| − | Historians have shown the nineteenth-century U.S. was a place where immigrants could stake their claims for a new life. After arrival, German and Irish immigrants settled regionally by nativity within the U.S. The Irish accounted for 68% of all immigrants to the Northeast; Germans accounted for 47% of all immigrants to the Midwest; British immigrants accounted for 19% of immigrants to the Northeast and 20% of immigrants to the Midwest. After arrival, the British, German, and Irish achieved success in U.S. labor markets, and the British and German immigrants found opportunity in skilled occupations. Irish Catholic immigrants did not fare as well as the other two groups in terms of jobs and economic status, but still fared better than had they remained in Ireland. Moreover, all groups sharply improved their average skills in the U.S. after arrival. Wages were much higher in the U.S. than in Europe, and it was much easier to own a farm. However, Americans worked much harder than their EWuropean cousins and took fewer holidays. | + | Historians have shown the nineteenth-century U.S. was a place where immigrants could stake their claims for a new life. After arrival, German and Irish immigrants settled regionally by nativity within the U.S. The Irish accounted for 68% of all immigrants to the Northeast; Germans accounted for 47% of all immigrants to the Midwest; British immigrants accounted for 19% of immigrants to the Northeast and 20% of immigrants to the Midwest. After arrival, the British, German, and Irish achieved success in U.S. labor markets, and the British and German immigrants found opportunity in skilled occupations. Irish Catholic immigrants did not fare as well as the other two groups in terms of jobs and economic status, but still fared better than had they remained in Ireland. Moreover, all groups sharply improved their average skills in the U.S. after arrival. Wages were much higher in the U.S. than in Europe, and it was much easier to own a farm. However, Americans worked much harder than their European cousins and took fewer holidays. |
| − | Cohn (2009) asks, "Did immigration help or hurt native labor and did migration lead to long run economic growth?" Immigration increased the long-run rate of economic growth. During the nineteenth century, immigration extended the U.S. product market and allowed labor in manufacturing and agriculture to specialize. Larger pools of unskilled labor after 1845 put downward pressure on wages. However, over time, labor markets adjusted, migrants assimilated, and the economy moved forward. | + | Cohn (2009) asks, "Did immigration help or hurt native labor and did migration lead to long run economic growth?" Immigration increased the long-run rate of economic growth. During the nineteenth century, immigration extended the U.S. product market and allowed labor in manufacturing and agriculture to specialize. Larger pools of unskilled labor after 1845 put downward pressure on wages. However, over time, labor markets adjusted, migrants assimilated, and the economy moved forward. |