Let's look at why Obama used this executive order------cheap high-end labor.
As someone with Science degrees I love STEM. Let's consider the degree of saturation that corporate education reform has placed on STEM. Think as well that US global corporations are telling us they will hire what they see as the best of the best in the world -----where will the jobs for US grads in STEM be? It looks to me this STEM is everything in K-12 is more about transitioning out our broad democratic liberal arts and humanities education and tying our schools with what is simply a product-based education. Remember, the goal for Americans is to move back to a domestic economy fueled by regional and small businesses with higher wages and quality of life. This requires a broad-based education with US citizens wanting to start their own businesses that may have nothing to do with STEM. Please, do not allow these global corporate pols use our economy to create stagnation and high-unemployment.
Project Tomorrow: Stem Integration in K-12 Education
projecttomorrowblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/stem... CachedMay 06, 2014 ·
What is STEM? Is it isolated or integrated? While K-12 students usually study science and mathematics separately, all four disciplines within STEM are ...
'Conclusion: Now is not the time to increase the number of H-1B visas and STEM green cards'
This is more than anyone wants to know about how we have enough US STEM grads to fill most jobs the tech industry needs so please skim through to next article. It is good to see what corporations driving these policies are trying to say and what the reality is----and it all centers on taking the US workforce to the lowest possible.
STEM labor shortages?Microsoft report distorts reality about computing occupations
By Daniel Costa | November 19, 2012
Policy Memorandum #195 View PDF Download PDF
Press release Share this page:
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email More Sharing Services 86 Microsoft Corporation recently published a report warning that there will not be enough American college graduates in computer science to fill all of the available job openings in computer-related occupations between now and 2020 (Microsoft 2012). Microsoft uses Bureau of Labor Statistics projections to claim that from 2010 to 2020 there will be an additional “1.2 million job openings in computing professions that require at least a bachelor’s degree” (Microsoft 2012, 6). Microsoft warns that since only about 40,000 Americans graduate with a bachelor’s degree in computer science each year, many of the 120,000 projected job openings in computing occupations each year will go unfilled. As further evidence to support its claim of present and future labor shortages in computer-related occupations, Microsoft points to the 6,000 job openings at the company, 3,400 of which are for “researchers, developers and engineers” (Microsoft 2012, 3).
As part of its analysis, the Microsoft report asserts that the U.S. educational system is failing to produce enough graduates in the broader science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines (also known as the STEM fields). It recommends that Congress address the alleged shortage of STEM workers between now and 2020 in part by making 20,000 new H-1B temporary “nonimmigrant” guest worker visas available each year for employers that hire foreign graduates with degrees in STEM fields from U.S. universities. In addition, the report suggests that Congress recapture unused permanent immigrant visas (“green cards”) and make 20,000 of them available annually over the next 10 years to foreign graduates in STEM fields. Microsoft claims that the federal government could raise $5 billion over a decade if it charges employers $10,000 for every new STEM H-1B visa and $15,000 for each STEM green card. These funds would then be redistributed to states “where STEM education investments are needed” (Microsoft 2012, 5).
The report also calls for strengthening the U.S. pipeline for educating and training STEM workers by: “1) strengthening K–12 STEM education, 2) broadening access to computer science in high schools, 3) increasing STEM capacity in higher education, with a special focus on computer science, and 4) helping more students obtain post-secondary credentials and degrees by addressing the college completion crisis” (Microsoft 2012, 10).
The study that produced these recommendations contains a number of flaws, the most obvious of which are addressed in this memorandum. Specifically, this paper finds:
- The Microsoft report projects a labor shortage over the next eight years by incorrectly assuming that only individuals with a bachelor’s degree in computer science can fill jobs in computer-related occupations. Data analyzed for this memorandum as well as other studies show that less than one-fourth to less than one-half of workers in computing occupations have a computer science degree.
- The report and Microsoft officials say a labor shortage already exists in computer-related occupations, citing as evidence the fact that the present unemployment rate of workers in those occupations (3.4 percent) is less than the 4 percent unemployment rate that prevails when the national economy is at full employment (generally understood as a 4 to 5 percent unemployment rate). But Microsoft is misleading when it uses the 4 percent full-employment unemployment rate for all workers as the point of reference. Data analyses suggest that for workers in computer-related occupations—and especially for those who hold a college degree (i.e., the workers Microsoft claims there is a shortage of)—the actual full-employment unemployment rate is closer to 2 percent.
- Further evidence that there is no shortage of workers in computer-related occupations is apparent in wage trend data. For example, from 2000 to 2011, the average hourly wage for workers possessing at least a bachelor’s degree in computer and math occupations rose less than half a percent per year, compared with the sharp wage increases we would see if a labor shortage existed in these occupations.
- Granting Microsoft’s request to increase the supply of STEM workers and workers in computing occupations with college degrees through additional H-1B visas and STEM green cards would propel unemployment rates in these occupations even higher, absent substantial new job creation. This is because unemployment rates for these workers are approximately double where they would stand if these labor markets were at full employment. These higher unemployment rates will keep wages from rising, which may be a desirable outcome for Microsoft but not for workers or the U.S. economy.
Computer science graduates aren’t the only workers in computer-related occupations The first significant problem with Microsoft’s report is the assumption that job openings “in computing” not filled by college graduates with computer science (CS) degrees will go unfilled. It is a well-known fact that computer science graduates are not the only source of new hires in computing. In the late 1990s, the Department of Commerce (DOC) published a report warning of looming labor shortages in the information technology (IT) sector, citing the lack of college graduates with CS degrees as a principal reason (DOC 1997). The Government Accounting Office (GAO)1 later published a report chastising the DOC for its faulty methodologies, noting that “IT workers come from a variety of educational backgrounds and have a variety of educational credentials such as master’s degrees, associate degrees, or special certifications” (GAO 1998, 8). National Science Foundation (NSF) data at the time indicated that “only about 25 percent of those employed in computer and information science jobs in 1993 actually had degrees in computer and information science” (GAO 1998, 5).
The same is true in the main computer-related occupations, according to the most recent comparable NSF data, presented in Table 1. As the table shows, even in the occupation where one would most expect workers to hold a CS degree—computer and information science researchers—only 43 percent (approximately two out of every five) hold a CS degree. A similar percentage (41 percent) of computer software engineers have CS degrees, as do computer system analysts (39 percent); and 17 percent to 29 percent of workers in the remaining listed computer-related occupations earned a CS degree. Professor Norman Matloff of the University of California, Davis, recently conducted a similar analysis of data from the NSF’s National Survey of College Graduates, which showed that “only 40.2% of those with Software Engineer, Programmer or Computer Scientist titles came to the profession from a CS degree” (Matloff 2012, 5). It is important to note that neither of these data sets includes workers with less than a bachelor’s-level education; as Matloff mentions in his paper, many titans of the tech world, including Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and Mark Zuckerberg, do not have a college degree in any field.
Share of computer and information science workers with computer/information science or science and engineering degree, by occupation, 2003 Occupation Employed in this occupation % with at least one S&E degree % with at least one computer/information science degree % whose highest degree is in computer/information sciences Total 1,772,000 69% 32% 30% Computer and information scientists, research 40,000 76 43 40 Computer support specialists 223,000 51 17 16 Computer system analysts 424,000 68 39 36 Database administrators 90,000 67 29 26 Network and computer systems administrators 166,000 63 28 25 Network systems and data communications analysts 123,000 53 21 19 Other computer information science occupations 173,000 54 21 19 Computer engineers – software 534,000 85 41 38 Note: S&E stands for “science and engineering,” which includes computer/math sciences, biological/agricultural/environmental life sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences and engineering.
Source: 2003 National Survey of College Graduates (NSF 2012a)
Current data from the Occupational Information Network database tell a similar story, further highlighting the flawed nature of the Microsoft report’s assumption that everyone in the computing professions has or needs a university-level CS degree. For example, 47 percent of web developers do not have a four-year college degree (O*NET 2012a), let alone a degree in CS, and 41 percent of computer systems analysts do not have a four-year college degree (O*NET 2012b).
Thus, calculating the number of students graduating with a bachelor’s degree in CS each year is not a methodologically credible way to measure the future supply of potential workers in these occupations, and it is illogical for Microsoft to hinge its claim of a labor shortage on this single statistic. Workers in computer-related occupations come from a variety of educational backgrounds, and always have.
A note about the STEM pipeline A 2007 study by professors Lindsay Lowell of Georgetown University and Hal Salzman of Rutgers University that assessed the adequacy of America’s STEM education pipeline and the perceived labor market shortages of scientists and engineers contradicts Microsoft’s main conclusions. Anyone interested in the subject will find the entire report valuable, but two points made by Lowell and Salzman are particularly relevant. They find that there is a sufficient supply of students well-prepared to enter the fields of science and engineering, arguing that “the available evidence indicates an ample supply of students whose preparation and performance has been increasing over the past decades” (Lowell and Salzman 2007, 40).
They add that there is also an adequate supply of experienced STEM workers, writing, “Purported labor market shortages for scientists and engineers are anecdotal and also not supported by the available evidence” (Lowell and Salzman 2007, 43).
Keep in mind that this analysis was conducted just before the recession that began in December 2007. Since then, the number of STEM degrees awarded to U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents has remained relatively constant, increasing slightly (NSF 2012b), while unemployment rates for all workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher—including those in computer-related occupations and in STEM fields overall--have increased, and remain stubbornly high compared with their unemployment rates before the Great Recession.
Persistent high unemployment in computer-related and STEM occupations The Microsoft report states that “unemployment in computer-related occupations has fallen to just 3.4 percent, or less than the traditional rate for ‘full-employment’” (Microsoft 2012, 3).2 Brad Smith, Microsoft’s executive vice president and general counsel, presented the report on Sept. 27 at the Brookings Institution, explaining exactly what Microsoft thinks this means:
If you look at the occupation that we know best—computer-related occupations—the unemployment rate is only 3.4 percent. Since the traditional definition of full employment is about 4 percent, that tells us that we have a shortage. (Smith 2012)
This is misleading. Microsoft and Mr. Smith claim a labor shortage exists in computer-related occupations and hence call for an increase in foreign workers educated at U.S. universities with at least a bachelor’s degree. But to establish the claim, they cite the unemployment rate during periods of full employment for the entire national economy, not for engineers, scientists, or college-educated workers in computer occupations. The full-employment unemployment rate for all college-educated workers is not 4 percent—nor is it 4 percent for computer-related occupations.
U.S. unemployment rate, all workers and college graduates, 1992–2011Note: Shaded areas denote recessions.
Source: Current Population Survey public data series
Figure A shows that since 1992, whenever the national unemployment rate of all workers has been in the 4–5 percent range (i.e., at or near full employment), the unemployment rate of college graduates has never been higher than 2.3 percent (which it reached in 2001). Over the past 20 years, including in recessionary periods, the unemployment rate of college graduates has averaged 2.7 percent. Thus, the unemployment rate of college graduates when the national economy is at full employment is closer to 2 percent.
Furthermore, Microsoft’s claim that a 4 percent unemployment rate equates to full employment of workers in computer and mathematical occupations is also misleading. Figure B shows the relevant unemployment data for computer and mathematical occupations,3 the occupational category on which Smith and Microsoft focus most of their analysis, and which they sometimes refer to as “computer-related occupations.” For comparison, the national unemployment rate of all workers is included.
Unemployment rates of all workers and workers in computer and mathematical occupations, 2000–2011 (relative to unemployment rates at full employment)Note: Top horizontal shaded bar shows that the unemployment rate of all workers at cyclical peak (full employment) ranges from 4 percent to 5 percent. Bottom horizontal dotted line shows that the unemployment rate for workers in computer and mathematical occupations at cyclical peak is around 2 percent. Vertical shaded bars denote recessions.
Sources: Current Population Survey (CPS) public data series, unpublished Bureau of Labor Statistics analysis of CPS basic monthly microdata, and EPI analysis of CPS basic monthly microdata
The data in Figure B paint a picture similar to that presented in Figure A. Although the unemployment rate is lower in computer occupations than in the labor market overall, changes in the unemployment rate of workers in computer occupations have generally tracked fluctuations in the national unemployment rate. Since the end of the recession that ended in November 2001, whenever the national economy has been at full employment (with an unemployment rate between 4 and 5 percent), the unemployment rate of workers in computer occupations has not surpassed 2.4 percent; for college-educated workers in the occupation, it did not rise above 2.2 percent. Thus, what we consider full employment in these occupations is an unemployment rate much closer to 2 percent, rather than 4 percent as Microsoft claims, especially when it comes to college-educated workers. As Figure B shows, for all workers in computer occupations as well as for everyone else, elevated levels of joblessness have not yet fully subsided.
College-educated workers across the broader spectrum of STEM occupations have fared similarly. Figure C shows the unemployment rates of college-educated workers in all STEM and non-STEM occupations4 between 1994 and 2011.
Unemployment rates of all workers, and workers in STEM and non-STEM occupations with at least a bachelor’s degree, 1994–2011Note: Estimates are for the civilian labor force age 25 and older with a bachelor’s degree or higher education. Shaded areas denote recessions.
Source: Current Population Survey (CPS) public data series and unpublished Economics and Statistics Administration (Department of Commerce) analysis of CPS basic monthly microdata
As the figure shows, when the entire economy has been at full employment (i.e., at an unemployment rate between 4 and 5 percent), the unemployment rate of college-educated workers in STEM fields ranged from 1.2 to 1.7 percent, except in 2001, as a recession was underway, when it reached 2.6 percent (the overall unemployment rate in 2001 was still 4.7 percent, but increasing rapidly). As of 2011, the unemployment rate of college-educated STEM workers was still 3.4 percent—more than double the 1.4 percent rate it stood at immediately preceding the recession that began in late 2007. This means that contrary to Microsoft’s claims, there are too many educated, experienced STEM workers who are trying to find a job; there is not a shortage of them.
It is true that unemployment rates of workers in computer-related occupations, of all college-educated workers, and of college-educated workers in STEM and computer-related occupations have fluctuated with changes in business cycles, similarly to the way the national unemployment rate fluctuates. But, taken together, figures A, B, and C demonstrate these groups of workers have unemployment rates that are consistently lower than the national unemployment rate of all workers. They also lead to the reasonable conclusion that full employment for these workers is an unemployment rate at or near 2 percent. If there were a shortage of college-educated workers available to fill jobs in STEM and computer-related occupations, their unemployment rates would be expected to remain low when the overall unemployment rate climbs. That has not occurred—instead, the unemployment rates (and the resulting pool of educated, jobless workers) in STEM and computer-related occupations have increased at a rate similar to the national unemployment rate. And as with the national unemployment rate, they have yet to rebound to prerecession levels.
Stagnant wages for workers in computer-related occupations Microsoft is proposing that the government increase the supply of STEM workers with college degrees even though their unemployment rate is already double the rate at which full employment occurs for such workers. Microsoft’s proposal is unsurprising, since adding workers to the STEM labor supply during times of high unemployment and insufficient job creation would propel STEM unemployment rates even higher, thereby preventing wages in these occupations from rising. If this occurs, more STEM workers would have little choice but to accept whatever terms and conditions are offered by employers. This wage suppression is already occurring in computer and mathematical occupations. Figure D shows the average hourly wage for college-educated workers in computer and mathematical occupations over the last 11 years.
Average hourly wage in computer and mathematical occupations, workers with at least a bachelor’s degree, 2000–2011 (2012 dollars)Source: EPI analysis of Current Population Survey basic monthly microdata
The average hourly wage for college-educated workers in computer and math occupations rose 5.3 percent over 11 years, from $37.27 in 2000 to $39.24 in 2011 (in 2012 dollars), which translates to an average wage increase of less than half a percent per year. If a labor shortage existed in these occupations, one would expect wages to rise sharply as employers try to lure scarce workers to their firms. As Figure D shows, that has not occurred. Furthermore, Microsoft does not have any difficulty convincing job applicants to accept the terms and conditions of employment it offers. Despite wages for computer occupations having basically remained flat over the past decade, Fox Business reported last year that Microsoft has a 93 percent offer-acceptance rate (Willis 2011), meaning that almost every job offer Microsoft makes is accepted.
Conclusion: Now is not the time to increase the number of H-1B visas and STEM green cards Microsoft’s methodology for determining whether there is a shortage of workers in computer-related occupations looks solely at unemployment rates of workers in these occupations relative to what the overall unemployment rate would be if the entire economy were at full employment. Microsoft concluded that since the unemployment rate for workers in computer-related occupations (3.4 percent) was lower than the overall unemployment rate under full employment (which they set at 4 percent), shortages exist. But Microsoft used the unemployment rate for all workers under full employment as its point of comparison, rather than the much lower roughly 2 percent full-employment unemployment rate for workers in computer-related occupations, as well as for college-educated workers in computer-related occupations—i.e., the specific group of workers Microsoft claims there is a shortage of. Using the correct measurement of full employment in computer-related occupations leads to the conclusion that no labor shortages exist in these occupations. The unemployment rate for computer-related occupations still remains much higher than it would be under full unemployment, and is far from receding to its prerecession level.
Microsoft’s assumption that only 40,000 CS grads per year will result in tens of thousands of computer-related jobs going unfilled is contradicted by all the basic, publicly available data.
It is noteworthy that although Microsoft laments its 6,000 unfilled job openings, it laid off at least 5,000 employees during the recession (Sayer 2009). How many of these job openings are replacing employees who were laid off? And how many other technology companies face a similar situation? Many other large technology companies, including Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Cisco, and Yahoo, have announced layoffs of thousands of workers throughout 2012.5
Despite all of the layoffs, last year employers were granted almost 130,000 H-1B visas, allowing them to hire college-educated workers from abroad (State Department 2012), 20,000 of which are reserved for foreign graduates of U.S. universities. All of these H-1B workers are available to employers to fill what they claim to be labor shortages in STEM fields. It is important to note that 130,000 is not an insignificant number of workers in terms of the total STEM workforce. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, between 2010 and 2011, the employment level of the entire U.S. STEM workforce (including workers at all education levels) grew by only 92,492 jobs (ESA 2012). In addition to the H-1Bs, employers are also able to hire new foreign graduates with STEM degrees from U.S. universities for 29 months through the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, a program that has no set limit, or “cap,” and no minimum or prevailing wage requirements to protect foreign and American workers from wage suppression and depression (U.S. ICE 2012; Thibodeau 2012a). EPI has documented and criticized various problems inherent in both the H-1B and OPT programs (Hira 2010; Thibodeau 2012b), but employers continue to make heavy use of them. Thus, it is clear that employers have plenty of avenues to hire and retain new foreign graduates in STEM. This is further evidenced by research by Michael Finn, senior economist at the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, showing that nearly two-thirds of the most highly educated foreign graduates from U.S. universities in science and engineering remain in the United States for the long term.6
Once the unemployment rate for college-educated workers in computer-related occupations begins to approach the true measure of full employment for the occupation, it will make sense to debate whether new STEM green cards should be created and if H-1B levels should increase. When the economy is operating near full employment, it might be sensible to adjust public policies to help employers secure additional workers to keep the economy growing at full speed, but even then it might be preferable to first allow wages to rise, sending a market signal to U.S. students to enter the STEM fields.7 Unfortunately, there are no indicators that this pace of growth will occur anytime soon. Until then, the nation would be better served if Microsoft filled its 3,400 job openings for “researchers, developers and engineers” by hiring and retraining some of the 141,000 unemployed workers in computer occupations who are actively looking for work around the country (BLS 2012a).
--Daniel Costa is an attorney and immigration policy analyst. His areas of research include a wide range of labor migration issues, including the management of U.S. guest worker programs, both high- and less-skilled migration, and immigrant workers’ rights. Daniel’s analyses of these topics have appeared in numerous national and local media outlets.
What is the one job that will see people all over the world competing for work that will be paid the lowest wage? Computer coding.
Know the fastest education track in the developing world? Computer coding. This is with whom these US grads will be competing. Coding can be done anywhere in the world. Knowing how to code is a good thing and can be learned without an emphasis.
If your teacher is shouting against mind-numbing computer coding especially in elementary school----THEY ARE RIGHT!
For those wondering where the national NAACP has been throughout what has been the complete dismantlement of all of MLK's civil rights legacy-----here you have it. Jealous was placed at the head of NAACP to capture what was a civil rights organization to one that backs all of Clinton global corporate neo-liberalism. This is his reward for backing what has been one Republican policy to end social safety nets, equal opportunity housing and education, the moving of wealth from the working and middle-class through the massive mortgage fraud with almost no justice yet occurring. The rich simply bought Jealous. We want to note that the movement of all low-income citizens to computer coding-----from prisoners to underserved charter schools----represents what will be tomorrow's assembly line work -----poverty jobs.
Newswire : Ben Jealous, former NAACP president becomes venture capitalist
on March 5, 2014 · No Comments · in Events, Government, News, News Wire, School News Ben Jealous
Just months after stepping down as head of the nation’s largest civil rights organization, former NAACP President Benjamin Jealous is changing his career from an East Coast political activist to a West Coast venture capitalist, a switch he hopes will help further his goal of growing opportunities for blacks and Latinos in the booming tech economy
“My life’s mission has been leveling the playing field and closing gaps in opportunity and success,” Jealous, 41, told The Associated Press before Tuesday’s announcement. “I’m excited about trying a different approach.”
The Northern California native and self-confessed computer geek will be joining entrepreneurs Mitchell Kapor and Freada Kapor Klein at their venture capital investment firm that backs information technology start-ups committed to making a positive social impact.
Fred Turner, who studies culture and technology as an associate professor at Stanford University, said it’s “fascinating that a person of his caliber and experience would move into this space.”
Turner said there’s a deep question going on in the U.S. about how to accomplish positive social change. “In the Silicon Valley they approach it entrepreneurially, in Washington they approach it politically,” Turner said. “These are two very different modes.”
Jealous said he and his family will remain in Silver Spring, Md., but he’ll commute to the West Coast about once a month.
Jealous, who was widely credited with improving the NAACP’s finances, donor base and outreach, said he will never completely drop out of politics. “It’s in my DNA,” he said.
He declined to specify his new salary but said it was about the same as it was at the NAACP—$285,000 in 2011, according to tax forms.
When he announced his departure from the organization in September 2013, Jealous said he planned to pursue university teaching and spend time with his young family. But Jealous says the opportunity to work with Kapor Capital was just too tempting, putting him on the cutting edge of helping people who are slipping further behind as the national economy grows.
The divide is greater in the Silicon Valley than the rest of the country. Blacks and Latinos, already earning about half as much as whites and Asians, saw per capita income drop 5 percent for blacks in the past two years, and 2 percent for Latinos, according to an annual Silicon Valley Index.
The disparity is clear when it comes to jobs as well. Just 4 percent of the nation’s 1.1 million software developers are black, and 5 percent are Latino, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“Silicon Valley holds itself up as a meritocracy, but it’s actually embarrassingly un-diverse,” said Freada Kapor Klein. “We expect Ben is going to help us change that.”
Kapor Capital’s portfolio currently has 46 percent of its investments in firms with founders who are women and people of color from an underrepresented background.
Mitch Kapor said Jealous’ ability and understanding about how to make a social impact will be a huge asset to the firm’s investment goals.
Kapor said he looks for companies that are “closing gaps of access and opportunity for underserved communities or involve a disruptive democratization of a sector.”
These include Pigeon.ly, a start-up that offers low-cost phone and photo sharing for prisoners and their families outside, and Regalii, an international remittance platform that helps immigrants send money to their families in Latin America.
Silicon Valley Community Foundation President Emmett Carson said the region attracts great talent, and Jealous “will blend human rights and entrepreneurship in an effective way.”
Jealous grew up in Pacific Grove, about 100 miles from the Silicon Valley, during the pivotal years when personal computing was just starting to gain traction. He was captivated and chose a long commute, on foot and by bus, to attend a magnet school for computer science.
For his new job, Jealous said he’s going to be getting a crash course in technology, investing and even software coding.
“I’m going to have a computer coding tutor for the first time since I was in fifth grade,” he said.
—By The Associated Press.
Here are the nations already steeped in cheap computer processing-----and this is where US labor with computer coding skills will look to compete. Remember, this technology can be done anywhere in the world----learning the basics to computer coding is a good thing to know----being tracked into these lower end processing jobs will end in poverty! We see US global tech corporations telling us that they will hire the best of the best in the world for the higher paying jobs-----so where will all the US citizens having all this training work?
That's what Trans Pacific Trade Pact is about-----and training US citizens to compete in the industry with the lowest worldwide wages does not bode well for labor and justice! Countries with the Cheapest Labor
Countries with the Cheapest Labor
- Sammy Said The Richest
- • 04.01.13
With the world getting smaller by the minute because of the never ending advance of modern technology, companies have deemed it wise to outsource the manufacture of its products and the service that it provides to countries where the labor is dirt cheap. After all, in the world of capitalism, it is the duty of the company’s management team to maximize its profits and minimize the expenses.
Investing in other countries will entail a lot of costs, however. You have to make sure that there is sufficient workforce available that has enough education for the product or service that you will provide. Sure, that’s not much of a problem if it would only involve simple manufacturing production lines, but outsourcing today includes services in the fields of accounting, web technology and other areas that require a decent level of educational attainment. You also have to factor in the ability of the locals to converse in your own language, the safety and security of the environment and the consistency and reliability of local laws and regulations.
One also has to take into account the infrastructure facilities, from public transportation and traffic levels to Internet and communication facilities and cost of utilities. For companies that outsource manufacturing, shipping costs must also be factored in, as well as taxes that need to be paid. Even the level of corruption is something to think about.
Yet, despite all these tangible and intangible costs, the labor cost of these countries are so low that even if you add all these things together, everything will still come out lower than the astronomical labor costs in Western countries that amount from $19 and above. The high labor cost in advanced societies is the reason why businesses are willing to risk cultural differences and shoulder training expenses in other countries.
If labor cost is the only factor, these are the top 10 countries with the cheapest rates.
10. Egypt – $0.80 per hour
With a population of over 80 million, Egypt’s advantage is that it is not that far from Europe, which is why it is a favored destination for European garment manufacturers. It can also be utilized for call centers and other information technology services. Political stability and religious extremism may be an issue, however.
9. Sri Lanka – $0.62 per hour Sri Lanka has a large workforce that has the ability to speak in English. This has allowed it to host call centers, as well as provide services for accounting and business processes. Most of it are from the United Kingdom because of its status as a former British colony. Its advantage is that it is the only country in South Asia to have a high human development index.
8. Senegal – $0.52 per hour
Senegal offers cheap labor and decent information technology infrastructure ideal for call centers. Of course, the problem is that its main language is French, so its investment appeal is limited to companies in French-speaking countries.
7. Kenya – $0.50 per hour
Kenya offers cheap labor that can be used for call centers and business processing activities. Take note, however, that Kenya’s bureaucracy is known to be corrupt and it has scored lowly in most corruption indexes the past few years. Its people speaks fluent English because the country used to be a colony of the United Kingdom.
6. India – $0.48 per hour
India is a popular destination for outsourcing activities because of its people’s ability to speak English and its large pool of computer engineering graduates. Call centers and software programming are done here. With more than a billion people and most living in poverty, it is also a good source of cheap labor for the manufacture of textile and parts. Traffic may be crazy in some areas, however. Law and order are also causes for concern.
5. Vietnam – $0.39 per hour
Though still officially a communist state, Vietnam has opened its doors for business through a series of economic and political reforms. The country is mainly used for information technology services, particularly in the fields of software design and digital game creation and development. Traffic and petty crimes may be a problem, but it’s not really that worse compared to other countries.
4. Ghana – $0.32 per hour
Ghana has a population that is quite conversant in the English language. It thus makes for a good destination for call centers. Investors should check the level of education of the workforce however, as well as the communication infrastructure critical for the success of call centers. Still, its education level has slowly been rising and technology services have also been improving.
3. Pakistan – $0.32 per hour
Just like India, Pakistan has a population that can speak in English. It can be a good source for call centers and IT services like software design and web development. Business processing can also be done here. But just like India, law and order may be a problem. Add to that the incessant threat of terrorists, as the country is in the frontline of the war against terrorism.
2. Bangladesh – $0.23 per hour
Bangladesh actually has a significant pool of college graduates just waiting to be tapped. It is also a good place for those with simple requirements in the field of information technology. Production facilities also abound in the country. Investors have to factor in, however, several areas of concern. Child laborers are used in the country’s factories. The country also has one of the most corrupt bureaucracies in the world. Flooding during the monsoon season will also interrupt operations.
1. Madagascar – $0.18 per hour On a per hour basis, Madagascar has the cheapest labor rate in the world. Corruption in the country may be prevalent, but it is not that worse off compared to other similar countries. It ranks around just about the middle in corruption indexes. The country can provide accounting and IT services. Manufacture of clothes and other garments is also done here.
This article is very long but great look at what the state of the state in immigrant status in the US is today. It is important to see that the Obama jesture to what was a few million immigrants with a policy that will end in 3 years was really not much. With Obama pushing as hard as he can for Trans Pacific Trade Pact and global corporations deciding immigration policy for themselves at that point-----even those immigrants now here legally are going to be brought to the level of those nations listed in the above article.
PLEASE SHOUT OUT THAT IMMIGRATION REFORM THAT IS NOT CITIZENSHIP NOW WILL END BADLY FOR NOT ONLY THE IMMIGRANTS BEING BROUGHT TO THE US BUT FOR THE US WORKERS AS WELL.
GET RID OF WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS!
Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States
April 28, 2014 Spotlight By Chiamaka Nwosu, Jeanne Batalova, and Gregory Auclair Migration Policy Institute
Immigration has been a touchstone of the American experience since the country’s founding. And the United States remains the world’s top destination for immigrants, accounting for about 20 percent of all international migrants. (Photo: David Sachs/SEIU)
Nearly 41 million immigrants lived in the United States in 2012—a historical numeric high for a country that has been a major destination for international migrants throughout its history. About 20 percent of all international migrants reside in the United States, which accounts for less than 5 percent of the world’s population.
This article compiles in one helpful resource some of the most frequently sought-after current and historical facts and figures about immigrants and immigration in the United States. It answers questions such as: which countries are the main sources for immigration to the United States? How many immigrants enter each year? How many became U.S. citizens last year? How many unauthorized immigrants are in the United States? Do immigrants have health insurance? How many immigrants live in poverty? How many unauthorized youth received a temporary reprieve from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) process? How many unauthorized migrants were recently deported?
The article brings together resources from the Migration Policy Institute (MPI); the U.S. Census Bureau's 2012 American Community Survey (ACS) and 2000 decennial census; and data from the U.S. Departments of Homeland Security and State; the Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project; Mexico's National Population Council (CONAPO); and Mexico’s National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI).
How many immigrants reside in the United States?
According to estimates from the 2012 ACS, the U.S. immigrant population stood at almost 40.8 million, or 13 percent of the total U.S. population of 313.9 million. Between 2011 and 2012, the foreign-born population increased by about 447,000, or 1.1 percent.
Check out the figure Number and Share of Total U.S. Population, 1850-2012 in MPI’s Data Hub (click on image) to see how immigrants’ share of the overall population has fluctuated over time.
Definitions "Foreign born" and "immigrants" are used interchangeably and refer to persons with no U.S. citizenship at birth. This population includes naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents, refugees and asylees, persons on certain temporary visas, and the unauthorized. Geographical regions: MPI follows the definition of Latin America as put forth by the UN and U.S. Census Bureau, which includes Central America (including Mexico), the Caribbean, and South America. For more information about geographical regions, see the U.S. Census Bureau site and United Nations Statistics Division.
What are the historical numbers and shares of immigrants in the United States?
Data on the nativity of the U.S. population were first collected in the 1850 decennial census. That year, there were 2.2 million immigrants in the United States, representing almost 10 percent of the total population.
Between 1860 and 1920, immigrants as a share of the total population fluctuated between 13 and 15 percent, peaking at 15 percent in 1890, mainly due to high levels of European immigration.
Restrictive immigration legislation of 1921 and 1924, coupled with the Great Depression and World War II, led to a sharp drop in new arrivals in the United States. As a result, the foreign-born share of the U.S. population continued to decline between the 1930s and 1970s, reaching a record low of approximately 5 percent in 1970 (9.6 million). Since 1970, however, the share and number have increased rapidly, mainly due to large-scale immigration from Latin America and Asia made possible by changes to admission rules adopted by Congress in 1965.
Table 1: Numerical Size and Share of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States, 1970-2012
- Read about U.S. immigration trends and policies in the 20th century in Immigration and the United States: Recession Affects Flows, Prospects for Reform.
In 2012, Mexican-born immigrants accounted for approximately 28 percent of the nearly 40.8 million foreign born in the United States, making them by far the largest immigrant group in the country. India was the second largest, closely followed by the China (including Hong Kong but not Taiwan), and the Philippines (each accounting for about 5 percent). El Salvador, Vietnam, Cuba, and Korea (each 3 percent), as well as the Dominican Republic and Guatemala (2 percent each), also were among the top ten countries of origin. Together, immigrants from these ten countries made up close to 60 percent of the U.S. immigrant population in 2012.
The predominance of immigrants from Latin American and Asian countries in the late 20th and early 21st centuries starkly contrasts with the trend seen in 1960 when immigrants tended to be from European countries. Italian-born immigrants made up 13 percent of all foreign born in 1960, followed by those born in Germany and Canada (accounting for about 10 percent each). In 1960s no single country accounted for more than 15 percent of the total immigrant population.
- To view the top ten source countries by decade from 1960 to 2012, use the MPI Data Hub's Countries of Birth for U.S. Immigrants, 1960-Present interactive tool.
- To learn more about individual immigrant populations, check out our Spotlights on Mexican, Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, and Central American immigrants.
Hispanics or Latinos are not a racial category. They include those people who classified themselves in one of the specific Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino categories listed on the Census 2000 questionnaire — "Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano," "Puerto Rican", or "Cuban" — as well as those who indicate that they are "other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino."
Persons who indicated that they are "other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino" include those whose origins are from Spain, the Spanish-speaking countries of Central or South America, the Dominican Republic, or people identifying themselves generally as Spanish, Spanish-American, Hispanic, Hispano, Latino, and so on.
Read more about Census Bureau definitions here.
Demographic, Educational, and Linguistic Characteristics Note: Some percentages do not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Are there equal shares of men and women in the U.S. immigrant population?
In 2012, approximately 51 percent of the immigrant population was female; the share has fluctuated slightly during the past three decades. Women accounted for 53 percent of immigrants in 1980, 51 percent in 1990, and 50 percent in 2000.
- See how the male-to-female ratio among immigrants changed between 1870 and 2012.
Overall, the immigrant population in 2012 was older than the U.S.-born population: The median age of immigrants was 42.6 years, compared to 35.9 years among the native born.
In 2012, fewer than 1 percent of the foreign-born population was under the age of 5 (compared to 7 percent of the native-born population); 6 percent were ages 5 to 17 (compared to 19 percent in the U.S. -born population); 80 percent were ages 18 to 64 (60 percent for the native born); and the same proportions of immigrant and U.S.-born populations were age 65 and older (13 percent).
- See the age-sex pyramids of the total, native-born, and immigrant populations from 1970 to now as well as for the seven largest immigrant-origin groups in 2011.
Thirty percent of the 40.8 million foreign born residing in the United States in 2012 entered between 2000 and 2009, 7 percent entered since 2010, and the majority (63 percent) entered before 2000.
How many immigrants are naturalized U.S. citizens?
In 2012, close to 46 percent of immigrants (18.7 million) were naturalized U.S. citizens. The remaining 54 percent (22.1 million) included lawful permanent residents, unauthorized immigrants, and legal residents on temporary visas, such as students and temporary workers.
Of the 18.7 million naturalized citizens in 2012, 11 percent have naturalized since 2010, 38 percent between 2000 and 2009, and 51 percent prior to 2000.
What is the racial composition of the immigrant population?
Of the foreign born in the United States in 2012, 48 percent reported their race as white, 9 percent as black, 25 percent as Asian, and 16 percent as some other race; more than 2 percent reported having two or more races.
How many immigrants are of Hispanic origin?
In 2012, 46 percent (18.9 million) immigrants reported having Hispanic or Latino origins.
How many Hispanics in the United States are immigrants?
The majority of Hispanics in the United States are native-born. Of the 53 million people in 2012 who identified themselves as Hispanic or Latino, 36 percent (18.9 million) were immigrants.
- Use our State Immigration Data Profiles tool to learn more on the demographic characteristics of immigrants and the U.S.-born in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia as well as nationally.
In 2012, approximately 79 percent (232.1 million) of the U.S. population* ages 5 and older stated that they speak only English at home. The remaining 21 percent (61.9 million) reported speaking a language other than English at home. Spanish was by far the most common language spoken within this category (62 percent), followed by Chinese (including Mandarin and Cantonese, almost 5 percent), Tagalog (almost 3 percent), Vietnamese (2 percent), French (including Cajun and Patois, 2 percent), Korean (almost 2 percent), German (almost 2 percent), Arabic (almost 2 percent), and Russian (1 percent).
Note: *Refers to the 294 million people ages 5 and older who resided in the United States at the time of the survey.
What is the size of the Limited English Proficient population?
In 2012, there were 25 million Limited English Proficient (LEP) individuals ages 5 and older in the United States, accounting for 8.5 percent of the 294 million people ages 5 and older. Spanish speakers - accounted for 64 percent (16.1 million) of the total LEP population. The next two languages most commonly spoken by LEP individuals were Chinese, including Mandarin and Cantonese (1.6 million, or 6.5 percent) and Vietnamese (835,000, or 3.3 percent).
Note: The term "Limited English Proficient" refers to any person ages 5 and older who reported speaking English "not at all," "not well," or "well" on their survey questionnaire. Individuals who reported speaking only English or speaking English "very well" are considered proficient in English.
- Read more about the LEP population in this fact sheet Limited English Proficient Individuals in the United States: Number, Share, Growth, and Linguistic Diversity.
- Click here for data on the total LEP population by state in 1990, 2000, and 2010.
- And for linguistic diversity of the LEP population by state and county, check out these 2007-2011 data.
In 2012, approximately 50 percent (20.3 million) of the 40.6 million immigrants ages 5 and older were LEP.
What percentage of the adult foreign-born population is college educated?
In 2012, there were 35.1 million immigrants ages 25 and older. Of those, 28 percent (9.8 million) had a bachelor's degree or higher (compared to 29.4 percent, or 51.1 million, of the native-born population). Nearly 31 percent (10.8 million) of immigrants lacked a high school diploma, compared to10.2 percent (17.7 million) native-born adults.
- Use our State Immigration Data Profiles tool for more information on the language and educational characteristics of immigrants and the U.S. born in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and for the nation overall.
In 2012, the top five U.S. states by number of immigrants were California (10.3 million), New York (4.4 million), Texas (4.3 million), Florida (3.7 million), and New Jersey (1.9 million).
When classified by the share of immigrants out of the total state population, the top five states in 2012 were California (27 percent), New York (23 percent), New Jersey (21 percent), Florida, and Nevada (19 percent each).
Between 1990 and 2000, the five states with the largest absolute growth of the immigrant population were California (2.4 million), Texas (1.4 million), New York (1 million), Florida (1 million), and Illinois (577,000).
Between 2000 and 2012, the five states with the largest absolute growth of the immigrant population were California (1.4 million), Texas (1.4 million), Florida (1.1 million), New York (560,000), and New Jersey (407,000).
Between 1990 and 2000, the five states with the largest percent growth* of the immigrant population were North Carolina (274 percent), Georgia (233 percent), Nevada (202 percent), Arkansas (196 percent), and Utah (171 percent).
Between 2000 and 2012, the five states with the largest percent growth* of the immigrant population were South Carolina (91 percent), Alabama (87 percent), Tennessee (83 percent), Arkansas (75 percent), and Wyoming (74 percent),
Note: *In some states, the starting population of the foreign born was rather small. Thus, relatively small absolute increases in the immigrant population in these states have translated into high percent growth.
- For more information on the top states of residence for the foreign born, see State Immigration Trends: Number and Share of Total State Population, 1990-2012.
Mexican Immigrants How many Mexican immigrants are in the United States?
Nearly 11.6 million immigrants from Mexico reside in the United States, according to the 2012 ACS, accounting for 28.3 percent of all U.S. immigrants.
Mexican immigrants are primarily concentrated in the West and Southwest, and more than half live in California or Texas. In 2012, the top five states with the largest proportion of Mexican immigrants were California (37 percent of the total Mexican immigrant population), Texas (22 percent), Illinois (6 percent), Arizona (4 percent), and Florida (2 percent).
- Use this interactive map to learn the top states and counties where different immigrant populations, including those from Mexico, reside in the United States.
In 2012, the foreign born from Mexico accounted for over half of the immigrant population in New Mexico (70 percent), Arizona (59 percent), Texas (59 percent), Idaho (51 percent), and Arkansas (50 percent). By contrast, Mexican-born individuals accounted for 2 percent or less of the immigrant population in Vermont (2 percent), Massachusetts (1.5 percent), and Maine (0.5 percent).
How many Mexican-born workers are in the U.S. labor force?
About 69 percent (7.6 million) of the 11 million immigrants from Mexico ages 16 and older were in the civilian labor force in 2012. This rate is slightly higher than the labor force participation of the total foreign-born population ages 16 and older (67 percent of 38.8 million immigrants in the civilian labor force) and the native-born population ages 16 and older (63 percent of 209.8 million U.S. born in the labor force).
How has the emigration rate from Mexico changed over time?
According to Mexico's National Survey of Occupations and Employment (Encuesta Nacional de Ocupación y Empleo or ENOE), the emigration rate from Mexico has remained relatively steady over the past three years, after a drop in 2007 following the start of the recession in the United States and around the world. In fall 2009, 5.4 migrants per 1,000 residents of Mexico left for the United States; in fall 2010 that rate declined to 3.3 per 1,000. In fall 2011, it increased to 3.8 per 1,000, but dropped again in 2012 to its 2010 rate of 3.3 per 1,000 Mexico residents.
The immigration rate to Mexico (i.e., the number of people who move to Mexico from abroad, who are overwhelmingly return migrants) has entered a moderate decline, dropping from 3.7 per 1,000 residents in fall 2008 to 2.1 per 1,000 in fall 2012.
Note: ENOE asks Mexican households to enumerate any members of the household are who living abroad at the time of the interview. Accordingly, it does not capture the emigration of entire families where no member of the household remains in Mexico.
Which areas/regions do most Mexican migrants come from?
According to the Survey of Migration on the Northern Border of Mexico* (Encuesta de Migración en la Frontera Norte de México, or EMIF), the flow of immigrants heading from Mexico to the United States decreased in recent years. In 2012, an estimated 276,000 immigrants crossed the country's northern border en route to the United States, a 13 percent decrease from 2011’s estimate of 317,000 individuals.
In 2010, traditional sending states such as Michoacán, Guanajuato, and Jalisco accounted for the largest numbers of the 492,000 Mexican migrants who headed toward the United States, representing nearly 16 percent, 11 percent, and 10 percent of the northward flows respectively. (For an overall map of flows by Mexican state, visit the INEGI website). This is a shift from recent years when larger shares of migrants came from new sending states in southern and eastern Mexico. The most significant drops were recorded in the states of Chiapas and Veracruz. Between 2007 and 2010, migrants from Chiapas declined from 12 percent to 7 percent of the total outflow from Mexico. Similarly, migrants from Veracruz declined from nearly 8 percent to 3 percent of the total outflow over the same period.
Note: *EMIF is an annual sample survey of migration flows along Mexico's northern border region conducted by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs (SRE) and Labor and Social Welfare (STPS), the National Migration Institute (INM), the National Population Council (CONAPO), and the College of the Northern Border (COLEF) in Tijuana. It excludes Mexicans entering the United States by air, migrants under the age of 15, and non-Mexican nationals crossing the Southwest border. The category "migrants headed toward the United States" is restricted to those migrants who are traveling to the United States or a Mexican border city, are ages 15 and older, were not born in the United States, and do not have an immediate return itinerary.
- Read more about the characteristics of Mexicans migrating to the United States from Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática, INEGI (in Spanish).
- More information on Mexican migration is available at EMIF (in Spanish).
According to the 2012 ACS, approximately one-third of immigrants (33 percent) are uninsured, compared to 12 percent of the native-born population. Approximately 49 percent of all immigrants in the United States had private health insurance (compared to 68 percent of the native born), and 24 percent had public health insurance coverage (compared to 32 percent of the native born).
Note: Health insurance coverage is only calculated for the civilian, noninstitutionalized population.
Definitions "Civilian labor force" — civilian persons ages 16 and older who were either employed or unemployed in the week prior to participation in the American Community Survey. Workforce Characteristics What is the foreign-born share of the total U.S. civilian labor force?
Immigrants accounted for more than 16 percent (25.7 million) of the 157.6 million workers in the civilian labor force in 2012. Between 1970 and 2012, the percentage of foreign-born workers in the civilian labor force tripled, from 5 percent to 16 percent. Over the same period, the foreign-born share of the total population grew from almost 5 percent to nearly 13 percent.
- For more on the share of immigrants in the civilian labor force since 1980, see Immigrant Share of the U.S. Population and Civilian Labor Force (Nationwide and by State).
Of the 23.7 million employed foreign-born workers ages 16 and older in 2012, 30 percent worked in management, professional, and related occupations; 25 percent in service occupations; 17 percent in sales and office occupations; 16 percent in production, transportation, and material moving occupations; and 13 percent in natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations.
Table 2. Share of Immigrant and U.S.-Born Workers By Select Occupation, 2012
Note: The perecentages do not add up to 100 due to rounding.
- Use our State Immigration Data Profiles tool for more information on the workforce characteristics of immigrants and the U.S. born in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, as well as nationally.
"First-generation immigrant children" — any foreign-born child with foreign-born parents.
"Children with immigrant parents" — both first- and second-generation immigrant children.
Note: The estimates in this section include only children ages 17 and under who reside with at least one parent.
Children with Immigrant Parents How many children in the United States live with immigrant parents?
In 2012, 17.4 million children under age 18 lived at home with at least one immigrant parent. They accounted for 25 percent of the 70.2 million children under age 18 in the United States.
The 15.2 million second-generation children—those who were born in the United States to at least one foreign-born parent—accounted for 88 percent of all children with immigrant parents. The remaining 12 percent (2.2 million) were children living in the United States in 2012 who were born outside the United States to foreign-born parents..
- For state-by-state information on children living with immigrant parents, including both first- and second-generation children, see the Children in U.S. Immigrant Families tool.
- Read more about second-generation immigrant children in this Source special issue.
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of children ages 17 and under with immigrant parents grew 60 percent, from 8.2 million to 13.1 million. Between 2000 and 2012, the number grew 33 percent from 13.1 million to 17.4 million.
For first-generation immigrant children (those born outside the United States), population growth was sizeable between 1990 and 2000, when the population grew by 43 percent (from 1.9 million to 2.7 million), but declined 20 percent between 2000 and 2012, from 2.7 million to 2.2 million.
The number of second-generation immigrant children (born in the United States to foreign-born parents) has grown steadily since 1990. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of second-generation immigrant children grew 65 percent (from 6.3 million to 10.4 million). Between 2000 and 2012, this population grew by 46 percent (from 10.4 million to 15.2 million).
In 1990, 13 percent of all children in the United States were living with immigrant parents, rising to 19 percent in 2000 and 25 percent in 2012. The share of second-generation children among all children with immigrant parents has grown from 77 percent in 1990 to 80 percent in 2000 and to 88 percent in 2012.
How many children living with immigrant parents are in low-income families?
There were 31.1 million children under 18 living in poor families (i.e., with family incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold) in the United States. Of them, almost 9.6 million (or 31 percent) were children of immigrants.
- For state-level estimates, see State Immigration Data Profiles (under Demographic and Social Profiles)
In 2012, the top five states by the total number of children living with immigrant parents were California (4.4 million), Texas (2.3 million), New York (1.5 million), Florida (1.2 million), and Illinois (777,000). These five states accounted for 59 percent of all children with immigrant parents.
What are the top five states by share of children living with immigrant parents in the state's total child population?
In terms of the share of children with immigrant parents, the top five states in 2012 were California (50 percent of all children in the state), Nevada (39 percent), New Jersey and New York (36 percent each), and Texas (34 percent).
What are the top five states in terms of the absolute growth of the number of children living with immigrant parents?
Between 1990 and 2000, the five states with the largest absolute growth of the total number of children with immigrant parents were California (1.3 million), Texas (643,000), Florida (384,000), New York (366,000), and Illinois (231,000).
Between 2000 and 2012, the five states with the largest absolute growth of the total number of children living with immigrant parents were Texas (733,000), California (332,000), Florida (328,000), Georgia (243,000), and North Carolina (210,000).
What are the top five states in terms of the percent growth of the number of children living with immigrant parents between 1990 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2012?
Between 1990 and 2000, the five states with the largest percent growth of the total population of children with immigrant parents were Nevada (about 233 percent), North Carolina (about 224 percent), Georgia (about 194 percent), Nebraska (174 percent), and Arkansas (170 percent).
Between 2000 and 2012, the five states with the largest percent growth of the total population of children living with immigrant parents were Tennessee (141 percent), North Carolina, and Alabama (125 percent each), Kentucky (124 percent), and South Carolina (122 percent).
Annual Flows How many immigrants obtain lawful permanent residence in the United States?
In 2012, 1,031,631 foreign nationals became lawful permanent residents (LPRs), also known as green-card holders, according to DHS data. The total number decreased slightly from 2011 (1,062,040). New arrivals comprised approximately 47 percent (484,072) of those granted LPR status in 2012. The majority of green-card recipients in 2012 (547,559, or 53 percent) were status adjusters—persons who were already living in the United States before 2012, but whose green-card applications were approved that year. Most status adjusters were formerly one of the following: refugees, asylees, temporary workers, foreign students, family members of U.S. citizens or green-card holders, or unauthorized immigrants.
Of the roughly 1 million new LPRs in 2012, 46 percent were an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen, 20 percent entered through a family-sponsored preference, and 14 percent entered through an employment-based preference. Another 15 percent adjusted from refugee or asylee status, and 4 percent were diversity-lottery winners.
Which countries did permanent immigrants come from?
The top five countries of birth for new LPRs in 2012 were Mexico (14 percent), China (8 percent), India (6 percent), the Philippines (6 percent), and the Dominican Republic (4 percent). Approximately 394,000 new LPRs were from one of the top five countries of birth, accounting for about 38 percent of all persons who received LPR status in 2012.
Persons born in the next five countries—Cuba and Vietnam (3 percent each), and Haiti, Colombia, and Korea (2 percent each)—made up another 12 percent of all LPRs. The top ten countries of birth made up half of total LPRs for 2012.
- Read more about LPRs in 2012 in Green Card Holders and Legal Immigration to the United States.
The Immigration Act of 1990 established the Diversity Visa Lottery (also known as the DV lottery or the green-card lottery) to allow entry to immigrants from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. The law states that 55,000 diversity visas are made available each fiscal year, of which 5,000 must be used for applicants under the Nicaraguan and Central America Relief Act of 1997, thus reducing the available number to other nationalities to 50,000. In 2012, 40,320 people received LPR status as diversity immigrants, representing 4 percent of the 1 million new LPRs.
Before receiving permission to immigrate to the United States, lottery winners must provide proof of a high school education or its equivalent or show two years of work experience within the past five years in an occupation that requires at least two years of training or experience. They also must pass a medical exam and a background check.
Overall interest in the DV lottery is significantly higher than the 50,000 available visas; more than 9.4 million qualified applications were registered for the DV-2014 program. (The application number varies each year depending on which countries are eligible). Check out the full list of qualified entries by country for DV-2007 to DV-2013 here.
What is the total number of temporary admissions to the United States?
The total number of nonimmigrant (temporary) admissions for 2012 was approximately 165.5 million, including primarily tourists, business travelers, and international students. That figure includes an estimated 111.6 million admissions of travelers who are exempt from completing the I-94 arrival/departure form at the port of entry. (Canadians who travel to the United States for business or pleasure, and Mexicans who possess a nonresident Border Crossing Card (i.e., laser visa) are exempt from completing this form).
Total temporary admissions of I-94 nonimmigrants increased slightly from 53.1 million to 53.9 million (1.5 percent) from 2011 to 2012.
Note: Nonimmigrant admissions represent the number of arrivals, not the number of individuals admitted to the United States. DHS only reports characteristics of nonimmigrants that have to complete an I-94 arrival/departure form.
How do nonimmigrant admissions break down by visa category?
Temporary visitors (tourists and business travelers) account for an overwhelming majority of all nonimmigrant admissions. In 2012, they represented 89 percent (47.7 million) of all admissions to the United States. Of those, 42 million were tourist admissions and 5.7 million were business-traveler admissions.
Temporary workers and trainees (as well as their spouses and children), including H-1B "specialty occupation" workers, registered nurses, temporary agricultural workers, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) professional workers, treaty traders, and intracompany transferees, among others, accounted for about 3 million arrivals (more than 6 percent of total I-94 admissions)
Students, who entered the United States to study at academic or vocational institutes, made up about 4 percent (close to 1.7 million) of the total arrivals including their family members but not including exchange visitors.
According to recent estimates by DHS, about 1.9 million foreign nationals on various temporary visas resided in the United States on January 1, 2012 (Note: this estimate excludes tourists and other short-term visitors). Of the 1.9 million, 45 percent were temporary workers and their families, followed by foreign students and their families (40 percent). Nearly half of the 1.9 million temporary visa holders were from Asia. Another quarter came from Europe and Canada. The top five countries of origin—India, China, South Korea, Canada, and Mexico—accounted for half of the 1.9 million residents on temporary visas.
- Read about the size of nonimmigrant population in Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Resident Nonimmigrant Population in the United States.
The Department of State (DOS) reports the number of visas issued to foreign nationals who wish to enter the United States for the purpose of traveling, conducting business, working, studying, and for other reasons.
In 2012, DOS issued 8,927,090 nonimmigrant visas, which is a 19 percent increase from the 7,507,939 visas issued in 2011.
The vast majority (77 percent) of the 8.9 million nonimmigrant visas issued in 2012 were temporary business and tourist visas (B-1, B-2, and BCC visas). The next largest visa class (F-1, F-2, and F-3) was for academic students and exchange visitors and their family members, who comprised 6 percent of all nonimmigrant visas issued, followed by the J-1 and J-2 visa categories for exchange visitors and their spouses and children (4 percent).
The distribution of the 8.9 million visas issued to foreign nationals in 2012 by region shows that the majority of temporary visas were issued to nationals from Asia (35 percent) and North America (24 percent, including Central America and the Caribbean), South America (24 percent), Europe (11 percent), Africa (4 percent), and Oceania (0.5 percent).
Note: The number of visas issued does not necessarily match the number of foreign nationals who entered the United States in the same year because some nonimmigrant visas may not be used.
- For more information, see the Department of State publication Report of the Visa Office 2012.
Refugees are generally outside of the United States when they are considered for resettlement, whereas asylum seekers submit their applications while they are physically present in or at a port of entry to the United States.
Asylum seekers can submit an asylum request either affirmatively or defensively. An asylum seeker present in the United States may submit an asylum request either with a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) asylum officer (affirmative request), or, if apprehended, with an immigration judge as part of a removal hearing (defensive request). During the interview, an asylum officer will determine whether the applicant meets the definition of a refugee.
How many immigrants enter the United States as refugees, and where are they from?
In 2012, 58,179 refugees were admitted to the United States, a roughly 3 percent increase from 2011 (56,384). Bhutan, Burma, and Iraq were the primary countries of nationality for refugees admitted in 2010, 2011, and 2012. The nationals of these three countries made up 71 percent (41,393) of all refugees admitted in 2012. The next seven countries of origin for refugee resettlements in 2012 were Somalia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan, and Ethiopia. Altogether, nationals of these ten countries totaled 94 percent (54,916) of all refugee arrivals in 2012.
Each year, the President and Congress set the annual refugee admissions ceiling and regional allocations. For fiscal year (FY) 2014 the ceiling was set at 70,000, same as 2013 (down from 80,000 between 2008 and 2011). The Near East/South Asia regions received 47 percent (33,000) of the total regional allocations in response to the refugee crises in Iraq and Burma.
How many foreign born enter the United States as asylees, and where are they from?
In 2012, 29,484 principal applicants and their spouses and/or unmarried children under the age of 21 were granted asylum after seeking protection upon arriving or after arrival in the United States. An additional 13,049 individuals outside of the United States were approved for asylum status as immediate family members of principal applicants. (Note that this number reflects travel documents issued to these family members, not their arrival to the United States.)
Asylees from the top five countries of origin for asylum seekers made up 55 percent (16,228) of all asylees in 2012. China was the top country of origin, with 10,151 Chinese receiving asylum in 2012, accounting for 34 percent of all asylum grants that year. The next four largest origin groups were from Egypt (2,882), Ethiopia (1,122), Venezuela (1,099), and Nepal (974). Together, nationals of these five countries made up more than half of all individuals who received asylum status in 2012.
- For more information, see Refugees and Asylees in the United States.
According to DHS’ Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS), an estimated 11.5 million unauthorized immigrants resided in the United States in January 2011. The latest available estimates from DHS, released in March 2012, suggest that the unauthorized population was virtually unchanged compared to the revised 2010 estimate of 11.6 million. The largest shares of the 11.5 million unauthorized immigrants resided in California (25 percent), Texas (16 percent), and Florida and New York (6 percent each). Between 2000 and 2011, Georgia’s unauthorized population nearly doubled (from about 220,000 to 440,000), while the number of unauthorized migrants in Florida decreased by 9 percent (from 800,000 to 740,000). These figures can be compared to 36 percent growth between 2000 and 2011 at the national level. Georgia was home to 4 percent of the nation’s unauthorized immigrants in 2011.
The Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project also produced estimates of the size and characteristics of the unauthorized immigrant population. According to recent Pew data, there were 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States in March 2012. The difference between the size of the unauthorized immigrant population from 2011 (11.5 million) to 2012 (11.7 million) is not statistically significant.
Note: The data sources and estimating methodologies used by the DHS Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) and Pew to describe the unauthorized population are different. Hence the estimates are not fully comparable, and we urge readers not to mix them. The two organizations cover somewhat different topics. For instance, OIS has estimates on the unauthorized population by period of entry, origin, state of residence, age, and sex. In addition to covering trends over time, Pew estimates include national and state-level estimates of the unauthorized labor force, as well as data on children with unauthorized parents.
Where are unauthorized migrants from?
According to DHS estimates, about 8.9 million unauthorized immigrants in 2011 were born in North America (which includes Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and Canada). About 1.3 million were from Asia, 800,000 from South America, 300,000 from Europe, and 200,000 from the remaining parts of the world. Mexico (59 percent), El Salvador (6 percent), and Guatemala (5 percent) were the top three countries of birth of the unauthorized immigrant population.
- See Table 3 in the OIS report for the top ten countries of birth of the unauthorized in the United States in 2011.
About 5.5 million children living in the United States in 2010 (the most recently available estimates) had at least one parent who was an unauthorized immigrant, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project. Of this group, about 82 percent (4.5 million) were U.S. citizens by birth and 18 percent (1 million) were unauthorized immigrants themselves. The number of children with unauthorized immigrant parents has significantly increased since 2000, when there were 3.6 million such children. However, over the same period, the number of unauthorized immigrant children declined from 1.5 to 1.0 million, while the number of U.S.-born children with unauthorized immigrant parents grew from 2.1 million to 4.5 million.
- Read the Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project’s fact sheet on unauthorized immigrants.
There were more than 600,000 apprehensions in 2012 (643,474) by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the two agencies within DHS responsible for the identification and removal of inadmissible noncitizens. About 365,000 (57 percent of all apprehensions) were reported by the Border Patrol in 2012, up 25,000 from 2011 (approximately 340,000), a year which had the lowest number of apprehensions by the Border Patrol since 1971. About 98 percent of Border Patrol apprehensions occurred along the Southwest border. Additionally, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations made 262,769 administrative arrests (or 41 percent of total apprehensions in 2012) and ICE Homeland Security Investigations made 15,937 administrative arrests (or 3 percent).
The leading countries of nationality of those apprehended in 2012 were Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Nationals from these four countries comprised 92 percent of all apprehensions, with Mexican nationals comprising the overwhelming majority—70 percent—in 2012 (down from 76 percent in 2011).
Note: Apprehensions are events, not individuals. In other words, the same individual can be apprehended more than once with each apprehension counted separately.
How many people are deported per year?
Foreign-born individuals who must leave the United States are categorized as either "removals" or "returns." Both removals and returns result in the departure of a foreign-born individual from the United States. There were 649,352 removals and returns in 2012, a 9 percent drop from 2011 (710,573 removals and returns).
In 2012, returns accounted for 35 percent (or 229,968) of total removals and returns, while removals comprised 65 percent (or 419,384)—an all-time high for removals. The number of removals has generally increased since 1990 when there were 30,039 removals. At the same time the number of returns has declined, from 1.02 million in 1990 to 229,968 in 2012 (the lowest since 1969).
Notes: Removals (deportations) are the compulsory and confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable unauthorized immigrant out of the United States based on an order of removal. An unauthorized immigrant who is removed has administrative or criminal consequences placed on subsequent re-entry owing to the fact of the removal. Returns are the confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable unauthorized immigrant out of the United States not based on an order of removal. Most of the voluntary departures are of Mexican nationals who have been apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol and are returned to Mexico.
The government fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30. All figures for immigration control and enforcement given here are for the government fiscal year.
- Read MPI's report with key current and historical data, The Deportation Dilemma: Reconciling Tough and Humane Enforcement
- Read DHS' Immigration Enforcement Actions: 2012.
On June 15, 2012, the Secretary of Homeland Security announced that certain unauthorized immigrants who entered the United States as children would be able to apply for deferred action, granting relief from deportation and work authorization for two years. MPI estimates that approximately 1.9 million people could be eligible for the DACA initiative. Prospective beneficiaries have to meet a series of requirements, including the following:
- Entered the United States before the age of 16
- Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007
- Are currently in school, have graduated from high school or earned a GED, or are honorably discharged veterans of the U.S. armed forces (including the Coast Guard)
- Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more misdemeanors; or otherwise pose a threat to public safety or national security.
The top states of residence for DACA applicants (refers to applications accepted) are California (29 percent), Texas (16 percent), Illinois and New York (5 percent each), and Florida (4 percent).
The top countries of origin are Mexico (77 percent), El Salvador (4 percent), Honduras (3 percent), Guatemala (3 percent), and Peru (1 percent).
By the end of December 2013, 521,815 of the accepted applications had been approved and 15,968 denied.
- For the most up-to-date DACA application and approval estimates, click here.
- Read more about the DACA-eligible populationin the MPI fact sheet Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals at the One-Year Mark: A Profile of Currently Eligible Youth and Applicants.
- For more information from USCIS on the DACA program, click here.
In 2012, 18.7 million immigrants were naturalized U.S. citizens, accounting for 46 percent of the foreign-born population (40.8 million) and 6 percent of the total U.S. population (313.9 million) according to ACS estimates.
How many immigrants naturalize?
According to DHS data, USCIS naturalized 757,434 LPRs in 2012. The total number of immigrants naturalized increased by 9 percent between 2011 and 2012.
From a historical perspective, the number of naturalizations has increased dramatically in recent decades. On average, 141,000 LPRs naturalized each year between 1970 and 1979, 205,000 in the 1980s; 498,000 in the 1990s, and 682,000 during the 2000s.
The number of naturalizations reached an all-time high in 2008 (1,046,539) before falling by almost 29 percent in 2009. The sharp 59 percent increase in naturalizations between 2007 and 2008 (from 660,477 to 1,046,539) came as a result of impending application fee increases and the promotion of naturalization in advance of the 2008 presidential elections.
- For more background information on naturalization trends, see Naturalization Trends in the United States.
In 2012, 7,257 foreign-born military personal naturalized as U.S. citizens, 13 percent less than in 2011 when the number of military naturalizations was 8,373.
- For more historical data on naturalization, see Number of Immigrants Who Became U.S. Citizens, 1910 to 2012.
- Read USCIS’ Naturalization through Military Service: Fact Sheet.
Of those who naturalized in 2012, 13 percent were born in Mexico (102,181), and 6 percent each in the Philippines and India (44,958 and 42,928 respectively). Immigrants from these three countries, together with those from Dominican Republic (33,351), China (31,868), Cuba (31,244), Colombia (23,972), Vietnam (23,490), Haiti (19,114), and El Salvador (16,685), comprised the top ten countries of birth for newly naturalized citizens in 2012 and accounted for approximately 49 percent of all naturalizations that year.
Where do newly naturalized citizens live in the United States?
In 2012, 54 percent of all newly naturalized citizens lived in one of four states. California has the largest number of newly naturalized citizens, comprising 21 percent (158,850) of the total newly naturalized. Thirteen percent (100,890) of the newly naturalized resided in Florida in 2012, 12 percent in New York (93,584), and 8 percent in Texas (57,762).
Approximately 16 percent of those who naturalized in 2012 lived in the greater New York metropolitan area (123,891) and 9 percent each in the greater Miami and Los Angeles metropolitan areas (68,072 and 65,679 respectively). These areas, together with the greater Washington DC metropolitan area (4 percent), Chicago (4 percent), San Francisco and Houston (about 3 percent each), and the greater Boston area (2 percent) were home to half of new U.S. citizens in 2012.
How many green-card holders are eligible to naturalize?
According to the latest available USCIS estimates, 13.3 million LPRs resided in the United States in January 1, 2012. Of them, about 8.8 million were eligible to naturalize.
How long does it take on average for green-card holders to naturalize?
To be naturalized, LPRs must meet a number of criteria, including being at least 18 years of age, have resided in the United States with LPR status continuously for at least five years, and pass an English and civic exam.
According to USCIS estimates, immigrants who naturalized in 2012 spent a median of seven years in LPR status before becoming U.S. citizens. The time varied by country of origin: African born spent about 5 years in LPR status before naturalization, followed by those born in Asia and South America (both 6 years), Europe (7 years), Oceania (8 years), and North America (including Mexico and Central America, 10 years).
Visa Backlogs How many visa applications for permanent immigration (green cards) are backlogged?
Two types of backlogs impact issuance of green cards. The first is due to visa availability. The government caps employment-based, permanent visas for foreign workers and their families at 140,000 per year world-wide. Family-sponsored preferences are limited to 226,000 visas per year. Also, no country can receive more than 7 percent of the total annual number of family-sponsored and employment-based visas (approximately 25,600 visas).
The second type of backlog is due to processing delays of applicants' documents, which is related to government processing capacity as well as increased background and criminal checks.
Once the Department of State grants a visa to an immigrant, USCIS and the Federal Bureau of Investigation conduct background checks.
In May 2014, the government was processing some family-related visas applications filed as far back as July 1990, and it was still processing some employment-related visa applications from October 2003.
Here are two examples of how long the waiting times have been for some applicants who became eligible to apply for a green card in May 2014:
- An unmarried adult child from Mexico of a U.S. citizen had to wait for about 20.5 years.
- A sibling from the Philippines of a U.S. citizen had to wait for about 23.5 years.
Another useful indicator to understand the waiting times is the number of people whose documents are on hold because there are no immigrant visas available for a given family/employment preference or a given country of origin. According to the data on the petitions submitted to the Department of State (DOS), there were about 4.3 million applicants (including spouses and minor children) who on November 1, 2013 were on the waiting list. The overwhelming majority of these applicants were family-sponsored applicants and their immediate family members (4.2 million). About 112,000 were employment-sponsored applicants and their family. Of the overall 4.3 million applicants, 1.3 million were citizens of Mexico, followed by those from the Philippines (437,000) and India (327,000). What these DOS data do not show is the number of family- and employment-based prospective immigrants who are waiting to adjust their status to LPR from within the United States. Their applications are likely to be processed by USCIS. To our knowledge, the number of people who await for green cards from within the United States has not been published by USCIS. In other words, the overall number of people waiting for a green card–within and outside of the United States–is larger than the 4.3 million reported by DOS.