We Can Do the Job Ourselves: Automation is the Alternative to Low-Skill Immigration

By Cyan Quinn

The MULE, a bricklaying robot. Image provided by the manufacturer.

Immigration advocates promote two categories of immigration that they argue “boost” the economy: low skill labor (a.k.a. “jobs Americans just won’t do.”), and high-skill labor (“but, Elon Musk!”). Both types are destructive and unnecessary at the rates Western nations have been importing them.

In this piece, I will deal with the alternative to low-skill immigration: automation.

Low-skill immigration suppresses wages and damages the native demographic community by privatizing profits and socializing the costs. The profit increase to businesses resulting from low-wage positions occupied by immigrants is not resulting in job creation as much as it is increasing the income inequality gap between the lowest wage-earners and the highest.

To illustrate the disparity in real terms, Harvard Economist Roland Fryer calculated that between 1945 and 2010, real incomes of the lower working class Americans dropped by 6% while the top 1% increased by 312% and the top 0.01% ballooned by an astounding 431%.

Worse, the cost of importing these low-skill laborers is socialized among the tax-paying public through programs such as social housing, Medicaid, nutrition assistance, the public education of their children, and translators.

Furthermore, though this piece deals with legal low-skill immigration, it’s worth noting the costs of illegal immigration (as many low-skill jobs are still occupied by illegal immigrants as well). The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that illegal immigration costs the American taxpayer $150.7 billion in net losses annually. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that each illegal immigrant will cost $68,400 in net losses to the taxpayer over the course of their presence in the United States. The Heritage Foundation estimates the illegal immigrant population is a net fiscal drain of $110 billion each year. These costs are unacceptable. These costs can be reduced, countered, and eventually eliminated by embracing automation that enhances the American worker’s productivity.

Many well-meaning Americans, including business owners who are compensating themselves reasonably, want to avoid using immigrant labor, but don’t see a way around it. On an individual level, they see themselves competing with unscrupulous business owners and skating on a thin profit margin.

That’s not to say businesses can’t thrive with a cultural commitment to hiring Americans at a living wage. Before I go into nationwide policy recommendations, there are cases where business owners have been able to take an honorable stand. One inspiring example is Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments who raised controversy in 2015 for reducing his own income from $1.1 million to $70,000 and paying a minimum wage of $70,000 to all his employees. Although he was dubbed a “socialist lunatic” and “enemy of capitalism,” over the next 6 years, Gravity doubled their employees and tripled their business. Employees were so loyal to Gravity, that when the company had a downturn during COVID, they volunteered to take 60% pay cuts. When Gravity rebounded, Price paid back his employees everything they were owed.

This is a great story, but I acknowledge it can’t work for every business. While I think we should cheer on companies who take a risk as an outlier to change the culture like Gravity, we as a nation need to take a thoughtful, public policy approach to support small businesses and critical industries like agriculture that traditionally have a slim profit margin and are unable to take such a stand.

One approach is supporting advances in Automation and AI. Here are some examples of innovation that have dramatically changed immigrant-heavy sectors of the economy.

In construction, incredible advances in robotics increase the ease of work and facilitate faster construction. This system, the MULE (Material Unit Lift Enhancer) is capable of lifting bricks, applying mortar, and setting them in place. A human bricklayer then follows the robot ensuring proper application and shaving off the excess mortar. Another robot can then grab and lift cinderblocks to the level where men are working so there is much less bending and lifting of heavy material therefore increasing the safety and efficiency of workers.

Another example of worker-robot cooperation is this drywall finishing bot.

This robot can be brought in to spray and sand worker-hung drywall. The company who produces the robot claims it reduces the time needed for finishing and sanding by 60%. This robot can be remotely guided to drill holes into a ceiling allowing one worker to do the job at a safe distance from potential contaminates or collapse.

More robots are in development to pump and pour concrete, drill, conduct demolition, and even make consistent welds. All of these systems require a human compliment to function but result in increased efficiency and more ergonomic working conditions.

In agriculture, immigration enthusiasts claim, “but the crops will rot in the fields.” Not anymore! Robots are in development that can operate day and night picking apples.

These robots (like most) require a small amount of human oversight but can do the work of 6-8 fruit pickers along two rows of trees simultaneously. Robots for picking fruits and vegetables have also been created for tomatoes, strawberries, lettuce, grapes, mushrooms, and peppers. Some of these systems are already fully marketed to farmers while others are still in a mixed stage of deployment and development, but the progress in just the last decade is astounding.

These innovations go far beyond picking. Laser-based systems of self-propelled and towed machines are able to replace pesticides entirely by “zapping” weeds. Another robot produced by the agricultural giant John Deere is able to plant seeds and apply fertilizer directly. The company claims it reduces needed fertilizers by 60%—an astonishing win for a farmer’s bottom-line considering that fertilizers are often 35% of a farm’s annual operating costs.

There are many more opportunities arising from this robotics revolution. The reduction it affords in labor force needs and productivity is amazing, but it’s also an opportunity to involve young people. Young men in particular are interested in agriculture, but most American farmers are over the age of 60 and without an “heir” to the family farm. This industry is one of the most difficult to enter as an outsider. Colleges, states, nations, agricultural firms, and small farm owners should be using these technologies to raise a new generation of farmers who are equipped and integrated with these automation-based systems. A public policy environment that offers grants and incentives to farmers exploring new technologies can get this done.

Instead of spending $110 or $150 billion on maintaining the illegal immigrant population, the American political class could redirect a fraction (a modest $20 billion?) to offer small and medium sized family farmers grants to purchase robotic equipment. The Department of Agriculture should establish relationships with non-profits and universities to teach farmers how to use this equipment, and work with these schools to cultivate a new generation of native-born tech-farmers. Similar incentives should be offered to construction companies while American unions could be tasked with establishing a relationship between manufacturers and companies to teach a new generation of American construction professionals how to use automated technologies in their work environments thereby meeting consumer need while ensuring a safe working environment.

Automation and AI extend into the “white-collar” workforce as well. Analysis of business data, accounting, market analysis, engineering, and many other fields are all being quickly transformed by AI and other automation technologies. These are all fields where corporations have recruited hundreds of thousands of foreign born accountants, administrators, engineers, and other business professionals.

Probably the most prominent example of AI growth is in programming. While not fully replacing human workers, these agents allow one worker to do a suite of tasks that may have previously taken a team of colleagues collaborating across platforms. As this technology evolves, it is likely that human programmers will focus more on quality control and editing AI written code instead of writing entire programs themselves. This will inevitably reduce the number of tech employees needed in the industry meaning the U.S. needs to focus on securing programming work for native-born Americans.

One policy change that will secure this work for native-born Americans is suspending or eliminating the H1-B visa program. The H1-B program is designed to hire “skilled” immigrants at a lower rate than their native-born counterparts. One of the most egregious examples of this discrimination is the Disney scandal in which American programmers were laid off and expected to train their H1-B replacements.

Moreover, companies use recruiting firms that specifically solicit H1-B holders. Two such firms, P33 and TeCHicago who provide workers for John Deere, Ulta, Discover, Caterpillar, and others, have been sued by the Department of Justice and the Institute for Sound Public Policy for discriminating against native-born Americans in their recruiting process. In November of 2023, Apple settled a $25 million lawsuit brought by the DOJ which claimed it was using recruitment practices that discourage U.S. workers from applying. Facebook settled a similar lawsuit in 2021. As long as the H1-B program is in place, there will be corporate neglect of Americans in favor of immigrants. This must end.

Finally, we need to combat the cultural animosity toward native-born workers. Even failed presidential candidate and Ohio governor hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy looks down upon the Americans he hopes will elect him, calling them lazy and mediocre. The reality is that native workers still make up the bulk of jobs in industries like construction. In Michigan, 82% of construction workers are demographically American. Overall, Whites represent 61% of all construction workers according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This is 7% above the White share of the population, illustrating that, in reality, Whites are pulling more than their share of weight in building the country.

Somehow, we picked fruit, built our own buildings, and went to space without mass immigration from the third world. We need to find our spirit as a nation again—one of independence and glory and exploration. One of the ways we can do that is to reject foreign labor and get our men (and women) back to work coming up with innovative, creative ways to fulfill our needs ourselves.

Support our mission to take on more writers and contributors:

White Papers is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Zelle: whitepapersinstitute@protonmail.com

Buy us a coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/wppi

Linktree: https://linktr.ee/wppi

Snail Mail: White Papers Policy, PO Box 192, Hancock, MD 21750S