Globalisation Institute

About us

The Globalisation Institute is a European think tank. Our main areas of interest involve developing policies that increase European Union competitiveness, replace harmful regulation, harness enterprise to fight global poverty, promote a positive, pro-technology approach to the environment, and increase world trade. For more information, visit our About page.

Latest comments

Why VHS won over Betamax
One could just as easily say that the market in cars failed by not pro...
Why VHS won over Betamax
The market failed by not combining the superior recording quality of B...
Removing the Common External Tariff would do more to promote innovation than EU R&D; subsidies
Dr Terrence Kealey makes this point very well: "The big myth about sc...

Subscribe to this blog

If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to this blog with this link. 

You can also get new blog entries delivered to your email inbox each mornining by entering your email address here:

Support our work by credit card or Paypal

Enter Amount:

Get GI Weekly

Keep up-to-date with the work of the GI with our weekly email bulletin. Just enter your email address into the box and click Subscribe:



Blogroll

European Union
Centre for European Reform
Daniel Hannan
FT Brussels Blog
Kosmopolit
Margot Wallstrom
Open Europe

Think tanks
Adam Smith Institute
Cato @ Liberty
CNE
Civitas Blog
Mises Institute
Reason
Social Affairs Unit

Economics
Daniel W. Drezner
David Smith
EconLog
Institutional Economics
Johan Norberg
Philippe Legrain
Made in Hong Kong
Trade Diversion

General
Cafe Hayek
ConservativeHome
From the Heartland
Knowledge Problem
Merciar Business Consulting
Mutualist Blog
Positive Externality
Radley Balko
Samizdata.net
The Commons Blog
The Welfare State We're In
Tim Worstall
Tom G. Palmer

Entrepreneurship
Hillary Johnson
Guy Kawasaki

Technology
TechDirt
Right to Create

Development
CIPE Development Blog
Pienso
Private Sector Development

India
IndiaUncut

People
Brian Micklethwait
Franck's blog
Iain Dale
Gavin Sheridan
Natalie Solent
Home Blog Immigration and the race to the top
Immigration and the race to the top
Written by Toby van den Hoven   
Friday, 20 April 2007

Immigration is good and globalisation creates a race to the top in labour and environmental standards. These are two views sometimes considered controversial, but as Tom Clougherty explains in these two short GI videos (originally made for internet TV station 18 Doughty Street), the empirical evidence supports these views. The first video is on the race to the top, the second on immigration.

Comments (14)

Andrew Griffiths said:

  Immigration might be alright economically but this is a small island, not some huge place like the United States or Continental Europe. We don't have space.
April 20, 2007

Inga said:

  What nonsense Andrew Griffiths utters. Britain has developed on only about 8% of the land.
April 20, 2007

The Nozickian said:

  Tom Clougherty is persuasive. We need more gifted communicators like him on our side.
April 20, 2007

Andrew Griffiths said:

  Inga: Most immigrants want to be in London. Have you tried the London Underground or the railways during rush hour? They're totally packed. It won't be long till we have people dying on the tube, squeezed off platforms onto the live rail.
April 20, 2007

Alex Singleton (GI) said:

  London Underground deliberately limit the number of people who can enter a station - so at very busy stations, you'll see they bring shutters across at the entrance sometimes.

The problem with the Underground is that much of it is ancient. A modern line like the Jubilee Line extension seems to be a pleasant experience. But it's worth noting that the Underground first opened in 1863; much of is designed for a bygone era.
April 20, 2007 | url

Craig Moody said:

  Watched the video on the race to the top. Loved it. Keep 'em coming.
April 20, 2007

Mischa said:

  Immigrants are good for the economy. They buy products which provides jobs both here and elsewhere. What part of this don't politicians get?
April 20, 2007 | url

Hugh said:

  The Daily Mail's hysteria about being "swamped" by asylum seekers has a lot to answer for.
April 20, 2007

Paul Wallace said:

  Andrew Boff (Tory campaigner) was on 18 Doughty Street last night giving a very strong defence of immigration, including asylum seekers. His argument was that these are people who've got up and travelled all around the world, often dangerously, in order to have the opportunity to live in Britain. He didn't use these words but his argument effectively said: these people are the world's strivers, not scroungers.
April 20, 2007

Andrew Griffiths said:

  They might be "strivers" but what about our responsibility to our native population? Immigrants come to this country and take away the birthrights of the English man. Sure, the immigrants get jobs at or below minimum wage but what about all the English who lose their jobs? At the same time, we're letting all the Europeans, Japanese, Chinese &c put our workers out of work. What's happened to Rover workers is criminal.
April 20, 2007

Alex Singleton (GI) said:

  "Sure, the immigrants get jobs at or below minimum wage but what about all the English who lose their jobs?"

The effect of immigrants is to increase wages, and as Tom points out, the OECD has shown that high immigration and low unemployment go together.

"At the same time, we're letting all the Europeans, Japanese, Chinese &c put our workers out of work."

Well of course we have a low unemployment economy. Countries get richer through imports, rather than exports.

"What's happened to Rover workers is criminal."

One presumes you don't mean any law has been broken? What we saw with Rover is a thirty year period for which the company pretty much every year destroyed wealth. The mistake was for govenment to get involved in the first place.
April 20, 2007 | url

Damian Merciar said:

  Well this is all very good already - lots of heated debate!

Immigration is a complex and emotive subject - the consensus of the debate is that it is, in strict economic terms - a good thing. This does not account for elements of social displacement of the indigenous population - nor more importantly, the loss to the exporting economy, of its "strivers". Each state needs a high proportion of these talented go-getters, to keep things moving.

Life is not simple and emigration / immigration is amongst its most complex of issues.
April 20, 2007 | url

Alex Singleton said:

  Johann Norberg:

"I have always disliked the concept of "brain drain" as a criticism of migration. Somehow it signals that people's brains belong to their society or their country, and that it has some sort of rightful claim on them.

"Furthermore, the concept presupposes that a country loses someones' abilities when he migrates. But studies show that brains that work more productively can benefit the countries they leave even better. Immigrants from poor countries working in rich countries send around $480 billion home every year ($160 officially, $320 inofficially). That is six times more than all development aid, and it doesn't end up in Swiss bank accounts, but in the local households and markets.

"Furthermore, immigrants facilitate and strengthen trade links between the countries they left and the country they went to."
April 20, 2007 | url

Vicky Kahney said:

  I googled the presenter, Tom Clougherty, and am informed he is developing a reputation as "wonkland's most eligible heterosexual batchelor".
April 22, 2007

Write comment
 

Other articles