Foreign Policy on the Nanny-Driven Economic Miracle

Harvard economists Michael Kremer and Stanley Watt have released a study claiming that importing a certain amount of cheap labor - such as nannies - does wonderful good for an economy. James G. Forsyth of Foreign Policy explains:

Kremer explains his findings by pointing out that domestic workers can increase a country's supply of highly skilled workers by allowing well-educated parents (generally mothers) to remain in the workforce. Household help is actually far more liberating to parents than day care, he argues, because nannies let them work the long hours required by many highpowered, highpaying jobs.

Of course, one wonders whether Kremer and Watt actually looked at this issue in its totality or whether they only looked at the fiscal aspects of the matter. Given what passes for economics, I suspect the latter. Specifically, I doubt whether they reported on the social impacts of the importation of cheap labor from foreign countries. For instance, are cheap Korean or Filipino nannies imported into Japan healthy for either party? Is importing Mexican nannies to their "lost territories" a dangerous situation? Does creating a "nanny employing class" lead to decadence and an elite class that becomes even further estranged from their (supposed) fellow citizens? Real economists would cover those issues, but I would be surprised if Kremer and Watt did.

Immigration · Wed, 01/03/2007 - 07:20 · · Importance: 1

Comments

If they were not trying to deceive by a one-sided analysis, they would have thought to look at the correlation of cheap domestic help in the different countries of the world, with low overall productivity, not to mention the implicit income inequality enhancement, associated systematically with the unproductive societies.
The more domestic help, and the more affordable it is relative to professional incomes, the less productive that society will be.
It will also be a more despotic society, the more afflicted it is, with a servile class of domestics who are too affordable, to ambitious women of intelligence and education.
The gulf principalities have hordes of domestics, but they dare not let them vote.
When America had a much larger percentage of the workforce in domestic employment, productivity was not even 1/10th that of today, and a large part of our politics was about how to prevent certain groups; illiterates, blacks, etc. from voting.
Were these honest analysts who ignored all that experience; or malicious ones who long for conflict from which vicious power-greed might be enlarged?

Posted by: John S Bolton at Jan 3, 2007 11:08 PM


Independent, in-depth coverage of immigration, politics, and media bias since 2002. Also: multiculturalism, Los Angeles, California, privacy, and occasionally celebrities and wacky humor...


If you can't find what you're looking for, see the About page or use the navigation features to the right.

Start here
Previous/Next
Diversions

Main

Atom feed · RSS 2.0 feed · RSS 0.91 feed · WML

Subscribe with Bloglines
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My MSN
Please subscribe to the feed and tell your friends about this site.

Tag search
Full text search
Reliable, pre-11/19/08 only:

What's Hot

  • Can you make a phone call? Get the answers to the questions in the FAX here.
  • See the top posts in the last 45 days.
Navigation
All Tags
Note: only a fraction of the content has so far been tagged.
Site search (new window)
Custom Search

Categories
Archives

All Posts(links to each post by title)

Latest