Over the past two years, all else equal, the appeal of the US as a destination for immigrants has changed in ways that will likely decrease innovation in the US economy.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
The US has become not just less open to immigrants, but less open full stop. It's bad news for innovation & for the future of institutions.
|
||||
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Autor |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Very little credible is known about migration and innovation. I tend to believe it, but unlike with most IGM questions, it is just intuition
|
||||
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
The US remains the most attractive place for innovators. No change in appeal for foreigners. But possibly harder for them to enter.
|
||||
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
Immigrants contribute disproportionately to innovation. Racism in the U.S. may well deter immigrants but U.K. less hospitable too.
|
||||
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
Appeal is still very high. However, ability to attract talented immigrants has declined because of misguided implementation.
|
||||
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
certainly we will reduce immigrants and that will reduce all kinds of activity, though magnitudes are hard to know.
|
||||
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
The rhetoric is awful and the policy environment is toxic, but the US still offers extraordinary opportunity.
|
||||
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Long causal chain and probably very small effect.
|
||||
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
A great asset of the US, though lately diminished, has been the ability to attract the best minds from throughout the world.
|
||||
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
If the number of immigrants is constant, loss of appeal means fewer who can choose their destination, so perhaps a less innovative mix.
|
||||
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|