By Dominique Peridans, August 9, 2011

A recent New York Times article by Princeton professor of sociology and public affairs, Douglas S. Massey, "Isolated, Vulnerable, and Broke", offers an analysis of a recent Pew Research Center study on current disparity of wealth between the "races". The study, conducted and analyzed by Rakesh Kochhar, Richard Fry and Paul Taylor, is entitled "Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics" (the unnecessary complexity generated by the inclusion of these categories together – two racial and one linguistic, with many of the latter to be included racially in the first two – in this or any study is worthy of analysis, but would take us far afield). It is interesting to note that for unknown because unmentioned reasons, Asians (towards the top of the wealth hierarchy) are included amply but not consistently in the study (and obviously not included in the study's name). Massey's op-ed piece boldly proposes to re-analyze what is already an analysis. "Immigration policy, not just the housing bust, sank Hispanic wealth" is stated. As Massey says, "this has nothing to do with nativist tropes like work ethic or resistance to assimilation and everything to do with misguided government (immigration) policy."

Wealth gaps acknowledged, there has been an erosion of wealth among all groups, which the Pew study attributes to plummeting house values. As the study articulates, however, "Hispanics" were hit hardest by the housing market downturn. Why is this? "Hispanics derive nearly two-thirds of their net worth from home equity, and a disproportionate share resides in states that were in the vanguard of the housing meltdown." These states are California, Florida, Nevada, and Arizona, which, along with Michigan, experienced median home prices decrease more than 30 percent between 2005 and 2009. Consequently, for "Hispanics", "almost all of the loss is attributable to declining home equity levels." "For Hispanics in these five states, median net worth tumbled from $51,464 in 2005 to $6,375 in 2009, a loss of 88%. For Hispanics residing outside of these five states, median net worth fell from $11,853 to $6,200, or by 48%."

Professor Massey offers what he claims is a truer explanation, which, for him, serves to underscore the "misguidedness" of our federal immigration policy. "Our immigration and border-control system has created a class of people cut off from traditional legal and economic structures and thus vulnerable to the worst depredations of the market system", and "until the country fundamentally changes its immigration policy to remove millions from the legal shadows, the entire economy will continue to suffer as its most vulnerable participants watch their fortunes disappear at the slightest downturn." As Massey claims, the militarization of our southern border has disrupted a circular flow of illegal immigrants ("according to estimates from the Mexican Migration Project, between 1965 and 1985, for every 100 undocumented entries there were 85 undocumented departures") leaving a large population trapped, unable to return to their countries of origin as was traditionally the case, and thus creating "a new class of people working outside the legal labor markets." Border enforcement "didn't really affect undocumented in-migration, but it did reduce out-migration – migrants knew that once they left it would be hard to get back in."

One could analyze Massey's analysis by underscoring that the sound reasons for economic decline among "Hispanics" given by the Pew Research Center itself seem to be rather dismissed. Or that no mention is made of differing investment choice patterns between the groups, and how these account – at least in part – for increased disparity. Or that no mention is made of another significant finding (and its implications) in the study, namely that, "during the period under study, wealth disparities increased within the Hispanic community."

The most significant question that arises from Massey's analysis, however, is far more interesting. Massey argues that vulnerability to economic exploitation by this new class of people, illegal aliens, is the consequence of misguided immigration policy, that is, a policy that refuses to grant them amnesty. Simply grant amnesty, and out of the legal shadows and thus vulnerability illegal aliens come. It is logical, save the fact that amnesty is not an immigration policy, strictly speaking. Amnesty is a punctual gesture of mercy on the part of government on behalf of the state, forgiving the act of illegal immigration (and implicitly forgiving other related illegal acts such as driving and working using false documents). Unless the United States surrenders its sovereignty, and consequently eliminates the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, amnesty will always be a temporary "solution". Indeed, if sovereignty is surrendered, there will be no need for amnesty.

There is economic exploitation by mortgage brokers, an unfortunate issue that must be further addressed. Perhaps, contrary to Massey's claims, strong border enforcement is actually a solution. It obviously serves to reduce the population of those "working and living in legal gray areas". Without it, large in-migration will continue and the population of this new class of people will continue to grow, serving only to increase its economic vulnerability and that of the country.




http://www.cis.org/peridans/isolated-vulnerable-broke