<p>The only argument that I think can be made is that immigrants often don't consume similarly to Americans. Large amounts of salaries are sent home from the US by immigrants which means that money is now out of circulation. </p>

<p>Additionally, coming from poorer countries with a lower standard of living it can be argued that immigrants will choose to live a lower quality of life in the US which again could cause a decrease in Economic activity in the U.S. </p>

<p>Lastly, for illegal immigrants wage/labor restrictions don't always apply to them meaning that U.S workers who are protected by these restrictions now have to compete with workers who do not have those restrictions which can drive down U.S employment and wages for workers across the board.</p>

<p>With that said, I think immigration as a general rule increases economic growth in the long run.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T21:41:38.493Z
Money is not out of circulation unless the immigrants send their salaries home in physical paper form. In every other case they will at some point buy foreign currency physically or electronically and send that home. The US currency will remain in the US and reenters the money market as soon as the currency vendor sells it to tourists or importing/exporting businesses.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T21:53:22.660Z
Interesting points, I like them! Illustrates I think it expands a little more on the complexity of the phenomena. Sending money to the home country is called [Remittance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittance).
Santropedro
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T21:18:51.590Z
2016-10-11T21:18:51.590Z
TheSaint321
<p>I heard many times politicians argue that immigration (in USA in particular, but applies to anywhere) are taking "real" Americans jobs. Then I tough, but they also are new consumers on the market, so they create supplies too. If immigrants also consume goods in a similar quantity and type as Americans, that will produce new more demand and thus the extra supply the jobs produce will be "justified", "balanced" or "matched". </p>

<p>Obviously, this economical situation is EXTREMELY complex with millions of factors: how productive/educated both populations are, average age of immigration, in which sectors will immigrants work and if they will overload some part of the economy with too much supply... There are millions more factors.</p>

<p>The only thing I care is if my argument disproves the IMO fallacious argument </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Immigrants will take our jobs"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Tell me if this in more correct:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"immigration will prompt the creation of more jobs and the new
  population demand will (hopefully, if everything goes well, which would
  not) balance with the new supply, without taking jobs in
  massive proportions, thought some people may loose jobs to more
  skilled immigrants."</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T20:07:13.900Z
I thought this observation might be one way of explaining why the number of jobs created recently is roughly equal to the number of new immigrants.
user2309840
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T21:14:10.967Z
Are you saying you suspected it before reading my post?
Santropedro
<microeconomics>
Even if immigrants take USA jobs, don't they consume proportionally to maintain supply-demand equilibrium?
Santropedro
# Even if immigrants take USA jobs, don't they consume proportionally to maintain supply-demand equilibrium?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-10-11)

I heard many times politicians argue that immigration (in USA in particular, but applies to anywhere) are taking "real" Americans jobs. Then I tough, but they also are new consumers on the market, so they create supplies too. If immigrants also consume goods in a similar quantity and type as Americans, that will produce new more demand and thus the extra supply the jobs produce will be "justified", "balanced" or "matched".

Obviously, this economical situation is EXTREMELY complex with millions of factors: how productive/educated both populations are, average age of immigration, in which sectors will immigrants work and if they will overload some part of the economy with too much supply... There are millions more factors.

The only thing I care is if my argument disproves the IMO fallacious argument

> "Immigrants will take our jobs"

Tell me if this in more correct:

> "immigration will prompt the creation of more jobs and the new
> population demand will (hopefully, if everything goes well, which would
> not) balance with the new supply, without taking jobs in
> massive proportions, thought some people may loose jobs to more
> skilled immigrants."

**Tags:** microeconomics
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I thought this observation might be one way of explaining why the number of jobs created recently is roughly equal to the number of new immigrants.  
> **username_0**: Are you saying you suspected it before reading my post?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-10-11. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

The only argument that I think can be made is that immigrants often don't consume similarly to Americans. Large amounts of salaries are sent home from the US by immigrants which means that money is now out of circulation.

Additionally, coming from poorer countries with a lower standard of living it can be argued that immigrants will choose to live a lower quality of life in the US which again could cause a decrease in Economic activity in the U.S.

Lastly, for illegal immigrants wage/labor restrictions don't always apply to them meaning that U.S workers who are protected by these restrictions now have to compete with workers who do not have those restrictions which can drive down U.S employment and wages for workers across the board.

With that said, I think immigration as a general rule increases economic growth in the long run.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Money is not out of circulation unless the immigrants send their salaries home in physical paper form. In every other case they will at some point buy foreign currency physically or electronically and send that home. The US currency will remain in the US and reenters the money market as soon as the currency vendor sells it to tourists or importing/exporting businesses.  
> **username_0**: Interesting points, I like them! Illustrates I think it expands a little more on the complexity of the phenomena. Sending money to the home country is called [Remittance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittance).  

---

