Millennials Are Shaking Up the Retail Industry

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, as of 2016, millennials overtook Baby Boomers to be the largest living generation group. Millennials, who are defined as ages 18 to 34, now number 75.4 million, surpassing 74.9 million Baby Boomers. With Baby Boomers, ages 51 to 69, reaching retirement age, millennials are now reaching their prime working and spending years. This means millennials will fundamentally change the landscape of the U.S. economy, and for the better. Over the next five-years, the purchasing power of millennials is projected to increase from 133 per cent from $600 billion to $1.4 trillion. With millennials being the largest and most diverse generation in U.S. history, their impact on the economy will be significant. In order to survive in a millennial-driven time, retailers will need to hit the refresh button not only to keep themselves alive, but the U.S. economy too.

To understand how millennials will affect the retail industry, it is important to understand the two factors that have shaped their spending habits. Firstly, is the 2008 recession, also known as The Great Recession. The first wave of millennials entered the workforce during the recession, and this meant one of two things: 1. They were unemployed for a considerable amount of time, or 2. They were employed, but were earning far less than what they should have been. Secondly, is student debt. While millennials are the most educated generation, what distinguishes millennials from other generations is the historic student debt they carry. As of September 2017, the total amount of student debt Americans owe is $1.45 trillion dollars. This, combined with coming of age during the 2008 recession, means millennials have had less access to full-time jobs and wealth than previous generations. Consequentially, this has severely limited the spending power of millennials and had a direct effect on their spending habits.

The spending traits of millennials will hurt U.S. retailers if companies do not take a look at their business models and re-strategize. This is because millennials are putting off major purchases, such as cars and houses. This is a result of being more conservative with their money and not being big risk takers or gamblers. Their inability to own means they opt to rent or lease. Most recently, they have embraced the sharing economy by highly utilizing services such as Uber, Lyft, AirBnb and Turo.

“Millennials are not confident consumers; they are afraid of recession and lack of employment,” Head of Loeb Associates Inc., Walter Loeb said. “They want to own less and lease more, even dresses and suits! Millennials respond to good service and do research on the internet before making a major purchase. They are real-time consumers, shopping for today’s needs and waiting until the last minute to shop for tomorrow’s events.”

Two-thirds of the gross domestic product (GDP) is consumption. This means the economy relies on people spending money. While it is estimated that by 2020, 30 per cent of all retail sales will be to millennials. Because millennials value objects and big-ticket items far less than previous generations, millennials have shifted their focus towards activities and experiences that make make memories. This value is forcing retailers to rethink how to attract millennial purchasers. With millennials’ love of technology and social media, retailers are only now beginning to implement changes to the way they offer their products and services. For example, millennials’ value for convenience and ease of transaction has seen many large supermarkets and retailers offer self-serve checkouts and electronic payment systems that don’t require you to take out your wallet, instead, just a swish of your phone.

While implementation of technology into the retail experience is useful in drawing in the millennial crowd, it is also one of the most dangerous millennial values that threatens brick-and-mortar retailers. A study conducted by BlackHawk Engagement Solutions, an international incentives and engagement company, showed that millennials are “plugged” into mobile and social shopping, which is completely disrupting historically traditional shopping patterns.

“Millennials are leading a change in purchase trends,” BlackHawk Engagement Solutions marketing president, Rodney Mason said. “It’s incredibly important for retailers and retailer marketers to understand how to appeal to this demographic. Millennials are savvy shoppers and many have come of age in a post-recession era. This group routinely comparison shops on mobile to get the best value and shopping experience. The market, however, has not yet capitalized on those habits.”

The retail industry has yet to catch up with the growing number of millennials entering their prime spending age. Retailers need to take into account that it is hard to convince millennials to make big purchases or purchases that aren’t considered a necessity with their limited spending ability. This lack of forward-thinking in the industry is evident in the number of reported store closings and bankruptcies. So far, in 2017, there have been nine retail bankruptcies and as many as all of 2016. Retailers such as J.C. Penney, Macy’s and Sears have each announced more than 100 store closures. However, these closures have occurred during GDP growth (eight straight years of growth), unemployment being under five per cent and steady wage growth. This further strengthens the notion that American storefronts are largely driven by millennial spending habits.

Due to millennials’ savvy shopping ways, e-commerce is eating away at traditional retail. Between 2010 and 2016, Amazon sales in North America quintupled from $16 billion to $80 billion. To put this into context, Sears’ revenue in 2016 were approximately $22 billion—Amazon grew by three Sears in six years. Mobile shopping is also seeing big increases thanks to apps and mobile wallets. Since 2010, mobile commerce has grown from two per cent of digital spending to 20 per cent.

As well as millennials’ love of technology is their equal love of social media, which is apparent in their retail spending traits. They’re on a mission for a bargain and one of the tools that helps them make an informed purchase is social media. Many use it as their primary source to find and hear about products, specials and shopping news. A report published by Deloitte found that 47 per cent of millennials say their decision purchase is influenced by social media. This figure is 19 per cent across all other age groups. Millennials are not listening or looking at a brand marketing messages on their social media accounts. Rather, they’re using social media as a way to review input and feedback about products and services. PricewaterhouseCoopers asked digital buyers about how they make purchase decision online. Nearly half reported that reviews, comments and feedback on social media impacted their shopping choices. With the ability to look for the cheapest price of a product at the drop of a hat, e-commerce is hurting retailers who generally offer their products at a higher price than their online competitors.

One company that is revitalizing itself to appeal to millennials is Estee Lauder. Estee Lauder recently announced a partnership between itself and YouCam Makeup to enhance the mobile phone browsing experience while still attracting customers to brick-and-mortar stores. App users can now apply makeup through uploading an image of themselves. This allows users to try on as many shades as they want before deciding to make a purchase in-store. To provide a unique experience for in-store customers, YouCam’s virtual in-store magic mirrors encourage customers to further engage with products, try on more options and take selfies.

About 70 per cent of Estee Lauder products sold today are new, have been updated or re-formulized in the wake of millennials entering their prime spending age. It’s most recent acquisitions include Too Faced, which began as a social media start-up and Becca Cosmetics, a makeup line that relies on social marketing and is designed to appeal to consumers of all ethnicities. Estee Lauder has relied heavily on acquisition to bring in millennial dollars. Their growth has been driven by the group’s “cooler” brands such as Jo Malone, Tom Ford, MAC, La Mer and Smashbox.

Not only is Estee Lauder making changes to cater for millennial customers, they are also catering for their millennial employees. The group’s attempts to tap young employees began a couple of years ago with retail immersion days, where Estee Lauder CEO Fabrizio Freda was shown how millennials “fall in love with brands”. Following that, the company created reverse-mentoring programs, where young employees were paired with senior Estee Lauder managers to teach them how to be tech-savvy shoppers by learning how to utilize social media during this process. Estee Lauder also created millennial advisory boards to offer advice to executive teams.

Based on Estee Lauder’s learning experience from millennials, the company launched a product line, The Estee Edit, targeted at millennial women. The line was promoted heavily on social media by reality television stars, such as Kendall Jenner. The makeup consisted of bright shades, all products were under $50 and were featured on numerous YouTube video tutorials—all that appeals to a millennial.

So far, the results look promising for Estee Lauder. During their Q4 quarterly earnings announcement, they reported strong financial results as well as for their fiscal year, which ended June 30, 2017. For the three months ended June 30, 2017, Estee Lauder reported net sales of $2.89 billion, a nine per cent increase compared with $2.65 million in the prior-year period. The recent acquisitions of Too Faced and Becca Cosmetics outperformed expectations, with incremental sales contributing to approximately 3.5 percentage points of the reported sales growth. The company posted sales growth in most brands across-the-board in all geographic regions (Asia/Pacific, Europe, the Middle East & Africa, and The Americas) and product categories, except hair care. For the year, Estee Lauder achieved net sales of $11.62 billion, a five per cent increase compared with $11.26 billion the previous year. Incremental sales from Too Faced and Becca Cosmetics contributed approximately two percentage points of the reported sales growth.

While it appears Estee Lauder’s efforts have achieved success thus far, other retailers will need to catch up in order to stay ahead of the millennial game or risk becoming, old, outdated and unappealing. For retailers to target and attract millennial shoppers successfully, there are a few important aspects to note: 1. Smartphones are a primary means to connect to the internet. Smartphones are the dominant method of connection to the internet for millennials, with 89 per cent of them the device to connect, versus 75 per cent who use laptops, 45 per cent tablets and 37 per cent desktop computers. Retailers will need to have a mobile-first strategy if they want to stay relevant with millennials. 2. Millennials love for social media means retailers should integrate digital media with their traditional advertising strategies. Brand engagement and peer discussions are the key making brands memorable. Retailers will need to encourage customers to leave feedback, or create a social media hashtag for millennials to use with their posts. 3. Google and Amazon are the go-to sites for price comparison. Almost 80 per cent of millennials are influenced by price and 72 per cent search for a coupon online before making a purchase. An average of three minutes is spent searching for coupons. To compete, retailers will need to offer competitive pricing, whether that be product discount, volume discount or distribution of coupons/promo codes.

While millennials are more conservative with their money compared to other generations, millennials are willing to part with their cash if retailers can impress them; their business must be earned. If retailers can tap into what millennials want, one thing is clear—that millennials’ love for technology, convenience and experiences will help grow the U.S. economy. These factors will drive competition within many sectors and industries, and if companies don’t keep up, they risk going out of business. This is the new reality for producers of goods and services.

 

References

Revised Project 1: “America first” immigration reform may put America last, economically

The RASIE Act, immigration reform proposed by U.S. Senator for Arkansas, Tom Cotton, and back by President Donald Trump, was introduced to diminish the number of low-skilled, unskilled and non-citizen immigrants taking American jobs. The sectors that have highest number of foreign workers are seen in agriculture, construction and services. It is no coincidence that low- to medium-skilled jobs are dominated by immigrants. The high number of foreign workers in these sectors is not due to non-citizens taking Americans’ jobs. Rather, it is because of the work conditions.

“Low-skilled jobs are low status, pay low wages, and are physically challenging,” Dean and Professor of Public Interest Law and Chicano/o Studies at the University of California, Davis, Kevin Johnson said. “Employers often say that they cannot get U.S. citizens to fill these kinds of jobs.”

The main aim of the RAISE ACT is to protect American taxpayer workers, taxpayers, and the economy. However, the repercussions of this reform could instead worsen the U.S. economy. If enacted, a rise in low- to medium-skilled job openings will occur. This will put a strain on businesses to operate with fewer employees. An attempt to operate with fewer employees working longer hours or increasing the wage to attract workers will in turn increase the cost of goods and services. This could potentially send many companies out of business. If the government decides to offer incentives to encourage Americans to take low- to medium-skilled jobs, it will be out of their pocket, or the Americans taxpayers’ pockets. Neither is desirable. Nor is this reform.

The proposed merit-based immigration system will prioritize immigrants based purely on the skills and knowledge they bring to the U.S. The proposed merit-based immigration proposal is modeled on the current Canadian and Australian systems. The reason behind modeling these two countries is that Canada and Australia attract highly skilled workers and see healthy growth, productivity and income per capita.

The skills-based system rewards applicants points based on individual merit. The system rewards points in areas such as higher education, English language ability, high paying jobs, and past achievements. The various ways that migration and population growth can be linked to Canada and Australia’s productivity and income per capita growth include, supply of labor; capital, investment; government expenditure on services and taxation; competition; natural resources, land and environmental externalities; and international trade.

The RAISE act doesn’t take into consideration the aging population. The U.S. population is aging rapidly as baby boomers enter old age and retirement. The Population Reference Bureau reported the number of Americans aged 65 years and older is projected to more than double from 46 million today, to over 98 million by 2060. The 65 years and older group share of the total population will rise to nearly 24 percent from 15 percent. An aging population has a direct impact on the labor force. This will result in a dependence on immigrants to replace current workers and fill new jobs.

In fact, The Raise Act would have the opposite desired effect of what the Trump administration propose the legislation will do, and sharply reduce legal immigration, and increase illegal immigration. The graphs below show legal immigration as a percentage of population since 1850.

Both graphs demonstrate The RAISE Act would be a significant reeducation in total legal immigration, and it would have no direct impact on illegal immigration. It is almost certain that more restricted access to legal immigration for family members of current immigrants would result in higher levels of illegal immigrations by those family members.

Deputy Dean and Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit at Adelaide Law School at the University of Adelaide in Australia, Alexander Reilly, said increasing skilled migration at the expense of family migration can impact on the desires for family reunion of existing U.S. citizens.

“In Australia, parent migration is very difficult,” Reilly said. “It may be that partner and child migration, which is currently considered a matter of right here, will have quotas or waiting lists imposed.”

A problem Reilly sees in Australia with independent skilled migration is that migrants find it hard to get jobs in their area of expertise and end up unemployed.

“Skilled migrants’ success is better if they have family support, so merit-based migration definitely needs a strong family component.”

Johnson agrees, believing a merit-based immigration system that halves the number of legal immigrants entering the country will unintentionally increase the number of undocumented immigrants.

“The goal of the U.S. government is to reduce legal immigration from one million a year to 500,000 a year, and this reduction will be seen in family immigrant visas,” Johnson said. “With the current limits on legal immigration, this has bought in roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants to the U.S.”

“Making legal immigration even more restrictive will increase the likelihood that those who want to immigrate lawfully will resort to doing so illegally.”

In 2015 to 2016, Australia accepted 189,770 permanent migrants through its skilled and family immigration streams, and settled 18,000 refugees and humanitarian migrants. Sixty-seven percent of migrants came through the skilled stream, and 30.8 percent through the family stream. These numbers add almost one percent to the Australian population each year, a much larger proportion than the U.S. admits through its migration program.

Immigration is the largest contributor to population growth in Canada since the early 2000s. Canada’s permanent immigration program is divided into three main streams: economic, family and humanitarian. In 2015 to 2016, Canada admitted 271,845 permanent immigrants. Of this number, the economic stream accounted for 60 percent of migrants, family made up 24 percent, and the remaining were humanitarian migrants. These proportions have remained fairly stable over the past 15 years.

In Australia, there are two pathways for skilled migration. The first, general skilled migration, requires applicants’ occupations to appear on a skilled occupations list. Most of these occupations are in professional areas such as medicine, engineering, or trades. The list is updated regularly based on an assessment of Australia’s economic needs at the time. The second pathway is for skilled migrants with an employer sponsor. This pathway is open to migrants with a wider range of skills. Employers must demonstrate they have a skilled position available and there are no Australians willing or able to take up the position.

A merit-based immigration system will transform the U.S. immigration system from primarily family-based to employment-based. Under the U.S.’s current system, most employment-based immigrants are highly skilled, but make up only 14 percent of those who receive green cards. Under the RAISE Act, employment-based immigrants would make up the majority of those who receive green cards.

In the proposed points system for the U.S., applicants would earn points for meeting criteria to do with age (preference for persons between ages 26 and 30) and having a degree. Extra points would be awarded for degrees earned in the U.S. and in a STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) field. Nobel Prize winners, professional athletes and English language speakers would also receive extra points.

Johnson said that while the Australia and Canada case studies were worth reviewing, the U.S. has its own history and political, social and economic forces that contribute to immigration pressures and flows that may not exist in Canada or Australia.

“Australia and Canada don’t operate in the same context as the U.S., so those main factors must be considered in any reform of U.S. immigration law,” Johnson said.

When asked if the RAISE Act will reduce poverty, increase wages and save taxpayers millions of dollars, as stated by President Trump, Johnson replied, “There is no empirical evidence to support this claim.”

 

References

Camarota, S. A. (2015, September 10). Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households: An Analysis of Medicaid, Cash, Food, and Housing Programs (Report.). Center for Immigration Studies. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from Center for Immigration Studies website: https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households

Infographic: Annual average growth rate, natural increase and migratory increase per intercensal period, Canada, 1851 to 2056. (2017, March 30). Government of Canada. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/170208/g-a001-eng.htm

Mather, M. (2016, January). Fact Sheet: Aging in the United States. Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://www.prb.org/Publications/Media-Guides/2016/aging-unitedstates-fact-sheet.aspx

Reilly, A., Paquet, M., & Johnson, K. (2017, September 17). RAISE Act: Global panel of scholars explains ‘merit-based’ immigration. The Conversation. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://theconversation.com/raise-act-global-panel-of-scholars-explains-merit-based-immigration-82062

Salerian, J. (2006, May 17). Economic Impacts of Migration and Population Growth (Report.). Retrieved October 4, 2017, from the Australian Government, Productivity Commission website: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/migration-population/report

Singer, A. (2016, August 02). Immigrant Workers in the U.S. Labor Force. The Brookings Institution. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from https://www.brookings.edu/research/immigrant-workers-in-the-u-s-labor-force/

Stone, L. (2017, August 3). Everything You Need To Know About The RAISE Act Without Reading It. The Federalist. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/03/everything-need-know-raise-act-without-reading/

The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2017, August 2). President Donald J. Trump Backs RAISE Act [Press release]. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from President Donald J. Trump Backs RAISE Act

U.S. Congress, Senate – Judiciary. (2017, February 13). Congress.gov (T. Cotton Sen., Author) [Cong. S.354 from 115th Cong., 1st sess.]. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/354/text

How millennials are changing the economy

As baby boomers reach retirement, millennials are now reaching their prime working and spending years. Over the next five years, the purchasing power of millennials is projected to increase 133% from $600 billion to $1.4 trillion. With the millennial generation being the largest of the generations in U.S. history, their impact on the economy will be significant.

Millennials grew up during a time of major technological advances, globalization and economic disruption. Because of this, they have a very different set of behaviors and experiences.

Millennials came of age in the midst of a lagging economy, and many carry large debt loads, largely from college tuition. Consequently, this is why millennials tend to focus on fulfillment and meaning in their lives. The also prefer to sacrifice money for convenience, too.

The effects the 2008 subprime crisis had on the economy delayed millennials’ ability to “grow up”—many have delayed buying houses, having children and making large purchases, such as a car. For the first wave of millennials (those born before 1990) who could find jobs, those jobs were less than well-paid. Due to the lack of financial autonomy, for the first time since 1960, 31.6 percent of people aged 18 to 34 are still living with their parents.

Millennials, also known as Gen Y, are moving to cities straight after college. For the first time since the 1920s, U.S. cities are growing faster than everywhere else on the country combined. This migration is driving the success of the economy.

The trend is impacting transportation, housing, and home ownership. Millennials are using public transit 40 percent more and cars 23 percent less. They are twice as likely to participate in the “sharing economy”, like ride-sharing and apartment rentals.

When it comes to consumerism, millennials are skeptical of advertising, and don’t rely on traditional marketing. Trust is vital to earning their business. Many conduct research through the internet and social media to learn about a product.

By 2020, 30 percent all retail sales will be to millennials, said CEO of “The Robin Report” and co-author of “The New Rules of Retail”, Robin Lewis.

With changing spending behaviors and habit, retailers have been forced to approach the millennial market differently to baby boomers. Convenience and flexibility are important to millennials. In response, many retailers are implementing news ways of payment and providing unique experiences to cater for Gen Y. Examples of this are self-checkout kiosks and paying with their mobile device instead of having to take out their wallets.

Another aspect that millennials want from retailers is a personalized experience. To cater for millennials shoppers, retailers have had to get creative. Some well-known examples include Coca-Cola replacing their logo with the most common names, and Nordstrom opening a store with no merchandise. Instead, stylists pull stock from other mall-anchored stores and its website.

If one thing is clear from analyzing millennials’ spending habits, it’s that their love for technology, convenience and experiences will help grow the economy. These factors will be drive competition within many sectors and industries, and if companies don’t keep up, they risk going out of business. This is the new reality for producers of goods and services.

References
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-brands-are-marketing-to-millennials-2013-8?op=1
http://fortune.com/2015/05/27/7-facts-every-business-should-know-about-millennials/
https://investors-corner.bnpparibas-am.com/investment-themes/please-mind-generation-gap/

America’s Trade Deficit with China, Explained

As of August 2017, the U.S.’s trade deficit with China was just over $239 million[1]. America exported approximately $80.2 million[2] to China while China imported over $319 million[3] to the U.S. There are numerous reasons for this imbalance, but being in deficit may hurt the U.S. economy in the long run.

The reason why the U.S. receives goods from China (mainly consumer electronics and clothing) is because China can produce goods at lower costs than the U.S. can. The benefits are felt in the pockets of Americans every day. China’s competitive pricing is the result of two factors:

  1. China has a lower standard of living. Therefore, companies pay lower wages to their employees.
  2. The Chinese yuan is partially fixed to the U.S. dollar. Also known as ‘pegging’, it is the act of a country or government’s exchange-rate policy attaching the central bank’s rate of exchange to another country’s currency[4]. It stabilizes the exchange rate between China and the U.S., which is advantageous for large importers like China.

However, in 2016, China began relaxing its “pegging” in an attempt to gain traction from market forces to increase the value of the yuan. As a result of this action, the dollar to yuan conversion has been volatile and China’s influence on the dollar remains high.

How exactly does China hold power over the U.S. dollar? Chinese companies receive dollars as payments for exports to the U.S. These companies deposit the dollars into the banks in exchange for yuan to pay employees. The banks then send the dollars to China’s central bank. It stockpiles them in its reserves. This reduces the supply of dollars available for trade. Therefore, it puts upward pressure on the dollar’s value, thus, lowering the yuan’s value. This cycle could potentially give China leverage over U.S. fiscal policy.

Another major reason why an ongoing trade deficit with China could be detrimental to the U.S. economy is because its financed with debt. What if China decided to call in its loans?

China also helps keep U.S. interest rates low by buying Treasurys. If China stopped buying Treasurys, interests would rise and potentially throw the U.S. and the world into recession.

The deficit puts a heavy burden on the manufacturing industry, as well. For U.S. companies to compete with China, they must either lower their costs (this could potentially put them out of business) or outsource jobs to China, but this option hinders U.S. job creation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

President Trump has promised to lower the trade deficit with China by imposing duties on Chinese imports. However, many Chinese imports are made up of raw materials sent from the U.S. Trump’s tariffs would reduce profits for these American companies who ship material to China, resulting in price raises of the products shipped back to the U.S. China might retaliate and raise its tariffs on imports from U.S. companies. If this is the case, Trump might be the biggest factor to hurt the economy.

__________________________

References

[1] https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

[2] https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

[3] https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

[4] http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/currency-peg.asp

 

Proposed immigration reform to grow U.S. economy, or not?

On February 13, U.S. Senator for Arkansas, Tom Cotton, introduced the RAISE (Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment) Act to the Senate. The RAISE Act seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to create a merit-based immigration system and replace the diversity immigrant visa program. The bill’s overall aim is to protect American taxpayer workers, taxpayers, and the economy.

The RAISE Act reduces overall immigration numbers to limit low-skilled and unskilled labor entering the U.S. Immigration reform is important now more than ever; America’s economy and future is dependent on it. The main cause for concern is the aging population. The U.S. population is aging rapidly as baby boomers enter old age and retirement.

The Population Reference Bureau reported the number of Americans aged 65 years and older is projected to more than double from 46 million today, to over 98 million by 2060. The 65 years and older group share of the total population will rise to nearly 24 percent from 15 percent.

An aging population has a direct impact on the labor force. This will result in a dependence on immigrants to replace current workers and fill new jobs. However, a surge in unskilled immigration over the past few decades has been blamed for depressing wages, according to President Donald Trump.

Since 1979, Americans with a high school diploma or less have seen their hourly wage decline, according to The White House. American workers without a high school diploma have seen their real hourly wages fall by 17 percent, in a press release quoting President Trump.

Twenty-nine percent of adult immigrants in the U.S. don’t hold a high school diploma, in contrast to seven percent native-born. However, native- and foreign-born adults hold bachelor’s degrees at similar rates, 32 percent for those born in the U.S. and 30 percent for those born outside the U.S.

Key sectors with low-skilled workers confirm the variance in education levels between immigrants and U.S. citizens. This is highly relevant to the agriculture and accommodation sectors. The majority of immigrant workers who work in the agriculture sector are low-skilled, compared to 29 percent of native workers. In the accommodation sector, more than half of foreign-born workers lack a high school diploma, compared to 25 percent of native workers.

On top of this, more than 50 percent of all immigrant households receive welfare benefits, compared to over 30 percent of native households, according to a 2015 Center for Immigration Studies Report.

Dean and Professor of Public Interest Law and Chicano/o Studies at the University of California, Davis, Kevin Johnson argues the reason there is a high number of foreign workers in low- to medium-skilled jobs sectors like agriculture, construction and services was not due to there being too many immigrants, but due to the work conditions.

“Low-skilled jobs are low status, pay low wages, and are physically challenging,” Johnson said. “Employers often say that they cannot get U.S. citizens to fill these kinds of jobs.”

The issue seen with the U.S.’s current immigration system is that it doesn’t prioritize the most highly skilled immigrants. On average, one million immigrants are accepted into the U.S. for legal permanent residency every year. On average, one out of 15 immigrants come to the U.S. with a high skillset.

Due to low-skilled workers taking the majority of non-citizen visas, the U.S. could be losing out on foreign talent. With the proposed merit-based immigration system, the RAISE Act will prioritize immigrants based purely on the skills and knowledge they bring to the U.S. The skills-based system rewards applicants points based on individual merit. The system rewards points in areas such as higher education, English language ability, high paying jobs, and past achievements. This process is to ensure immigrants contribute positively to the country and the economy.

The RAISE Act also prioritizes immediate family members of foreign workers to live in the U.S., and ends preferences for extended family members and adult children. The new reform also limits permanent residency of refugees to 50,000 a year, which is in line with the 13-year average.

Senator Cotton ultimately wants the RAISE Act to: 1. Help American workers receive a pay rise and achieve a higher standard of living, and 2. To promote economic growth and make the U.S. a more competitive country.

The proposed merit-based immigration proposal is modeled on the current Canadian and Australian systems. Both countries successfully attract highly skilled workers and see the benefits it adds to population growth, productivity and income per capita.

The various ways that migration and population growth can be linked to Canada and Australia’s productivity and income per capita growth include, supply of labor; capital, investment; government expenditure on services and taxation; competition; natural resources, land and environmental externalities; and international trade.

Immigration is the largest contributor to population growth in Canada since the early 2000s. Canada’s permanent immigration program is divided into three main streams: economic, family and humanitarian. In 2015 to 2016, Canada admitted 271,845 permanent immigrants. Of this number, the economic stream accounted for 60 percent of migrants, family made up 24 percent, and the remaining were humanitarian migrants. These proportions have remained fairly stable over the past 15 years.

In Australia, there are two pathways for skilled migration. The first, general skilled migration, requires applicants’ occupations to appear on a skilled occupations list. Most of these occupations are in professional areas such as medicine, engineering, or trades. The list is updated regularly based on an assessment of Australia’s economic needs at the time. The second pathway is for skilled migrants with an employer sponsor. This pathway is open to migrants with a wider range of skills. Employers must demonstrate they have a skilled position available and there are no Australians willing or able to take up the position.

In 2015 to 2016, Australia accepted 189,770 permanent migrants through its skilled and family immigration streams, and settled 18,000 refugees and humanitarian migrants. Sixty-seven percent of migrants came through the skilled stream, and 30.8 percent through the family stream. These numbers add almost one percent to the Australian population each year, a much larger proportion than the U.S. admits through its migration program.

Twenty years ago, more migrants came through the family stream than the employer stream. The change in numbers is a direct result of government policy prioritizing skilled migration because of its value to the economy.

A merit-based immigration system will transform the U.S. immigration system from primarily family-based to employment-based. Under the U.S.’s current system, most employment-based immigrants are highly skilled, but make up only 14 percent of those who receive green cards. Under the RAISE Act, employment-based immigrants would make up the majority of those who receive green cards.

Deputy Dean and Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit at Adelaide Law School at the University of Adelaide in Australia, Alexander Reilly, said increasing skilled migration at the expense of family migration can impact on the desires for family reunion of existing U.S. citizens.

“In Australia, parent migration is very difficult,” Reilly said. “It may be that partner and child migration, which is currently considered a matter of right here, will have quotas or waiting lists imposed.”

A problem Reilly sees in Australia with independent skilled migration is that migrants find it hard to get jobs in their area of expertise and end up unemployed.

“Skilled migrants’ success is better if they have family support, so merit-based migration definitely needs a strong family component.”

In the proposed points system for the U.S., applicants would earn points for meeting criteria to do with age (preference for persons between ages 26 and 30) and having a degree. Extra points would be awarded for degrees earned in the U.S. and in a STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) field. Nobel Prize winners, professional athletes and English language speakers would also receive extra points.

Johnson said that while the Australia and Canada case studies were worth reviewing, the U.S. has its own history and political, social and economic forces that contribute to immigration pressures and flows that may not exist in Canada or Australia.

“Australia and Canada don’t operate in the same context as the U.S., so those main factors must be considered in any reform of U.S. immigration law,” Johnson said.

Johnson believes a merit-based immigration system that halves the number of legal immigrants entering the country will unintentionally increase the number of undocumented immigrants.

“The goal of the U.S. government is to reduce legal immigration from one million a year to 500,000 a year, and this reduction will be seen in family immigrant visas,” Johnson said. “With the current limits on legal immigration, this has bought in roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants to the U.S.”

“Making legal immigration even more restrictive will increase the likelihood that those who want to immigrate lawfully will resort to doing so illegally.”

When asked if the RAISE Act will reduce poverty, increase wages and save taxpayers millions of dollars, as stated by President Trump, Johnson replied, “There is no empirical evidence to support this claim.”

References

Camarota, S. A. (2015, September 10). Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households: An Analysis of Medicaid, Cash, Food, and Housing Programs (Report.). Center for Immigration Studies. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from Center for Immigration Studies website: https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households

Infographic: Annual average growth rate, natural increase and migratory increase per intercensal period, Canada, 1851 to 2056. (2017, March 30). Government of Canada. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/170208/g-a001-eng.htm

Mather, M. (2016, January). Fact Sheet: Aging in the United States. Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://www.prb.org/Publications/Media-Guides/2016/aging-unitedstates-fact-sheet.aspx

Reilly, A., Paquet, M., & Johnson, K. (2017, September 17). RAISE Act: Global panel of scholars explains ‘merit-based’ immigration. The Conversation. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from http://theconversation.com/raise-act-global-panel-of-scholars-explains-merit-based-immigration-82062

Salerian, J. (2006, May 17). Economic Impacts of Migration and Population Growth (Report.). Retrieved October 4, 2017, from the Australian Government, Productivity Commission website: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/migration-population/report

Singer, A. (2016, August 02). Immigrant Workers in the U.S. Labor Force. The Brookings Institution. Retrieved October 04, 2017, from https://www.brookings.edu/research/immigrant-workers-in-the-u-s-labor-force/

The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2017, August 2). President Donald J. Trump Backs RAISE Act [Press release]. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from President Donald J. Trump Backs RAISE Act

U.S. Congress, Senate – Judiciary. (2017, February 13). Congress.gov (T. Cotton Sen., Author) [Cong. S.354 from 115th Cong., 1st sess.]. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/354/text

Venezuela – What happened?

Once a wealthy country in the 1970s, Venezuela is now experiencing political turmoil and its citizens are living in poverty. With over 298 barrels of proven oil reserves, why is Venezuela, the country with the largest oil reserve in the world, the poorest performer in terms of GDP growth per capita? What happened to one of the richest countries in Latin America?

  1. It’s ongoing economic crisis

Venezuela is now in its fourth year of recession. With the economy shrinking, the price of goods keep increasing. The price for a dozen eggs is equivalent to US$150. So, this means devaluation of their currency, the Bolivar. To put it into perspective, one U.S. dollar was 100 bolivars in 2014. In 2016, one dollar got you 1,262 bolivars. On top of this, years of the excessive government spending and poorly managed government programs led Venezuela to experience its worst economic crisis in history.

  1. The currency split

Venezuela established three different exchange rate systems for the bolivar; one rate for “essential goods”, the other for “nonessential goods and another one for its citizens. The two primary rates overvalue the bolivar, and the black market values bolivar near worthless. The government has tried increasing the number of bolivars to tackle this problem, but the money in circulation isn’t enough.

  1. Venezuela is running out of cash and gold

Venezuela is struggling to pay its bills. It owes approximately US$15 billion while its central bank only has US$11.8 billion in reserves. The oil company, PDVSA (Petroleum of Venezuela), is pumping less oil and is at risk of defaulting. China used to come to Venezuela’s aid and loan it billions of dollars at a time. But even China has stopped giving out cash. Interestingly, most of Venezuela’s reserves are in the form of gold and has being making debt repayments in the form of gold bars.

  1. Its hottest commodity, oil, isn’t “hot” anymore

Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves, but the problem is that oil is the only commodity it has to offer. Ninety-five per cent of Venezuela’s revenue comes from exports, so if it doesn’t sell oil, the country hasn’t got much money to spend. Venezuela’s situation went downhill pretty quickly when oil prices plunged in 2014. It’s been struggling to recover ever since.

  1. Government control

The Venezuelan government enforced strict price controls on golds sold in supermarkets. It also stopped food importers to cease importing basically everything because they would have to sell their products for a major loss. In 2016, the government stopped enforcing price control. However, prices are still so high that Venezuelans can’t afford even the most basics supplies.

There are many factors that have contributed to Venezuela’s economic and political turmoil. The challenge for the country will be to escape the cycle it is stuck in, and that’s only if they can sort out the state of their government first. There won’t be a quick fix solution, it will be long and arduous journey for the country.

References:
Article 1
Article 2

What is Consumer Sentiment?

Believe it or not, your opinions count! Your views regarding the health of the economy, long-term economic growth and your personal financial situation play a role in shaping public policy, economic policy and stock markets. You are, essentially, an economic indicator, according to the University of Michigan. Feeling special now?

Consumer sentiment is a measurement of the overall health of the economy, determined by consumer opinion. It directly relates to the strength of consumer spending. The University of Michigan’s Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index (MSCI) is the most popular publications of consumer sentiment. American households are contacted randomly each month via telephone. Here, the chosen ones are asked about their financial situation and attitudes about the economy.

The Force, aka. The University of Michigan, releases the final report of the previous month on the first of the next month. Basically, the index is useful to economists because it gives a snapshot of whether consumers feel like spending. Yep, Leo… We’ve all been there at Chipotle.

Inflation and favorable employment conditions are what give consumers the urge to spend. But, current events also affect how much we spend. Things like bull and bear markets, and geopolitical events.

Why are economists dying to know what consumers are up? Because consumer spending accounts for more than two-thirds of the economy. This is, basically, real-life Gossip Girl… your one and only source into the financial activities of America’s citizenry. Where have they been? And what have they been up to? Who knows? You know you love me, xoxo… the economy. So, the more confident consumers are about their finances and the economy, the more likely they are to spend.

The MCSI is determined by subtracting the percentage of unfavorable consumer responses from the percentage of favorable ones. It is calculated based on the following five core survey questions:

  1. Compare the pair – Would you say that you are better or worse off financially than you were a year ago?
  2. After some crystal ball gazing – Do you think a year from now you will be better off financially, worse off, or about the same as now?
  3. Now, let’s get down to business – As a nation, do you think the next 12-months will be financially good or bad?
  4. Back to the future – What would you say is more likely: the country, as a whole, having a good five-years or so, or periods of widespread unemployment / depression?
  5. To spend or not to spend? Do you think it’s a good or bad time to buy major household items, such as furniture, refrigerator television etc.

After the relative scores have been worked out, and the actual equation of CSI = x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 + x5 / 6.7558 + 2.0 has been left in the school hallway for the Will Huntings of the world to work out, we have the CSI!

And there we have it – the MCSI – one of the leading indicators of consumer sentiment in the United States.

 

References

Investopedia 1

Investopedia 2

Economic Calendar