source:
What's wrong with the economy? by EPI President
Lawrence Mishel and Policy Director Ross Eisenbrey,
based on their analysis of BLS data.
Labor productivity
measures growth in output produced by the average
American worker in an hour. Rising productivity should
mean that employers can pay workers more without
reducing profits or raising prices.
The (alleged) 14.7
percent gain in output per hour since 2001 is well
above the historical average, and—if accurate—should by
now have produced the best of all worlds for business
and labor, as well as for Ben Bernanke.
Profits have
indeed risen sharply since 2001. But incomes are
stagnant and inflation is higher than the Fed and most
economists had anticipated.
What went wrong?
One possible answer:
labor productivity may not be growing nearly as fast as
the official statistics indicate. That’s because BLS
calculates productivity using
payroll survey employment figures instead of the
larger, more rapidly growing, household survey numbers.
While the most
recent payroll survey estimates 134.7 million
workers held jobs in the first quarter of 2006, the
household survey counted 143.3 million – nearly 9
million more.
More importantly,
employment growth since the fourth quarter of 2001 is
estimated at 3.8 million by the PS versus 7.1 million in
the HS. (Table 1.)
Implication: labor
productivity is growing about half as fast as the
official statistics indicate.
It gets worse. As noted
above, productivity is measured per hour, not per
worker. If the “missing” workers are largely
illegal Hispanics who work
longer hours than other workers, productivity growth
will be overstated by even more than the employment
undercount alone would suggest.
Some economists argue
that the cyber-commuters,
temporary workers, and others who are not on
payrolls but show up in the household survey, are the
major reason why employment growth is understated.
But there’s a better
explanation—unmentioned (not
for the first time) by the left-leaning EPI:
illegal aliens. They do not show up in the PS for
the simple reason that employers who admit to hiring
them risk stiff penalties. (Absent such an admission,
employers can—and
do—break the law with
impunity.)
Estimates of the
illegal alien workforce range from 7.2 million (
Pew
Hispanic Center) to
20 million (Bear
Stearns) The consensus gravitates to between 8 to 9
million—a figure strikingly close to the gap between the
two employment surveys.
The illegal immigrant labor force may be the missing
link between apparently strong economic data and weak
economic reality—for
American workers, if not for
American capitalists.
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.