There was a big increase in Immigration to the US following World War 2. People came to the country after marrying American soldiers. They came to the US in search of jobs which were available in manufacturing plants. Immigrants also came to the US in search of safer living from their countries which were destroyed during the war.
One of the hottest topics in today’s news is immigration, both legal and illegal. The discussion is focused on “solutions,” but perhaps we should begin with an examination of why immigration occurs. The kind of immigration that is making headlines – movement of Hispanic immigrants across our Southern border – is primarily economic immigration. That means we should be able to use basic economic theory to tell us why it is occurring and what ought to be done about it, if anything. Basic economic theory tells us that labor tends to move from low-wage areas to high-wage areas. For example, suppose the average wage for an unskilled worker in Ohio is $5 per hour, and the average wage for an unskilled worker in Michigan is $50 per hour. We would expect that workers would begin moving from Ohio to Michigan. We should not be any more surprised to see that people are eager to move from low-wage Mexico (GDP per capita of $10,000) to the high-wage United States (GDP per capita of $42,000). We also know that capital – the economist’s term for buildings, factories, machinery, computers, etc. – moves from high-wage areas to low-wage areas. Using the same example as above, we would not be surprised if Dell set up a computer factory in Ohio rather than Michigan. This part of the story is related to another hot topic: outsourcing. Outsourcing is not the movement of jobs from one place to another; it is the movement of capital from one place to another. We could say Dell has “outsourced” to Ohio when it sets up a factory there rather than expanding a factory in Michigan. The same thing is going on in regard to the United States and Mexico. Now what happens to wages as these movements occur? Holding everything else constant, wages will decline in the area where more labor accumulates, and wages will increase in the area targeted by capital growth. The increase in the supply of labor in Michigan in our example will decrease the price of labor there. Meanwhile, the additional capital in Ohio will add to the productivity of Ohio workers and bid up wages there. The degree of wage change depends on the size of the labor flow relative to the existing capital. For example, if 15 workers move from Ohio to Michigan, with a labor force of 4.5 million, then the wage effect will be small. If the Dell factory moving to Ohio adds significantly to the capital in Ohio, then the wage effect will be large. In the case of Mexico and the United States, academic studies show varying effects of immigration on wages. A recent National Bureau of Economic Research study by Gordon Hanson found the reduction in trade barriers from the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement raised wages in Mexico. That was particularly true for the most well-educated workers, who were best able to make effective use of capital. George Borjas of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government found that wages for U.S. workers who competed with immigrant labor did not rise as fast as for other workers. What policy implications arise from this basic knowledge? It will be very difficult to overcome the strong incentive for labor to move to the high-wage area. That is, of course, why we have nine to 10 million illegal immigrants in the United States. If one is concerned about the flow of those immigrants, one should alter the incentives, rather than use up resources trying to fight the incentives. This could be done in two ways. First, deny government-provided benefits such as free education, medical care and welfare assistance to illegal immigrants. This would ensure that the only immigrants who enter would be ones who could produce goods and services that are more highly valued than the goods and services they consume. Second, reduce U.S. and Mexican government-imposed barriers to capital flows. The more capital moves to Mexico, the higher the productivity of Mexican workers, and the higher the wages of Mexican workers. This would reduce wage disparities and the flow of illegal immigrants. When I was a young child, Japan was noted for its low wages and something “made in Japan” meant it was cheap and probably a little shoddy. By 1995, according to a recent study by Koji Nomura and Jon Samuels, also of the Kennedy School of Government, Japanese wages exceeded those in the United States. Today Japanese vehicles are known for their quality. As a consequence of the wage disparity, we find Japanese companies opening up factories in the United States. By fully integrating the Mexican and U.S. economies in a similar way, we may one day find capital moving from Mexico to the U.S. and labor moving from the U.S. to Mexico. The alternative is to waste billions of dollars of resources in a futile attempt to fight market forces so strong that people are willing to risk their lives in response to them. Dr. Gary L. Wolfram is the George Munson Professor of political economy at Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Mich. He also serves as an adviser to the Business & Media Institute. http://www.businessandmedia.org/commentary/2006/com20060614.asp
Many on the immigrants was treated badly from the impact of the war. People thought that since they was Japanese that they was part of what happened in Pearl Harbor attacks.
immigrants helped us to build the Snowy Mountain Scheme which would not have been completed without the extra help
It made it harder
The Manhattan Project resulted in the development of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan in world war two. The most immediate impact was on Japan since hundreds of thousands of people were killed. Ultimately the entire human race was impacted by the nuclear arms race.
700,000 - 10000000 Japanese citizens died in World War Two
Japanese internment camps sprung up during World War Two. These camps relocated 110,000 Japanese Americans on the West Coast. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a factor in the development of these camps.
The two largest were the Yamato and Musashi, each mounted 18" guns.
{| |- | Yes, there were two atomic bombs that were used in World War 2. The US dropped them on Japanese cities in an effort to end the war. After the devastation was understood, the Japanese surrendered. |}
Immigration in the 1990s was similar to that in the 1890s in that there was a large wave of immigrants that came into the country in both periods.
WW2
Two atomic bombs from the U.S.Airforce
The U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japanese cities and Japan surrendered.
The Manhattan Project resulted in the development of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan in world war two. The most immediate impact was on Japan since hundreds of thousands of people were killed. Ultimately the entire human race was impacted by the nuclear arms race.
They didn't! They fought the Japanese in Timor after the Japanese invaded Indonesia and Malaysia and thus they became involved in World War Two.
The two Japanese cities that were bombed in August 1945 were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These bombings, carried out by the United States, were the first and only instances of nuclear warfare. The bombings resulted in significant loss of life and had a major impact on Japan's surrender in World War II.
Yes, the battle of Guadalcanal was fought between the Allies and the Japanese Empire in the Pacific Theater of World War Two.
They fought the Germans, Japanese, and Italy
Japan was in the Russo-Japanese War, the Boxer Rebellion, two Sino-Japanese Wars, World War 1, and World War 2. In all cases the goal was imperial expansion.
700,000 - 10000000 Japanese citizens died in World War Two
hiroshima and nakasaki.