The basic problem with much of this analysis is that the sample of immigrants used is subject to self selection bias (they are people that are high academic achievers, less risk averse than those they left behind) a very different pool of people from the sample of "natives" that these are compared to. These immigrants haven't jumped of a boat or a border (usually illegally) and have almost zero human capital. Conflating immigrants in the; first group with the second is a false comparison; I doubt if you take a sample of asylumm seekers or others that came illegally and then became legal residents, you would find them brimming with "innovation" and ideas.
I… say in the post that selection is a significant reason immigrants are more innovative on average than natives? There is a section head titled “selection”?
I was referring to some of the studies cited; conflating mass immigration with no thresholds with normal immigration serves the purpose of those that favour the latter- thats all in a " suggest the false and suppress the truth" style of presentation. Its the same with papers that show Brexit was bad; absurd consclusions because the counterfactual in this case just does not exist, but it serves the purpose. In any case, Brexit was not about economics; it was about politics.
The basic problem with much of this analysis is that the sample of immigrants used is subject to self selection bias (they are people that are high academic achievers, less risk averse than those they left behind) a very different pool of people from the sample of "natives" that these are compared to. These immigrants haven't jumped of a boat or a border (usually illegally) and have almost zero human capital. Conflating immigrants in the; first group with the second is a false comparison; I doubt if you take a sample of asylumm seekers or others that came illegally and then became legal residents, you would find them brimming with "innovation" and ideas.
I… say in the post that selection is a significant reason immigrants are more innovative on average than natives? There is a section head titled “selection”?
I was referring to some of the studies cited; conflating mass immigration with no thresholds with normal immigration serves the purpose of those that favour the latter- thats all in a " suggest the false and suppress the truth" style of presentation. Its the same with papers that show Brexit was bad; absurd consclusions because the counterfactual in this case just does not exist, but it serves the purpose. In any case, Brexit was not about economics; it was about politics.