For about a week late last month, Western media were obsessed with the fate of the Titan, a small submersible carrying a few billionaires and others to the sunken Titanic and later found to have imploded within hours of beginning its descent. Meanwhile, a boat carrying about 750 economic refugees capsized off the Greek coast, killing hundreds who had boarded in Libya after making perilous journeys from places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria.
Pakistan declared a national day of mourning for its citizens lost at sea, but the West paid hardly any notice.
Of course, it is unfair to fault the media for responding to the demands of its audience. The relatively scant coverage of the migrants’ tragedy is symptomatic of a larger tendency to ignore the plight of those who happen to have been born in less privileged parts of the world.
Illustration: Mountain People
The mood has changed since the 2015 refugee crisis, when chilling photographs of a migrant boy who had washed up on the Turkish coast elicited outrage and a vigorous response from policymakers in rich nations. In the intervening years, the Western public has become inured to such images, more often looking inward or focusing on other priorities.
True, a cynic might say that the intense coverage of the 2015 refugee crisis was motivated less by idealism than by pragmatic concerns about Europe being overwhelmed by millions of people fleeing from violence, but even if that was the case, the same concerns dictate that advanced economies pay more attention to the developing world’s problems today.
Most governments around the world have recognized that they can no longer ignore climate change and other environmental damage, but ignoring the huge gap in living standards between the Global North and Global South has similarly become unsustainable. Owing to advances in communications technology and access to social media, the poor today are keenly aware of the vast differences between their lives and those of people living in rich nations. As long as these differences remain, they will keep pushing north in search of a better future. No border, no wall and no sea will keep them where they are.
The ongoing immigration crisis at the US’ southern border and the continuing drama on the seas around Greece and Italy have made that clear, but the quest for a better life is just the supply side of the equation. On the demand side, labor-market shortages have created a strong incentive to bring people into advanced economies to do the work that natives no longer do. In the absence of well-considered immigration policies that can satisfy this need, reckless smugglers have filled the void.
The labor-market shortages in advanced economies are not some temporary or short-term phenomenon. In the US, a recent Brookings Institution study documents a shortfall of 2.4 million workers as of December last year, relative to the 12-month average ending in February 2020. Most of this decline would have happened without the COVID-19 pandemic, owing to changes in the age and education of the population, but there was also a decline in the average weekly hours worked, producing an additional labor-supply shortfall equivalent to another 2.4 million people.
This reduction in work hours cannot be attributed solely to COVID-19 or the fear of long COVID. While its causes are not yet fully understood, a re-evaluation of work-life balance seems a plausible hypothesis. In any case, the bottom line is that labor shortages experienced in the aftermath of the pandemic are likely to persist, both in the US and in Europe, where low birthrates and aging populations present similar demographic challenges.
While advances in automation, robotics and artificial intelligence might mitigate some labor-supply challenges, not every job can be replaced by a robot or a computer-generated service. Many of the jobs that remain in demand are in sectors such as construction, housekeeping, healthcare and hospitality, where the work is usually not pleasant or glamorous. If Americans and Europeans are unwilling to take these positions, it makes sense to offer them to motivated, hardworking immigrants. This is not about providing humanitarian assistance; it is just sound economic policy, especially at a time when repeated interest-rate hikes by central banks have not yet resolved one of the primary contributors to inflation — tight labor markets.
A well-designed immigration policy that allows for the controlled entry of willing workers, and that helps integrate them into host nations, would go a long way toward easing labor-market tightness and preventing humanitarian tragedies caused by smugglers’ shameless exploitation of migrants and refugees, but policymakers need to look beyond the next election cycle and rise above partisan political interests.
At the same time, it is neither possible nor desirable to move the entire populations of low-income nations to the US and Europe, so it is imperative to reject short-sighted economic nationalism. Advanced economies must do more to address the huge imbalances that still exist across the world economy. Reducing global inequality is essential to a sustainable future.
Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, a former World Bank Group chief economist and editor-in-chief of the American Economic Review, is professor of economics at Yale University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2023.
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been dubbed Taiwan’s “sacred mountain.” In the past few years, it has invested in the construction of fabs in the US, Japan and Europe, and has long been a world-leading super enterprise — a source of pride for Taiwanese. However, many erroneous news reports, some part of cognitive warfare campaigns, have appeared online, intentionally spreading the false idea that TSMC is not really a Taiwanese company. It is true that TSMC depositary receipts can be purchased on the US securities market, and the proportion of foreign investment in the company is high. However, this reflects the
RSS