How to Fix Immigration’s Black Market

Alex Nowrasteh and I have a piece in today’s Detroit News arguing that liberalization, not regulation, is the way to shrink immigration’s massive black market. Our main points:

-New rules that came into effect this month, such as raising the minimum wage for H-2A visa holders (that’s the visa for low-skilled agricultural workers) makes cheaper undocumented workers look more attractive for employers. They actually harm legal workers.

-Other new regulations, including background checks, workplace inspections, and mountains of paperwork, cost thousands of dollars per employee. These regulations also make black market workers look more attractive.

-The way to reduce illegal immigration is liberalization. For agricultural workers, that means making their H-2A visas inexpensive, easy to obtain, and keeping the bureaucracy to a minimum.

-When legal channels cost too much in time and money, people will turn to illegal channels every time. That’s how the world works. Getting rid of immigration’s black market begins with admitting that fact.

This Is an Actual Law

Texas state law states that “When two railroad trains meet at a crossing, each shall stop and neither shall proceed until the other has passed.”*

Sometimes, I think legislators are just messing with us.

*Robert Wayne Pelton, Loony Laws, p. 2.

Regulation of the Day 130: Roommates

In New York City, it is illegal for four or more unrelated people to live together. At least 15,000 New York homes openly flout the rule.

The ranks of lawless hooligans cut across lines of class and race. According to the New York Times, violators “include young actors and ponytailed post-graduates; rising and falling junior investment bankers; immigrants, legal and illegal; and trend-obsessed residents in Brooklyn neighborhoods.”

The Times also interviewed a young film star who lives with five other people. He is not related to any of them.

People break the regulation to save money on rent. Given the cost of living in New York, this is a smart and prudent way to save money. It also leaves more housing left over for others, which helps to drive down housing costs.

Even better, if enough people pool their resources, they can afford to live in a larger home in a nicer neighborhood than they could pay for alone.

The city has the good sense to rarely enforce the rule – just three times since July, according to the Times. This is good. What would be better is to repeal it. When a law is almost universally regarded as counterproductive, not only should go unenforced, it should go away.

Friday Regulation Roundup

Government does more wacky things than anyone could possibly write about in any detail. Listed here are just a few that I dug up over the course of the week. If you have more, I’d love to hear about them.

206 occupations require licenses in New Jersey.

– Federal money is paying for a museum exhibit called “Race to the End of the Earth.” (Note: the earth is round.)

– In the market for a new air conditioner? Act fast, because new regulations are on the way.

– The federal government pays for a website that monitors jellyfish sightings.*

– Fear not: the federal government has a Potato Research and Promotion Plan.

– Last year, the feds started a Dairy Industry Advisory Committee. Let the rent-seeking begin!

– And finally: 2,000 House staffers make $100,000 or more per year.

*CORRECTION: Commenter Steve, who works at jellywatch.org, writes that “Our web site is NOT supported by the federal government in any way. It would not be a bad thing if it were, since people are dependent on fish which interact with jellyfish. However we are presently supporting the site through our volunteered time and money from our own pocket. The article you cite refers to associated research which our project will contribute data. Please correct your site accordingly.”

I take Steve at his word, thank him, and issue this correction. Federal money does go to jellyfish research, but not to jellywatch.org.

I also received a thoughtful email from  a colleague of Steve’s that deserves a thoughtful reply. I will post it this weekend.

New Feature: Papers

Yesterday I put up a few papers I’ve written. You can read them by clicking on the “Papers” tab above, or by clicking here.

Baseball fans might enjoy my take on steroids and home runs. I argue that while steroids do have an impact, it is a lot smaller than most people think it is.

History buffs might like my paper on the economics of Ancient Greek religion.

The other two currently up are about trade and institutional change.

Poke around and see if any of them look interesting. I’ll be adding more later.

Four Ways to Spend Money on Health Care

As the House gets ready to pass the health care bill today, I’m reminded of one of the first lessons in economics I ever learned. Milton Friedman put it best:

There are four ways in which you can spend money. You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you’re doing, and you try to get the most for your money. Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I’m not so careful about the content of the present, but I’m very careful about the cost. Then, I can spend somebody else’s money on myself. And if I spend somebody else’s money on myself, then I’m sure going to have a good lunch! Finally, I can spend somebody else’s money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else’s money on somebody else, I’m not concerned about how much it is, and I’m not concerned about what I get. And that’s government. And that’s close to 40% of our national income.

The biggest problem with health care today is that patients only pay 12 percent of costs out of pocket.  As far as each individual is concerned, it’s basically on sale for 88 percent off! No wonder we spend so much on health care.

Today’s bill consists almost entirely of spending other peoples’ money on other people. If it becomes law, that 12 percent figure will fall even further. This is no way to keep costs under control. However noble Congress’ intentions may be, its bill will not work as advertised. Human nature won’t allow it.

Regulation of the Day 129: Droves of Animals on Streets

Washington, DC city law states that “No loose herd or flock shall be driven or conducted in the District, except with a permit issued by the Chief of Police.” (See District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, Title 24, Chapter 9, Sec. 906.10.)

Many, many years ago, Washington was a pretty rural place. There were even farms in the Northwest and Southeast quadrants of the city. This was before the automobile, and well before the federal workforce climbed into the millions. But a lot of these old laws are still on the books. Nobody seems to have thought to get rid of them.

Other animal herding laws in DC include:

-No droves of mules or horses larger than six animals are allowed. (906.6)

-However, “Horned cattle may be led singly by a rope or halter through any of the streets in the District.” (906.8). That includes K Street, Constitution Avenue, and every other street in the District, great or small (Note to self: this might be worth trying someday).

-As with cars, the driving age for herds is 16. (906.12)

-A drove of sheep crossing a bridge must have at least six drovers. (906.4)

-It is illegal to “water, feed, or clean any horse, mule, cow, or other animal” within 15 feet of a fire hydrant. The same rule apples to cars.(906.13)

(Hat tip: Marc Scribner)

New Feature: Twitter Feed

I just installed a feed of my recent Twitter posts. You can see it in the right sidebar. I signed up for Twitter yesterday, basically as a way to get more eyeballs reading my articles and blog posts. But that makes for a bland Twitter account — especially for Twitter users who already read this blog.

So I’m thinking of better ways to use this Twitter thing. I’m still going to use it to link to posts that I want people to read — but not every single post. I’ll also link to my articles as they come out. But here are a few ideas I have for additional Twitter content:

-Links to good articles and columns I find while reading the news of the day.

-Re-tweeting other people’s Twitter posts that are particularly pithy. Not only is this good Twitter etiquette, but there’s a lot of good stuff out there worth reading.

-Quick remarks about dumb policies and breaking news. I don’t always have time to write a whole blog post or op-ed on an issue, but I can usually write one sentence and get my point across.

If you have any other ideas or advice, please let me know. I’m new to Twitter, and still experimenting. If I find that the service is not particularly useful, or it’s too difficult to strike a balance between promotion and content, I’ll cancel my account. But I’m enjoying it for now. Any help is appreciated. Basically, I’m asking what you’d like to see. And if you’re on Twitter, you can follow me at @RegoftheDay. Thanks!

-Mgmt.

Regulation of the Day 128: Bounty Hunters

You need a license to be a bounty hunter in New Jersey. You can apply by clicking here.

The license comes with a cool bounty hunter identification card that you must keep on your person whenever you’re on the job.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. There are lots of hoops to jump through first. For one, you need valid photo ID. And you need to pass a criminal background check, and give five character references.

You must also have at least five years of experience in either bounty hunting, law enforcement, or a related field. No one under the age of 25 may be a bounty hunter.

The license fee costs $300; biennial renewal costs $200.

You also need to take a 2-day, 16-hour bounty hunter training course at the Middlesex County Fire Academy in Sayreville. Topics covered range from Constitutional law to proper boundaries on the use of force.

If you want to hire a secretary or other administrative worker, that employee has to register with the New Jersey State Police and go through a background check at his or her own expense. If the employee quits or is fired, you have to let the state know within ten days.

If you can get through all that, happy hunting!

Will the Jobs Bill Create Any Jobs?

Over at the American Spectator, I explain why it won’t, but a deregulatory stimulus would. Main points:

-Anything that Washington giveth, it must first taketh away from somewhere else. The jobs bill is a zero-sum game.

-When government borrows more, less investment capital is left over for the productive sector.

-Taxes will have to be raised later to pay for today’s increased borrowing.

-Deregulation is a better approach. The biggest obstacles to job creation and economic growth are all in Washington.