As usual, the radical solutions arise just as the underlying problems begin to abate
Saturday, June 12, 2010 at 12:05AM 
Newsweek piece.
The call-out text tells you everything you need to know: “The fertility rate in Mexico has undergone one of the steepest declines in history.”
Leveraging Michael Barone, I made this point in “Blueprint for Action”: There is a combination of decreasing birthrate and increasing per capita income that usually turns off the emigrant flow out of any developing economy.
With Mexico, these developments are tied to the progressive economic integration of the northern Mexican states with the US economy.
No, that doesn’t mean the flow of illegals from the South goes away completely just because Mexico is leveling off. Over time, I think it simply means people are both traveling farther to get to the US and, in some measure, stopping when they hit the improving conditions in Mexico.
Per the piece:
A little-known, but enormously significant, demographic development has been unfolding south of the our border. The fertility rate in Mexico—whose emigrants account for a majority of the United States’ undocumented population—has undergone one of the steepest declines in history, from about 6.7 children per woman in 1970 to about 2.1 today, according to World Bank figures. That makes it roughly equal to the U.S. rate . . ..
It will go even lower than that replacement rate in coming years. Point is, Mexico will have less and less trouble absorbing its new workers as they age into employment.
The same is happening, to a lesser degree, throughout the rest of Latin America.
Bottom line: immigration won’t remain a problem/advantage forever, so opening the brand back up for expansion will ultimately make sense to enough Americans. Why? That great demographic input will diminish just as the Boomers begin retiring in bulk, meaning our labor force could start shrinking in some parts of the country as early as 2015, according to experts cited in the piece.
One academic: “I wouldn’t be surprised if Arizona starts pleading for Mexican workers who can help them in their retirement homes.”
LATAM, US, demographics, immigration | in Citation Post | Email Article | Permalink | Print Article 
Reader Comments (7)
Arizona is going to regret that it didn't turn into California? Now that California is officially the least educated state in the union, with high levels of white flight, that's unlikely. If our glorious future includes more spending on prisons than universities, then maybe our moral betters will explain to us how we'll pay for all those foreign wars when we can't afford our own prisons.
http://www.cis.org/california-education
Don't be coy, Tom. Problem/advantage? Which is it? This bothers me enough to comment on your fine blog because I suspect you know better but, like much of the elite, you're unwilling to speak your mind.
Immigration is an advantage for a host a reasons long documented; without it, we wouldn't have a country. But throughout our history, we've bitched mightily about the "horrible" costs. For decades, those costs were born primarily in the big cities along the coast. Now, it's more to the South. People living in these areas have always felt put upon and unfairly burdened. And when they feel it enough, they migrate to other states, like many of those immigrants have done historically.
Nothing new in any of this. Been going on for several centuries now.
You mix a lot of subjects up here in your obvious anger, and then step back on your insinuation that they all get fixed with tighter immigration.
Wonder why I don't admit that from my elite perch in Indianapolis?
Because it doesn't strike me as very good logic.
The next town north of ours is Escondido, California. It got a lot of publicity a short time ago when the city council proposed an ordinance that would make it unlawful for a landlord to rent an apartment or house to anyone that was not a legal resident of the United States. Wire services picked up the story and it was covered nationally and also in Mexico. The liberal residents (there aren't many) were aghast and others feared the ACLU would descend on their little town. The council was pressured to forget the ordinance. The interesting part of the story is that the pressure came, not from the few liberals in town, but rather from the solid conservative citizens who owned the apartment buildings full of brown skinned folks from south of the border. As they say in Chicago..."Money talks and B.S. walks."
First, sentimentalism is bad policy. Immigration policy isn't about my or your grandmother. Second, if you want to know how an immigrant group will fare in the US, look at where they came from. That's the best predictor. The chances are that a wave of Mexican immigrants is going to recreate New Mexico, not Silicon Valley. Third, tighter immigration will solve one problem, loose immigration. So yes, tighter immigration is the solution. Fourth, if you think that immigrants wiping bums and emptying bed-pans is our great demographic destiny, then maybe you do have a clearer idea of the future than you let on.
Tom is correct here. Every immigrant group has been maligned in the past, yet we have successfully integrated them all. One of our strengths. It would help if we would increase the number of legal Mexican immigrants allowed in. I suspect this does not happen since business, and the people who live by the border, prefer cheap illegal labor.
Steve
bjk- Tom's included specific and familiar examples to bring clarity to his point about labor supply/demand...he doesn't care about your grandmother. He does this so our small minds can understand some of the macro-level stuff he discusses. This is confusing you. Points two and three are just awesome.
I think Ted's comment is a great example of Tom's recent post about mayors vs. presidents paving the way for solutions to problems such as these. At the local level, a lot of the crazy gets drowned out by pressing requirements and solutions can be more practical than political.
-Mark
bjk – “The chances are that a wave of Mexican immigrants is going to recreate New Mexico, not Silicon Valley.”
Not anymore than Irish, Italian, German immigrants recreated Ireland, Italy, or Germany. When people come to America, legal or illegal they always stick with their own for a few generations. When my ancestors came from Scotland (via Ireland) they moved down through the Shenandoah Valley with other Scots-Irish. Same for my Dutch & German ancestors, they moved into areas of Pennsylvania & Ohio at first.
It's the generations after the first wave that create (or recreate) Wall St., Silicon Valley, etc.
California & the other three states were minorities are the majority are just the start of the post Caucasian world that most Americans will notice.