This is a good review. As much as I loved Caplan’s book, it’s good to point out its less compelling points.
I just feel like commenting one line in the opening part of the post.
Immigrants commit more crimes than native-born Europeans but fewer crimes than native-born Americans.
Yes, that is somewhat true. But I have looked into this claim for Italy (where I’ve spent most of my life), and it turns out it is only true before adjusting for age. Foreign-born commit more crimes because they’re younger on average. When you compare homogeneous age groups (say 18-to-25-year-olds to 18-to-25-year-olds of the other group), it looks like the crime rate is virtually the same. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out this to be true of several other European countries. Also, crime rates are particularly high for illegal immigrants, but I wouldn’t know how much people self-select themselves into legal and illegal immigrants, so where the causality is. But the above descriptive statistic (same crime rate when accounting for age) could be a useful argument—in Europe—in favour of the case Caplan is arguing for in the US.
You are right, the same is true in Germany as well. There is even some evidence for lower crime rates for certain immigrant groups (e.g., first generation immigrants from Turkey, or SE-Asian/Chinese immigrants, if I recall correctly). Still, more crimes means more crimes, even if this is due to demographics, and the voters will punish the pro-immigrant parties accordingly.
The “lower crime rates for certain immigrant groups” is exactly why these figures are deceptive. If certain groups have lower crime rates, don’t lump together high crime and low crime subgroups as “immigrants” and claim that immigrants as a whole are neutral on crime rate.
This is a good review. As much as I loved Caplan’s book, it’s good to point out its less compelling points.
I just feel like commenting one line in the opening part of the post.
Yes, that is somewhat true. But I have looked into this claim for Italy (where I’ve spent most of my life), and it turns out it is only true before adjusting for age. Foreign-born commit more crimes because they’re younger on average. When you compare homogeneous age groups (say 18-to-25-year-olds to 18-to-25-year-olds of the other group), it looks like the crime rate is virtually the same. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out this to be true of several other European countries. Also, crime rates are particularly high for illegal immigrants, but I wouldn’t know how much people self-select themselves into legal and illegal immigrants, so where the causality is. But the above descriptive statistic (same crime rate when accounting for age) could be a useful argument—in Europe—in favour of the case Caplan is arguing for in the US.
You are right, the same is true in Germany as well. There is even some evidence for lower crime rates for certain immigrant groups (e.g., first generation immigrants from Turkey, or SE-Asian/Chinese immigrants, if I recall correctly). Still, more crimes means more crimes, even if this is due to demographics, and the voters will punish the pro-immigrant parties accordingly.
The “lower crime rates for certain immigrant groups” is exactly why these figures are deceptive. If certain groups have lower crime rates, don’t lump together high crime and low crime subgroups as “immigrants” and claim that immigrants as a whole are neutral on crime rate.