There are a number of prejudices and preconceived ideas about migratory phenomena, and they have become recurring arguments for immigration opponents who use them constantly. However, these arguments have been mostly refuted by specific academic studies.



Immigration does not deteriorate the labor market



The study "Immigration, Search, and Redistribution: A Quantitative Assessment of Native Welfare" of Felbermayr, Peri, Battisti and Poutvaara run by the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, has reviewed the economic statistics of 20 industrialized countries hosting immigrants. 19 of these 20 countries have benefited from the migratory influx, registering significant rises in the average basic wage of the refugee receiving areas.


On the other hand, Foged and Peri´s research “Immigrants' and Native Workers: New Analysis on Longitudinal Data" which took Denmark in the 90s as an example, revealed that all the areas that received refugees recorded a higher demand of skilled workers due to the general increase of the economic activity.


19 of these 20 countries have benefited from the migratory influx, registering significant rises in the average basic wage of the refugee receiving areas.Refugees are without a doubt an economic force to consider that benefits the environment that takes them in.  In addition to the studies mentioned above, we must understand that in most cases it is not only the potential workforce that moves, but also a series of original economical activities that normally do not exist in the country that hosts them.  When the groups of refugees achieve a stable situation, they are very likely to open small businesses, which not only revitalize the regional economy, but also create jobs and since they are types of businesses without direct correspondence with the local activity, they do not imply a fierce competition.


In addition to the previous information, among the refugees there is a significant number of highly qualified individuals and with high academic preparation. When these individuals manage to access markets in line with their qualifications, they promote an intellectual exchange that frequently gains as an outcome significant advances and innovations in their areas.  For example Jerry Yang of Yahoo,  Sergey Brin of Google or Andrew Grove who helped perfect the modern semiconductor industry, without which most of the current devices could not exist.


But even without these cases, it has been proven that the influence of a large workforce of refugees, not only doesn't displace local workers, it also complements them by becoming an important consumer market to consider. Another study "Are Refugees Different from Economic Immigrants? Some Empirical Evidence on the Heterogeneity of Immigrant Groups in the United States" by Kalena Cortes of Texas AT&M concludes that while it is true that the process takes awhile to start, once the migrants reach a basic economic stability, they add more value each year to the economy than the original cost of receiving them. Clearly, all these factors can not be ignored and that is not only reasonable, but indispensable, to accelerate the point of stability and integration of refugees with all the means at our disposal.




Immigration is not a burden for the state



There is an incorrect notion, that refugees are a fiscal burden for the state because it has to spend its social resources in order to meet their severe basic needs. This is a particularly sensitive topic in today´s Europe with the crisis and the cutbacks, and it is one of the arguments that mostly feeds the mistrust between the native population, given that they have to suffer with all the State budget cuts, it is perceived as unjust that refugees receive assistance, but this argument is wrong.



Various studies have shown that immigrants bring more to the state through taxes than the expense that they generateIn case the previously listed positive economic effects aren't enough, various studies have shown that immigrants bring more to the state through taxes than the expense that they generate. This is true even for unemployed immigrants who continue to pay indirect taxes as demonstrated in the research of Dustman and Frattini "Positive economic impact of UK immigration from the European Union: new evidence.”



Not only that, another study, "THE LONG- TERM ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF REDUCING MIGRATION: THE CASE OF THE UK Migration Policy" by Lisenkova and Sanchez-Martinez of the University of Ottawa has come to the conclusion that in the case of the UK a 50% migration reduction would imply such a decline in the GDP that the government would be forced to raise taxes significantly in order to maintain a fiscal balance.  In other cases, such as the USA, a Congressional report estimates that migration represents an increase of 5.4% of GDP and their tax contributions could reduce the deficit by 897 billion dollars in 20 years.



Treating the subject in a serious manner we must take the previous into account and accept without a doubt that the positive aspects of migration cannot be overlooked.  The generally high costs that are generated during the reception of refugees and other immigrants are minimized when viewed from a long-term perspective and when compared to the potential benefits that arise from immigration.  That is why immigration should not be seen as a burden to the state, but rather an investment for the future.  In order to convert this issue into a socially beneficial opportunity it is not only convenient, but also necessary to maintain a genuine welcome and a serious and mutual cultural recognition, to be able to accelerate the economic integration and stabilization of immigrants with all available means.


Right now, Germany is the most crucial place when it comes to welcoming refugees and it is the focus of attention in the world opinion. We must understand that the basic conditions and circumstances are repeated in a similar or identical way in the rest of the industrialized countries, and that the migration benefits could be seen in all of them.  Germany has the opportunity and the duty to become a reference in solving this phenomenon.








By 2050 the descent in Germany will be at 14.7% 10,9% decrease in Greece and 18,6% for PortugalIt is no secret to anyone that Europe is aging, it is estimated that with the current demographic growth, the population of Germany will have decreased from 81 million today to 68 million by 2060. This is a widespread problem throughout Europe.  By 2050 the descent in Germany will be at 14.7%, and also in the southern countries steep declines are expected, from 10.9% (Greece) to 18.6 % (Portugal), just to cite a few cases.


If the native population is unable to maintain the government structures, the industry, the pensions and the social security, it must necessarily rely on immigrants. Cultural and ethnic diversity are common features in Germany and the rest of the developed countries and have been a symptom of development for a long time.  A significant inclusion of migrants in the host society is not only an influx of active workers, but it also helps ensure demographic stability.


The current refugee crisis is the biggest since the end of WWIIHowever, facing such a complex phenomenon as mass immigration from other regions and cultures of the world, it is necessary to ensure that the cultural identity, traditions and values of the host country will persist in the future.  And to prevent these differences from causing deep chasms among the community, carefully structured, designed and planned integration structures must exist, whose processes aim to implement a complete integration.  In a way that immigrants integrate quickly and the second or the third generation the latest will make the values of the country where they were born their own and will no longer be considered an immigrant but a fully entitled citizen..

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Cookie policy. ACCEPT