I’ve often pointed out that the question of immigration–and the way the debate is often framed–ignores the fact that immigrants are economic refugees, forced to come to the U.S., in large part, as a result of economic policies that our government imposes on the world–for example, so-called "free trade" agreements that end up undoing basic social safety nets in other countries.

    The New York Times, whose editorial page regularly tells us about the wonders of so-called "free trade" has a piece today on the global migration of people who move from places where they are very poor to places where they can just be a little poor.

Across the developing world, migrants move to other poor countries nearly as often as they move to rich ones. Yet their numbers and hardships are often overlooked.

They typically start poorer than migrants to rich countries, earn less money and are more likely to travel illegally, which raises the odds of abuse. They usually move to countries that offer migrants less legal protection and fewer services than wealthy nations do. Yet their earnings help sustain some of the poorest people on the globe.

There are 74 million “south to south” migrants, according to the World Bank, which uses the term to describe anyone moving from one developing country to another, regardless of geography. The bank estimates that they send home $18 billion to $55 billion a year. (The bank also estimates that 82 million migrants have moved “south to north,” or from poor countries to rich ones.)

Nicaraguans build Costa Rican buildings. Paraguayans pick Argentine crops. Nepalis dig Indian mines. Indonesians clean Malaysian homes. Farm hands from Burkina Faso tend the fields in Ivory Coast. Some save for more expensive journeys north, while others find the move from one poor land to another all they will ever afford. With rich countries tightening their borders, migration within the developing world is likely to grow.

    The article is quite good at describing the realities faced by migrants. What is really astounding about the article is that it makes no connection between the migration and the economic policies that created the migration. Sad.

    [Publishing note: we’re moving offices today so tomorrow might be a tough day to blog…it’s okay, I know you will try to bear the burden of the hole in your life]