40 Percent of Fortune 500 Companies Founded by Immigrants or Their Children

[dkf]

A new report from the Partnership for a New American Economy found more than 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children. Eighteen percent (or 90) of the 500 companies had immigrant founders. The children of immigrants started another 114 companies. (A copy of the report can be found here.)

One reason these figures are remarkable is that, according to the report, the foreign-born population of the United States has averaged 10.5 percent since 1850. That means immigrant entrepreneurs are overrepresented on the list of founders of Fortune 500 companies. As the report notes, “The revenue generated by Fortune 500 companies founded by immigrants of children of immigrants is greater than the GDP (gross domestic product) of every country in the world outside the U.S., except China and Japan.” These Fortune 500 companies had combined revenues of $4.2 trillion in 2010, $1.7 trillion which from immigrant-founded companies.

The report also notes,” Many of America’s greatest brands – Apple, Google, AT&T Budweiser, Colgate, eBay, General Electric, IBM, and McDonalds to name just a few – owe their origin to a founder who was an immigrant or the child of an immigrant.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2011/06/19/40-percent-of-fortune-500-companies-founded-by-immigrants-or-their-children/

[pampango]

1. Aren't we supposed to focus on the costs of immigration, not the benefits?

We could be in danger of becoming "Canadians" and looking at immigrants as a positive for our economy. :) That is most certainly not the tea party message - which focuses on how much of a burden immigration is for all real Americans.

[dkf]

2. That's the cost of illegal immigration probably. Two different things.

In a discussion about immigration on CNN's State of the Union on July 3, 2011, AOL co-founder Steve Case said it's crucial for the economy that the United States "continues to be a magnet for high-skilled immigrants who want to start companies here."

"The reality is these high-skilled immigrants are job-makers, not job-takers," Case said. "...We really need to make sure that we get the best and brightest, not just in our schools here and give them Ph.D.s, but when they graduate, we get them to stay here and start companies here, not start companies other places.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/06/steve-case/steve-case-says-40-percent-fortune-500-were-starte/

[pampango]

8. Perhaps from our perspective, but not necessarily from the right.

These ads are running in Ohio and are funded by FAIR target all immigration.

New TV Campaign in Ohio Calls for Less Legal Immigration to Increase Jobs for Americans

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=24189

FAIR: "It is described as conservative in dozens of press reports and books.<3><4><5> ... According to Andrew Wroe, a lecturer in American Politics and author of The Republican Party and Immigration Politics,<7> it is viewed by many as an extremist group."

"FAIR was called a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform#Criticism

Many on the right want less immigration period. They view its costs to society as too high and not balanced by its benefits. They do focus more on illegal immigration. That is a wise political strategy, but it is not their ultimate goal.

[dkf]

13. I understand both arguments.

It's probably a balance, to get the best and brightest, but give our people a chance too.

[sam11111]

10. his AOL used dirty trick programs. A crook

[Fumesucker]

3. A number of the companies in the list in your OP I would characterize as actively evil..

McDonalds, GE, Budweiser, all are working hard to make the USA a worse place for the 99%.

[dkf]

6. Where do you expect jobs to come from? Geez.

[Fumesucker]

11. Small business does much better at creating jobs than Fortune companies..

You think GE is creating jobs in the USA?

Budweiser is actively working to promote some drug prohibition.

[dkf]

14. When they got started fortune 500 companies were small businesses.

That is kind of the point.

[Fumesucker]

15. Once they get to a certain size many companies become a destructive force in our society..

For instance, our political process is dominated by big business.

Personally I find this a bad thing, apparently you disagree.

[GliderGuider]

4. Propaganda in support of the "Meme of the Dream": upward mobility.

:thumbsdown:

[dkf]

5. Actually the point of this is to point out that we need to keep the US attractive to

Entrepreneurs.

It's doesn't say "upward mobility" to me at all.

[GliderGuider]

16. Entrepeneurialism is the foundation of the Dream.

Unfortunately, in the real world most immigrant entrepreneurs don't run F500 companies. They end up with subsistence-level mom-and-pop variety stores. This article is pure propaganda.

[Fumesucker]

17. Upward mobility is the entire thrust of your OP..

And upward mobility in the US is lower than in practically any other developed nation.

[dkf]

19. Not upward mobility for Americans.

It says to me that we've lost the appetite so we need immigrants to provide the smarts, talent, or drive.

[GliderGuider]

20. It's an article from Forbes, for god sake - the premiere propaganda tool for the Power Elite

Of course they're going to make it read that way.

"Paging Mr. Derrida, Mr. Jacques Derrida, deconstruction required in aisle three."

[Fumesucker]

21. And yet many countries with lower immigration levels than the US and far more socialist..

Have higher levels of upward social mobility, often considerably higher.

There's more to it than your simplistic analysis would indicate.

[pampango]

24. Would you care to name a few of those countries? Certainly not Canada,

"Canada has the highest per capita net immigration rate in the world..."

Not Norway where immigrants are 12.2% of the population; not Sweden - 14.3%; not Australia - 25%. By comparison immigrants are 11.4% of the US population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Canada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Norway
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_Netherlands#Migration_and_ethnicity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States#Contemporary_immigration

All of these other countries have much better distributions of income and wealth compared to the US (because of/in spite of?) their higher immigration levels.



"In the UK, the OECD found that 50% of the economic advantage that high-earning fathers have over low-earning fathers is passed on to their sons. By contrast, in Australia, Canada and the Nordic countries, less than 20% of the wage advantage was passed on."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/10/oecd-uk-worst-social-mobility#

Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden are high in the scale of social mobility among advanced economies. The US is near the UK towards the bottom of the social mobility scale.

[Fumesucker]

25. And yet by far the most immigrants end up in the states with the lowest standards of living..

And with the lowest social mobility..

Thanks for prodding me to research that..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States#Immigration_by_state

[pampango]

26. Actually most immigrants end up in California (26.8%) and New York (21.3%)

with New Jersey (19.7% of population is foreign-born), Massachusetts (14.1%), Illinois (13.4%) and Washington (12.1%).

The lowest foreign-born populations by state were in the South - Mississippi (1.9%), Alabama (2.9%), Kentucky (2.8%), and South Carolina (4.4%).

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html

Most immigrants still go to states with higher standards of living and avoid poor states (though some are starting to go to those states, too, as your figures indicate).

Someone should give this information to republican legislators in Alabama and South Carolina which have passed state immigration laws recently. Since they don't have that much immigration, it would appear that they are looking for scapegoats rather than solutions. :)

[PETRUS]

18. That said, social mobility is in decline in the USA.

And that is having the effect of making this country less attractive to entrepreneurs. Further, entrenched interests have successfully campaigned for trade and immigration policies that that protect their current status by limiting the numbers of highly skilled immigrants that can enter the country while opening up the flow of capital and (many but not all) goods . Free-marketers should point this out and demand our trade and immigration policies be stripped of the numerous protectionist measures they contain. Or at the very least, we could demand honesty; if some level of protectionism can be shown to provide a public benefit, fine - but let's stop calling our trade agreements "free," when they are anything but.

[sam11111]

7. right . one "great" brand took out RR praise ads recently - GE

OP is a mishmash

[dkf]

9. What the heck is an rr praise ad?

[Fumesucker]

12. RR = Ronald Reagan

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. Note: Not all immigrants are poor.

[The Straight Story]

23. illegal immigrants or immigrant immigrants?

:evilgrin:

[bengalherder]

27. Just because they were immigrants doesn't make them nice people

or someone to be held up for adulation.