Global Migration Trends: Youth And Least Educated Prefers US, US Expats Think Otherwise

Gallup's article on global migration trends, which involves some 700 million people (nearly 10% of global population) and growing, reveals that the US still remains as the most desired destination among 15 nations that attracted most (500 million or 70%) of the migration flows.

What piqued my interest is that Gallup imputes the 'youth and the least educated' as having to prefer the US as the ideal place for relocation, in contrast to the second ranked Canada.

From Gallup:

Together, the number of potential migrants who would like to move to the United States, which represents 24% of adults who would like to move overall, and Canada, which represents 7%, make Northern America the most desired region to move to in the world. But individually, both countries appeal to people from different parts of the world. Gallup finds the U.S. appeals more to the youngest and least educated adults, while those who choose Canada are on average slightly older and more educated. (bold highlights mine)

And interestingly, people from Asia and Africa appear to be the sectors most in favor of the US.

In a choice between the US and Canada, I'd also be in the minority camp. But if I would be granted the opportunity to relocate I would choose as my priority one of Asia's key financial centers Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan, or perhaps even Australia or New Zealand as alternatives. That should make me stand opposite to the conventional wisdom as posited by the polls.

Well, various forms of perceived opportunities constitute that the incentives to relocate. Here is Gallup again,

``The United States and Canada attract potential migrants for various reasons -- personal, political, or economic -- but opportunity is the common, overarching theme. People may see moving to these countries as a chance to reunite with family members who have already moved, to find jobs, or to provide better lives for their children. Immigration policy and migrant policy, too, could play a role in the talent each nation attracts. Health and social services available to them as newcomers, and their future benefits as citizens, may be yet another factor."(bold underscore mine)

Again I would be in the opposite camp, as political and economic opportunities, for me, appear tilted to the East more than the West, especially if America's "gradualist" political trend to emulate Europe's social democracy is likely to get entrenched which obviously would have unfavorable ramifications on both her financial balance sheets aside from diminishing civil liberty or personal freedom.

The Greece crisis seems merely a prologue of the gamut of ailments that will plague these welfare states. Yet America's leadership seems steadfastly navigating her political economy into the same trap.

And a growing number of Americans appear to be renouncing their citizenship seemingly shares this view.

From the New York Times (bold emphasis mine),

``The Federal Register, the government publication that records such decisions, shows that 502 expatriates gave up their U.S. citizenship or permanent residency status in the last quarter of 2009. That is a tiny portion of the 5.2 million Americans estimated by the State Department to be living abroad.

``Still, 502 was the largest quarterly figure in years, more than twice the total for all of 2008, and it looms larger, given how agonizing the decision can be. There were 235 renunciations in 2008 and 743 last year. Waiting periods to meet with consular officers to formalize renunciations have grown.

``Anecdotally, frustrations over tax and banking questions, not political considerations, appear to be the main drivers of the surge. Expat advocates say that as it becomes more difficult for Americans to live and work abroad, it will become harder for American companies to compete.

``American expats have long complained that the United States is the only industrialized country to tax citizens on income earned abroad, even when they are taxed in their country of residence, though they are allowed to exclude their first $91,400 in foreign-earned income."

More...

``Stringent new banking regulations — aimed both at curbing tax evasion and, under the Patriot Act, preventing money from flowing to terrorist groups — have inadvertently made it harder for some expats to keep bank accounts in the United States and in some cases abroad.

``Some U.S.-based banks have closed expats’ accounts because of difficulty in certifying that the holders still maintain U.S. addresses, as required by a Patriot Act provision."

I find the articles' incoherence in suggesting that taxation isn't a political problem, when it notes that the primary incentive in relinquishing citizenship has been out of onus of regulatory and taxation compliance.

Taxation and regulation is a product of politics, so how can these not be related? For instance, $1.42 trillion in fiscal deficits in 2009 to "save favored sectors", which would obviously leads to higher taxes in the future isn't about politics?

Going back to the original topic, while the US of A would seem like an ideal place to relocate, this would seem more of a delusion, unless we see a dramatic around in the current political trends.

4-Block World: Fawning Eulogies

From Tom McMahon's 4-Block World:

Let me add a quote from Professor Don Boudreaux, (all bold highlights mine)

``While Kennedy didn’t choose a life of ease, he did something much worse: he chose a life of power. That choice satisfied an appetite that is far grosser, baser, and more anti-social than are any of the more private appetites that many rich people often choose to satisfy...

``Instead, Mr. Kennedy spent much of his wealth and time pursuing power over others (and of the garish ‘glory’ that accompanies such power). He did waste his life satisfying unsavory appetites; unfortunately, the appetites he satisfied were satisfied not only at his expense, but at the expense of the rest of us. Mr. Kennedy’s constant feeding of his appetite for power wasted away other people’s prosperity and liberties".

Well learning from the above, such mawkishness (especially in the political context) should be avoided. And this should apply elsewhere including the Philippines.

Swine Flu: Mostly A Media Fuss

I was supposed to write something about the seeming fear mongering by media on the swine flu, but the Associated Press beat me to the punch.

Here is an excerpt (all emphasis mine)...

``The so-far mild swine flu outbreak has many people saying all the talk about a devastating global epidemic was just fear-mongering hype. But that's not how public health officials see it, calling complacency the thing that keeps them up at night.

``The World Health Organization added a scary-sounding warning Thursday, predicting up to 2 billion people could catch the new flu if the outbreak turns into a global epidemic.

``Many blame such alarms and the breathless media coverage for creating an overreaction that disrupted many people's lives.

``Schools shut down, idling even healthy kids and forcing parents to stay home from work; colleges scaled back or even canceled graduation ceremonies; a big Cinco de Mayo celebration in Chicago was canned; face masks and hand sanitizers sold out — all because of an outbreak that seems no worse than a mild flu season.

``"I don't know anyone who has it. I haven't met anyone who knows anyone who contracted it," said Carl Shepherd, a suburban Chicago video producer and father of two. "It's really frightening more people than it should have. It's like crying wolf."

``Two weeks after news broke about the new flu strain, there have been 46 deaths — 44 in Mexico and two in the United States. More than 2,300 are sick in 26 countries, including about 900 U.S. cases. Those are much lower numbers than were feared at the start based on early reports of an aggressive and deadly flu in Mexico.

``Miranda Smith, whose graduation ceremony at Cisco Junior College in central Texas was canceled to avoid spreading the flu, blames the media.

``"It's been totally overblown," she said Thursday.

Well speaking of "overblown" and "breathless media coverage" Pew Research shows of how the epidemic scare has eclipsed all other topics.
According to Pew Research, ``Yet all those stories were overwhelmed by the frantic coverage of a new flu virus that in a matter of days had made its way around the globe and was threatening to become the first influenza pandemic in four decades. From April 27-May 3, the swine flu, or H1N1 as it officially became known, accounted for nearly one-third of the newshole (31%) studied, according to the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism."

It is understandable for media to revolve around sensationalist news simply because its fundamental incentive is to generate more audiences. And when fear or panic is in the air, the public gropes for information to which media obliges.

But for governments, aside from the "social service" function, the unstated incentives may vary from expanding government control, desire to increased access to funding, or cronyism as discussed in Swine Flu: The Black Swan That Wasn’t and Swine Flu: The Politics of Fear and Control.


Yet according to Gallup, Americans appear nearly evenly split between those who say that media coverage of the swine flu had been exaggerated and those who say media coverage was just right.

But I don't think this will last.

The subdued impact from the swine flu infestation has reduced fear as shown by the Gallup survey above. Note that at the peak only 25% of those surveyed said they were personally worried by the Flu which means 75% were not. Now only 17% are concerned, which implies 83% aren't.

This suggests that, despite the intensive media coverage, the American public hasn't been cowed into panic. This further implies that media has indeed overhyped its coverage of the swine flu.

This declining trend of swine flu scare has likewise been apparent in Google's search trends. Thus eventually I expect more converts to the exaggerated camp for as long as the spread of the disease do not worsen.

Lastly, congratulations to world boxing legend Manny Pacquiao not only for a stunning triumph in his latest quest for glory but also for defying authorities who had been trying to curtail his civil liberty from a vastly inflated health scare.