Det optimale antal immigranter? Det tal findes ikke!

Når indvandringen er til debat – det vil altså sige tilflytningen af ikke-asylansøgere til Danmark fra fremmede stater – falder snakken hurtigt på, hvor meget en immigrant hhv. tager eller giver til statskassen. Den liberale vinkel på spørgsmålet har altid været klar: Frihandel er godt, uanset om vi taler varer, tjenesteydelser, kapital eller arbejdskraft.

Grønkort- og kvoteordninger begrænser arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed og de er, ligegyldigt hvordan de vendes og drejes, fundamentalt uliberale. Som Chicago-økonomien John Cochrane så fint pointerer på sin blog, The Grumpy Economist:

What is the optimal number of imported tomatoes? Soviet central planners tried to figure things out this way. Americans shouldn’t. We should decide on the optimal terms on which tomatoes can be imported, and then let the market decide the number. Similarly, we should debate what the optimal terms for immigration are – How will we let people immigrate? What kind of people? – so that the vast majority of such immigrants are a net benefit to the US. Then, let as many come as want to. On the right terms, the number will self-regulate.

Econ 101: Figure out the price, set the rules of the game; don’t decide the quantity, or determine the outcome. When a society sets target quantities, or sets quotas, as the U.S. does now with immigration, the result is generally a calamitous waste. With an immigrant quota, an entrepreneur who could come to the U.S. and start a billion dollar business faces the same restriction as everyone else. The potential Albert Einstein or Sergey Brin has no way to signal just how much his contribution to our society would be.

Men hvad så med statskassen og alle de sociale ydelser? Løsningen er her, ifølge Cochrane, en variant over temaet ”åbne grænser, lukkede kasser”, som jeg selv er varm tilhænger af:

Why fear immigrants? You might fear they will overuse social services. Morally, just why your taxes should support an unfortunate who happened to be born in Maine and not one who happened to be born in Guadalajara is an interesting question, but leave that aside for now. It’s easy enough to structure a deal that protects the finances of the welfare state.

Immigrants would pay a bond at the border, say $5,000. If they run out of money, are convicted of a crime, don’t have health insurance, or whatever, the bond pays for their ticket home. Alternatively, the government could establish an asset and income test: immigrants must show $10,000 in assets and either a job within 6 months or visible business or asset income.

(HT: Lars Christensen via The Market Monetarists-bloggen)