-- these are highly skilled occupations. try doing it yourself some time. trends in construction employment are highly correlated with movement into and out of the united states. we heard about immigrant net immigration in recent years. i was suggest this is a direct result of the housing lost. construction is only one dimension of real estate. immigration directly impacts the demand for real estate, and can change the very dynamic of local real estate markets. when i mentioned phrases like ,"ittle italy" or "chinatown you immediately know what i mean. it does not require expedition. it paints a picture in one's mind of neighborhood dynamics. of course, immigration was a direct contributor to the rise of tenement housing, which in my opinion ultimately gave rise to a movement for higher-quality housing. studies in the 1930's for the

birth of federal housing policy, which saw its precursors in cities like new york and chicago. so you could make a strong argument that immigration itself is what gave birth to our federal housing policy today. our panel will be a little less historical, except for the last decade. our panel is going to look at recent trends, especially in like of the recent housing boom and bust, which coincided with a significant movement of immigration. we are offering connections between immigration and real estate. jacobrst speaker will be vigdor, from the university of washington. that is the other washington, the one with good coffee and a little more rain, although i think we probably rival you in humidity. in addition to his many journal publications, vigdor is the author of "from an address to

americans -- the rise and fall of fitting in. next guest will be gary painter, who serves as a professor at the university of southern california, as well as a director of public policy at sol. his numerous journal publications, particularly on housing in the great recession, have interdicted immensely to our understanding of housing dynamics during the recent crisis. our final speaker, susan wacht professor at the wharton school at the university of pennsylvania, as well as of city and regional planning at the university of pennsylvania. i was fortunate to know susan 20 years ago, when she was assistant secretary for policy directing and research at the u.s. department of housing and urban development. i have been even more fortunate that since that time she has been willing to sell -- to share her insights on mortgage policy and housing policy. i do not think it is an exaggeration to say if there is an important policy question about the mortgage market, susan

has probably written something on it. quite prolific, as all of our panel is. with that, i want to turn over the podium to jacob. i am here from the other washington, i have to set the record straight. the humidity is no contest. there is a difference between being damp and being human. and if anybody is unclear on that, come home with me. i am going to talk about today is part of a project that i worked on that is looking a little bit broadly at the impact of immigration on communities across the united states. only a short amount of time to i will you today, so keep moving. there are some things we have to do with the data to understand the impact of immigration on local communities.

i am looking specifically -- what is the impact of immigration to a local community on the housing market #happens to the price of housing in the community? what happens to manufacturing employment? and immigrants move in, do natives leave coordinates arrive? information using counties between 1970 through 2010. that is what we are going to talk about. the stuff i am going to talk to you about today is building on the work of quite a few other people, some of whom are with us today. a lot of work. we heard about immigration and the labor market early today. i am following up a couple other studies of immigration in the housing market that looked at slightly broader levels -- at state level or metropolitan area data. i am going down to the level of the county. let's talk about immigration and housing. it is a basic story of supply and demand. that is the basic way we teach this, right?

there is demand for housing and a supply of housing. you can draw these little supply and demand curves in various different ways, but the basic idea is this. immigration increases the number of people who need a place to live. so the impact on the housing market is fairly straightforward. you have some common nation of more houses being built and increase prices. depending on how easy it is to build new structures, you might have more effect on the price side or the supply side. that is what we might call the direct effect. in addition to these direct effect on the housing market, there could be what we might call indirect effects. the arrival of immigrants in the community could lead -- some people might perceive the community less desirable. native flight -- natives might look at immigrants coming into a community and say they do not want to live there. demand forreduce

housing. there could also be effective natives are displaced in the labor market. the indirect effects of immigrants arriving in the housing market could also be positive. it could mean better opportunities for the local residents. the could also be positive impacts on the local quality of life. we will have the opportunity to talk little bit about some of these things. the positive impacts look very important. one thing immigrants have done -- they have gone into a lot of declining the records in cities and neighborhoods that in the 1970's were declining have no stable is, in large part because they are repopulated with -- have now stabilized, in large part because they were repopulated by immigrant communities. is it positive to have higher housing prices? if you own your home, higher housing prices means more wealth. if you are a renter or someone who is trying to turn into a homeowner, higher prices are a

mixed bag. it may mean more money out of pocket, but generally speaking, we think you are paying that more money because what you are renting has become more valuable. more of alittle bit complicated thing. if we were doing this analysis from a strict cost-benefit perspective, we would refer to a lot of these things as transfers. the price going up, yes, it does mean that people's wealth has gone up. renters, thes price of rent goes up. forward intoght the analysis that i did, i got population and housing data from the county level for just about every county in the united states, from 1972 2010. i had to toss out alaska. alaska does not really have counties. it -- i ended up

countysample of 3109 equivalents. what happens is a punch and of the foreign-born population? i look at the native population and home values. i try to take up a long-term differences between counties, so i am not directly comparing with manhattan and rural iowa. i'm studying, over time, it happens to that community as immigrants into the community. i have slides that get into a lot of detail about reform. modelingwant to be this? i am going to wake my hands a little bit. if you can read fast, it is all there. the servers and is, i looked to see what kind of model best fits

the data, and i looked at that. it was a basic, linear model. surprise, surprise. it is inflation-adjusted, so it is easy to explain. i'm also going to be incorporating data from county business patterns, to look at what is happening in manufacturing across counties. county business patterns -- places that do not have a lot of were taken out of this analysis, so that leaves me with about 2000 counties. a lot of people who do this work, you run into this problem. you see in france move into the community and housing prices go up. is that a case of immigrants causing housing prices to go up, or is it just the case that immigrants are moving to places that are successful?

they are not going to places where the population is declining, where the housing market is in a downward spiral. i am pursuing a strategy of trying to get around that chicken and egg problem by identifying immigration into a economicat looks at conditions on the ground. it is a well established veteran that immigrants of the counties where there are already immigrants in the population. i am using a strategy that has been used for at least 20 years in economics to predict where immigrants will go as a function of where immigrants were distributed as of 1970. right? distribute this back to some work that was done in the early 90's. there is a lot more detail about it. if you can get the whole story. -- if you can read fast, you can get the whole story. i am doing something very

similar with the manufacturing analysis, which is a little bit different, instead of looking at something like housing crisis. it is manufacturing jobs. i only have data on that. the housing price analysis, i am 90, 2000,rom 70, 80, 2010. here is what the results look like. i want to show you is, i can predict where immigrants are going to go as a prediction of where immigrants were in 1970. i have what i call the shift share base forecast. this is my variable that predicts where immigrants will locate as a option of where immigrants lived in 1990. -- 1970. where will we have immigrants from honduras in 2010? in 1970, there were not a lot of immigrants from honduras. but what counties where they located in? the prediction is that they are

going to find a particular concentration of hondurans in the counties that had a lot of hondurans back in 1970. what we find is that this is not a perfect redactor. we talked about immigrants going to new destinations. one of the phenomena we see is that immigrants in the past 10 or 20 years have gone to places like the intermountain west and the southeast, places that did not have large immigrant populations in the 1970's. so this forecast messes up with those types of counties. but it is really good about forecasting the growth of the immigrant population in california, the northeast, florida, and parts of the midwest. so it works pretty well. strategy kind of does what it is supposed to do. here is the result of the greatest interest for this particular panel. when i look to see, what is the impact of immigration on the housing market, i get that

little coefficient at the top that is 0.116. when one immigrant moves into a county, on average, housing prices in that county go up by 11.6 cents. sounds like a small number, and it is a pretty small number. but i am going to go through a little calculation in a little while to show how this 11.6 cents turns into about $3.6 million. that is the total impact of immigration on housing wealth in the united states. i have quite a few different control variables in their that are less interesting for the discussion. i will take you to migrate some efforts later on. effortsyou through my later on. when an immigrant moves into a county, the nativeborn population stays the same.

an increased is not chase the nativeborn away. natives are actually drawn to counties with immigration. as evidencethis that immigration increases the amount of economic opportunity in the county. this is the idea that there is finite -- there is not a finite economy in place. the service sector needs people to serve. if you bring a thousand immigrants into a county, you would get 423 extra natives. some of those natives are the children of foreign-born. we do an adjustment based on the childbearing rate of immigrants. the net impact is about 270. thousand immigrants from a county forecast 270 additional natives moved to the county. thisufacturing analysis -- is showing you that the strategy

of predicting where immigrants will go as a basis of where they were in 1970, here is what we get. when you get a thousand foreign-born individuals moving into a county, the number of manufacturing jobs increases by about 42. immigration, in the context of an economy where manufacturing jobs generally are declining -- this is saying that the loss of ens incturing jobs less counties that seymour immigration. you have 8% of the workforce in manufacturing. just under 70% of the adult population is in the workforce. the manufacturing jobs created increases with the number of foreign-born people who live there. second strike -- slide on implications, adding 1000 immigrants draws in 270 natives.

that is something we have talked about already. here is the way we want to think about the housing. if a thousand immigrants moving to a community, the forecast is that median home values will increase by about $116. it is time to do a back of the envelope calculation. the average immigrant resides in the county with a hundred thousand houses. houses,-- with 800,000 in larger urban areas. so if you think about it, one immigrant moving into a county with 800,000 housing units, they are raising the median price by 11.6 cents. 800,000 istimes $90,000. basically, the dowry to the theunity, the effect on community housing wealth, is a grand total of $90,000. $90,000 per immigrant.

we have approximately 40 million immigrants in the united states. you just have to take those numbers and multiply them. 40 million times 90,000 gives impact of trillion creation of housing wealth. i should be clear about this. this is owner occupied and rental housing. this is what it is. it is a straightforward story. there are more people who want housing units. i should mention that this statistical analysis is not really looking at the impact on construction. if you look at the impact on prices, this is the implication you get. thank you. [applause]

gary: i would also like to thank alex and cato for having us here today. i think what is interesting about -- all the panels have a slightly different definition. i should say that one of the things that i wanted to emphasize, and i think this is true of the panel at large, is that when we are talking about immigrants, we are talking about with authorization and without. this is about people who come from other places. it is my hope that in my talk, although in a gathering like this, it might be impossible, that maybe i will share one new fact or one new piece of data in a way you have not seen before. facts forinteresting how we might think about immigrants in the housing market. as our moderator opened up today, one of the aspects and where i have done most of my work is in the area of

understanding immigrant housing demand, and understanding how it may or may not be similar to nativeborn housing. that is where i am went to focus most of my attention. the nice thing is that my colleagues are very complement to read in terms of our expertise and research. -- very come from entering -- very complimentary in terms of our expertise and research. are not arkets national phenomenon. housing markets are local. we have to think of them as a collection of localities. we have to keep in mind that immigration trends can change rapidly. is not aword immigrant homogenous category by any means. there are multiple dimensions of which i will only go through a few, in understanding immigrant housing. trends in immigration flows aress the u.s., the maps

somewhat large on the screen behind me. this is one of those nice screens that eat laser printers. unfortunately, i cannot show you anything in particular. let me show you what these formats are going to be. the first map is mapping out the percent of the foreign-born population as a percentage of the total. the different shades are different quintiles. ,t is divided into a bucket where there are the largest concentrations. not surprisingly, the immigrant -- new york, miami, california -- are the darkest. as we know, over time, it has been migration across the u.s. what i did not do is change the quintile bucket, so things just get darker over time. i have not changed the definition. in 1990, it was mostly in the southwest, and california and new york. 2000 and 2010, there is

substantial migration throughout the u.s. so nothing new there. the percent latino foreign-born population is one dimension where perhaps there could be some different clues. it could be shown in the same way. perhaps not surprisingly, because of until very recently, latino migrants, the foreign-born from latin america, where the largest group. the map approximates what we saw on the previous. the dark shades are often traditional immigrant gateways. by 2000 and 2010, migration has spread. the asian population has a similar spread, but if you want in 1980,losely, back to be in the top quintile, you only had to have a population of 4.4% asian immigrants. these are very much impressed. but what i find most interesting in this series of maps is, think about, where are the new immigrants as a percent of the total foreign-born population?

1990, look at 1980 and you see that most immigrants were new. you see lots of dark. and when you step to 2010, you see that most immigrants that are new are no longer in immigrant gateways. so the places like california, florida, texas, and so forth, these are very light shades. less than 20% of the immigration population is new. that says a lot about the background. if you are in places where there theres of new immigrants, might be different challenges or opportunities. that is something to keep in mind. thing i focused on was the immigrant housing market. i thought immigrants had been ignored in the housing data. your mark inmake something. so i showed up in the 1990's, realizing, i am not exactly sure

why they have been ignored. one theory of herd is, they are transient. they come in and come out. impact onot a big housing demand in one place, because you never know if they are going to stay. one fact i have been surprised at and not everybody knows is that immigrants are now no longer more mobile than the native population. in fact, they are less mobile across state borders once they arrived. that means immigrant populations than themore stable nativeborn population. so this was shocking to me, when i started to look at the data. this is data from the current population survey. when i started doing my work, as you see, the underlying mobility of the immigrant tuition, when your mobility, was close to 20% -- quite high. native population was closer to 50%. this includes interurban or interstate moves.

period,he end of the the green line is below the purple. when i got to the data, i knew this was happening, but i did not know how much. this is overall mobility. if you look at long-distance moves, whether you are looking at interstate moves -- these are facts we have been running about. the overall mobility of the u.s. is in decline. immigrantsility of is declining also. that is important to keep in mind. and county mobility rates, you can see for immigrants it is a percentage point or more less than four nativeborn. when immigrants come into a community, they are therefore the duration. for theare there duration. i did not realize, but some of you may have known this by looking at this data before. some of the differences have to do with things like skill levels. low skilled workers are much less likely to migrate and do long-distance moves. if you look at the scales, you

can see the low skilled workers -- workers start around 2% and dropped to 1% in these when your migrations. if you look at high skilled workers, it started for andgrants and around 3.4% declined down to about 2.5%. the immigration population -- this has been important in my work -- you think about the arrivals. if you are a new immigrant, the immigrant -- the mobility rates are much higher. and as you have been in the country for a wild, especially -- in the country for a while, you are only going to have 1% move across state lines in four years. i am going to continue to move quickly, and look forward to some q and a later. but in addition to these mobility patterns, one of the things that i have done in a lot people noted--

they are really critical components, the immigrant populations, to housing markets. they are also integrating more rapidly than past generations of immigrants. these are really important facts to keep in mind. if you are trying to measure changes in housing demand, you already got the econ 101 supply and demand, so i do not have to redraw the picture. it worked out quite well, the order of speakers. you can think about the population. immigrants are people. they bring families. there is also the type of housing demand that is important to think about. you can think about, are people going to be owning or renting? and they also might reorganize in these different ways, which headship,hifts in

which i will define in just a second. not all metropolitan areas, but for analytical convenience, because i had a couple of papers where i took this particular sample, just to show differences -- the established gateways, everyone knows what they are. l.a., new york, chicago, miami. there is the emerging gateways, which are places like denver, las vegas, atlanta. then there is small metro areas. in this sample, there is a total of 80 metropolitan areas where we can track trends over time. the first thing is the shifts in population. shifts in population, you can see that from 2000, the last decade and a half, the percent of immigrants in established gateways is almost stable, from 33% to 34%. much of the change in established gateways happened in the 1980's and 1990's.

the emerging gateways have 21%, and from 16% to the small metros from 9% to 11.8%. what is different, especially in those established gateways, is the percentage of new immigrants. here i am defining new immigrants as "been in the country less than 10 years." that is decline rapidly in established gateways, and has declined slightly in the other places. but the recent entry among immigrants -- if you look at those, you can see a more rapid decline coming from other countries. i am going to go to homeownership, which is one of those markers we find that all the time. ameownership, i went to give definition that might seem obvious if you are talking about housing demand. homeownership is like when we report unemployment. we have a definition. here, it is the number of

occupied housing units that are headed by the owners, divided by the number of independent household heads periods you will see the difference in this ratio when we talk about the headship rate. it does not capture the number of potential households that could exist in the housing market. home ownership trends in the what hase all know happened in terms of the housing crisis, housing ownership rates 3% in u.s. have fallen this sample. you can see that has happened in all of the places. what is interesting is, if you look at immigrant homeownership over this period, in every case, immigrant homeownership from 2000 through 2014 has risen. it went up. it is higher than it was. and of course lower for us-born households. the us-born households are, a decade and a half later, at a much lower rate.

if you look at asian immigrants, latino immigrants, homeownership rates for asians are higher than latinos. the trends are pretty similar in the year 2000 compared to the year 2014. we are, in many cases, for latinos, not in established gateways, but in other places, it is higher. they're pretty similar. for asians, starting at the beginning to the end. that is one measure of housing demand. another way of thinking about is how manynd households could be out in the housing market to many to rent, own, or occupy. this is the ratio of identified households. this is one where we have evidence that immigrants are more likely to have multiple adults living together, whether it is grandparents living with familys or bringing in

members. so when you look at headship rates of immigrants, they are lower than natives over a long couple of time. at the most basic level, occupied housing units is a way of measuring housing. the surprising statistic to me was this one. it was not the immigrants. it is the us-born households. the headship rates of us-born households have fallen since 2000. the first part of the decade, they fell because of increasing challenges with housing for housingarea -- with affordability. then you have the millennial generation becoming young adults, but not leaving the house. then you had the recovery. they are not leaving. what is really interesting is of us-borntes

households are almost the same as immigrants. so it is not the old way of thinking that immigrants are becoming more like the nativeborn population. we are having the opposite happened. part of this has to do with housing affordability. but this is really interesting. headship now is almost the same. if you look at asians and latinos, they have similar headship rates. let me conclude with a few things. literature.t the immigrant rights of homeownership tend to rise with comparable nativeborn households. if you are looking at the margin, it does not take that long before it looks like this. however, prior to the most recent period, they used to be

in larger areas of society. but the gap has fallen. immigrants have higher homeownership where there are more vibrant immigrant networks. you can measure that in a lot of different ways. i do not have time to talk about that today. things like greater english proficiency tends to lead to higher homeownership, except in gateways, where bilingual immigrants do better. they have higher homeownership. but just to conclude, because i am out of time, i think you can say quite clearly, based on the first presentation and this one, the contributions of immigrants to housing demand -- what is interesting now is you can make an argument that it is really no different than native households. you do not have to think, what are immigrants thinking? how is everybody else? it is all of us. and we can talk about the spillover benefits to neighborhoods and so forth as well. that is my time. thank you. [applause]

susan: thank you to cato for inviting us here today. it is my pleasure to follow the two speakers we heard. my comments are also companies read to theirs as well -- are imentary to theirs as well. paper i authored, " immigration in the neighborhood." this is with respect to residential segregation and neighborhoods. how do we proceed? we test for native preferences, true native preferences that we will be able to determine whether immigration affects segregation. we directly measure native flight, white flight.

we then look at immigration more by the components of immigration , characteristics of immigrants. finally, we discuss the implications for access to opportunity and social integration. to get ahead of our findings, in general we find that immigration does lead to more segregated neighborhoods. therefore, that raises issues of social integration, which i will discuss at the end. so, the question we are asking is, do neighborhood housing prices rise or fall with immigration? and i will explain why we are asking question. we are asking other questions as well, but this is the key one. first of all, why are we asking that question when it has been asked and answered? actually, it has not been. the question that has been asked and answered is, when in part -- what impact do immigrants have on housing prices in msas and counties.

you heard from mr. vigdor earlier and from gary painter that immigrants are like others of us, and when you increase demand, the results would be higher housing prices. that is in the literature for metropolitan areas, and through gdor, forof mr. vi counties. there is an increase in demand for housing, in housing prices. in fact, my co-author establishes a neat relationship of a 1% increase of immigrants to a metro area increasing housing prices by 1%. to what you heard earlier. so we are asking something different. impact oning the segregation. that is not really supply and demand. that is, what is the impact on neighborhoods? to give you a sense of the order

of magnitude, i think that jake was talking about counties with average populations of 800,000, nearly a million. we are talking about 4000. order of magnitude of difference. we are using census tracts. and the question that we are addressing is whether movement in of immigrants leads to higher housing prices.

shared comgrants is an nequivocal sign of native. unless there's perceived negative compensating differential. otherwise natives move in until the price gap is breached.

if natives perceive immigrant enclaves as less desirable places to live, a negative association between immigration density and housing values will be observed, all else equal. but not everything else is equal. causalityreverse potential excavations for a negative relationship between prices and immigrant in migration. causality thatse is causing this. immigrants may be moving to affordable kate -- a formal places. it is not that housing prices are falling due to immigrants coming in, but immigrants are attracted to warehousing is affordable. but we exclude that explanation of reverse causality by setting up an instrument similar to what jake

changes in quality. just looking at the index prices. although we do have evidence of the other results as well which i will point to. there many variables. we're not looking at the first cause at. we are looking at new immigrants in the neighborhood. we will look at changing outcomes, aspects of impact in neighborhoods.

i will go over the results. we do two sets of results again to be very superficial but it can go to the paper for more details. then we also do this nstrument. what we find increases from here to 30% house values are

housing prices own at the absolute is down. ey're likely to be drawn inaudible] the model again i'll skip through it. interestingly enough the results are very similar to the

results with controls. notice when we do not have controls in column one, the impact is twice as large. which to me indicates there's reverse causality and there are variables which are related.

initially higher priced neighborhoods initially whiter neighborhoods. then we look at a direct outflows. of native we do this with instruments and without. again to move ahead very quickly the results -- here they are. but to summarize them the esults in columns one and five look positive, actually consistent with a positive impact. so it looks as though when migrants and immigrants come in we have an increase in other residents. but as columns one and five as it turns out results are driven by the top 5% where the

population total population more than doubles. so then we exclude this fast growing track, this new development we find in other 95% and also with median regression we find that immigrant arrivals are associated with absolute decreases in native population, especially white populations. so now let's unbundle the results. is it the foreignness of immigrants that causings the segregation? nd the answer to that is no. the results are all over the place. then we sort by educational achievements and particularly dropouts and we also look at

the rates, ethnicity, and these results are very much different by ethnicity and race of immigrants. , ican american status nonhispanic white immigrant. the the table shows egression. in sum, then with all these results.

does immigration always lead to lower prices and always higher levels of segregation? the answer is absolutely not. first the results are driven mostly by neighborhoods where that were whiter and higher priced to begin with so immigration had little impact on relative home values. that is in areas that were already minority and already low house prices. in fact scombgration was not associated with a decline in prices.

this is consistent with local revitalization in relatively poor minority neighborhoods. our results are driven by preferences and those may change over time as we move to a majority/minority nation. finally, growing areas. the new developments attract a rowing share of populations. o now let's discussion implications. the concern here is that dei've spite the fact that we do have urban revitalization, has it already happened and these data are from 1990 and 2000. so maybe we are in a different period. he different period is still

associated nationally with concentration of poverty. so we know that from other work that poverty -- neighborhood poverty has become more concentrated. so the question is whether immigrants, low income immigrants as well as low income nonimmigrants will be increasingly segregated. [applause]

>> before we open it up to questions, there was a fair amount of overlap so i wanted to give each of the panelists if they wanted to make a comment. you are under no obligation to do so. maybe that appear to be conflicting and so forth. but since i didn't write either one of them the thing that strikes me is the work with different colleagues on segregation and there's been a bunch of papers that actually show that white households will pay a premium in majority white neighborhoods. so finding what susan has found is kind of the converse of that

and maybe can comment. >> you said what i was planning to say. so i think you did a great job. so the work that i did establishes that housing prices .ithin a county will increase i don't see the data to be able to say they go up uniformly. take a county like l.a. county, very large, lots of different parts and they don't always move in lockstep. so i think the work points out that an important phenomenon to bear in mind is that part of the price increase phenomenon may be a situation where you have these increasing price hurdles move in to the predominantly white and native neighborhoods. >> i know we economists can

sometimes get focused on the aggregate. it seems an important message is like you always hear in real estate location, location, ocation. two questions. my first question which gets tolt question partly about decline in mobility are there differences we're seeing between cities, areas that are relatively -- in supply or difficult to build? do there seem to be differences there? and then my second question is was there something different about the recent move? in cost? what we've seen was not broken 09s. y 80s or first one.

>> i'll try to be careful as academics tend to and say i haven't addressed that directly so i want to be cautious. so what we do know is that high-skilled workers is that only kind of high-skilled workers are likely to make those long distance moves. you're not seeing low skilled workers making those kind of moves. so that is a fact that you do observe there. one of the things to keep in mind is that when the immigration if you will was cut off in terms of new immigrants moving into the u.s., we actually have a net negative migration one of the things happening is there's not nearly as many as new arrivals. so that is another kind of damper on mobility overall.

>> i'll say a couple things. in terms of the impact that is you see on prices i think i might have mentioned this but it bears repeating. there is some places where it's easy to build and that might be a function of availability of land but also regulation. zoning laws in some parts of the country make it very difficult to expand the stock of housing. in those parts you're going to see more of a price conpact than construction. in other parts where there's more available land and easier regulations you'll see more of a quantity of access. in terms of things being different using census data from 2000-2010 the bubble and the the bust kind of fall not entirely within that interval. but the fact that i was using data ten years apart mean that the short-term dynamics were

missing from my data. but nonetheless you could definitely see that a lot of the communities that were heavily impacted by the housing bust like the inland areas of california, south florida, these are areas that had a large immigrant population. so a lot of the home owners who were caught up in that were foreign born. >> i will comment on the wealth. absolutely wealth immigrant households was hit more because especially hispanic households had more of the wealth in housing. but i would like to take your question one step farther because we're doing these metrixes studies that rely on data we're not looking at what's happening right now although price has implications. what i think is interesting is that housing prices and renlt are increasing relative to the

cpi and wages and income at a very rapid rate, faster than they ever had and more consistently. so in terms of rent we're far higher than we were in 2006, far higher than 2000, and they keep on increasing although they're likely to increase at a lower rate relative to inflakes. and wages are increasing somewhat this year. so there's a better balance there. but this is in ab absence. so the issue for affordability and the issue for the ability to move and mobility for immigrants and low income populations across the board for low-skilled populations, this is a challenge that's going to be our challenge as a nation for integrating populations with low skills and for low skill populations that are native. >> maybe if i can rephrase that one way.

i think some of the concern one often hears about immigration and housing markets is somewhat about displacement. i think as we heard earlier we've been reminded on this panel that that immigration has been negative yet we see strong increases in rents suggesting hat it's something else. question in the back. if you could identify yorse and phrase your question in the form of a question. > i'm dan. immigration and crime has been in the news. just this week. actually i think it was the national academy of science last year document that had

immigrants are connectd with lower crime rate. that immigrant neighborhoods have lower crime rates than comparable nonimmigrant neighborhoods. i wonder if that was factored n. >> it is in our analysis. in spite of that this is absolutely we do find these results. > i'll put in there i did an analysis. i had level of crime from new york city from 1990 to 2010-2012. the period where crime dropped dramatically in new york city and lots of people have their

explanations for why but criminalologists are puzzled. if you look at the precincts in new york where crime dropped the most they happened to be connected to the neighborhoods where the foreign-born population increased the most. it's not just that foreign-born people themselves are not coming to the united states to commit crimes. they're coming here to work. it's not just a function of their own behavior. it's a function of stabilizing neighborhoods where the vacancy rates have been very high. parts of the bronx where drug use was ramp president. you had problems with all sorts of social ills. and the reoccupation of those neighborhoods, the cleaning up of those neighborhoods had a profound impact on them. to susan's point there still might not be places where your white middle class neighborhoods wanted to live but they've turned around.

>> in my own work i've looked at how that process, the dynamic that you described. so what i found in a fairly complicated modal not cited here is places in south l.a., if crime fell, with huge increases in black home ownership of -- as well, what was happening is once people moved to the middle class, they were going to the inland empire to buy as opposed to these neighborhoods. o that will nots only affect rices. to the estion relates roll of real estate agents.

back in the early 70s i was a civil rights lawyer in atlanta and brought the first suit against a large real estate company which was steering black perspective buyers into lower middle class white neighborhoods causing white flight out of those neighborhoods jacking up the prices initially in those neighborhoods causing an increase in the overall market i suppose for real estate. and the owners then bought houses elsewhere for more. to what extent do you see or have you considered the role of eal estate agents steering ople into neighborhoods to prey upon their fear and therefore make more money?

>> it's become a more complicated world. i think that to some degree discrimination continues to go on. i was involved in a case a couple years ago involving a landlord in korea town in l.a. so i got to know a lot about the market in koreatown where there is a lot of discriminatory behavior. but in a lot of cases it is immigrant groups themselves trying to preserve the ethnic identity of their buildings or neighborhood. so while there may be some situations where there are certain immigrants p having a difficult time there are also immigrants on the other side of the coin. o it's very complicated. i'll note that the microfone -- i know our authors will be around a little bit if you want

to come up, i think they'll be happy. >> i wanted to ask about redevelopment and expectations. i think the speakers kind of mentioned it in the middle of all their data. it seems to me anecdotally around here there were some immigrant neighborhoods that were in the last, i don't know, 30 years or so, redeveloped and have now become sort of the -- [inaudible] it seems to me that prices in those neighborhoods that change not because of the population composition but because of redevelopment that preceded. >> there's no doubt about it. here's a sea shift going on in the inner city neighborhoods across america. often these are immigrant neighborhoods where prices are

rising with redevelopment. that is going to change the whole sale. whether that makes our results actually no longer applicable because now we're talking about revitalizing neighborhoods where there are immigrants certainly makes -- and we do talk about new development and neighborhoods where it has already happened completely consistent with what you're saying. in the meantime, however, so new immigrants are coming although not now or simply low income households generally looking for housing increasingly are being pushed out. so to enclaves that are poor in the suburbs or in smaller cities. >> thank you. i want to thank the audience, our panelists. i know two came from the other side of the country so i really appreciate that.

so i want to thank you. we'll turn it over to the next panel. [applause]

discussion on middle east politics and security. they looked at how several countries are governed and tofertse promote stability and trust. this is an hour-and-a-half.

>> good afternoon, and welcome, on behalf of the brookings institution foreign policy program and on behalf of the atlantic council. i'm deputy director of foreign policy at brookings. i would like to extend a special welcome to my counterparts from the atlantic council rejoined us here today including the deputy director and ambassador richard lebaron. i would like to extend a special welcome to our distinguished guests on the diplomatic community. we are here to discuss a report written by my colleague, who over the pastor has convened the task force is working group on politics, governors, and state society relations. this is one of five such groups organized by the middle east strategy task force, a bipartisan initiative launched in february 2015.