Originally Posted by popcorn_karate
i'd like to see data that supports this contention. I think you are wildly off base on this. it depends on what your definitions are, but about 26% of the adult population has a bachelor's or better educational attainment.
as for the immigrants - again wildly off base. there are high skill immigrants, but when you look at the numbers your imaginary graph would look nothing like the way you represent it.
If you want to see data supporting this argument you should follow the links in my first post to the work of Peri. He is a careful empirical economist that not only collects much new raw data but uses econometric techniques to direct test his hypothesis.
The graph is not imaginary. The key is to understand that the skill composition of the two groups of workers is a relative measure. It is the skill composition of native born labor relative
to immigrant labor. In absolute terms to the US population may be high or low skilled, but this does not have direct implications for the changing distribution of income. On the other hand, the relative skill mix of the two groups directly determines whether or not workers from the two groups operate as substitutes or complements in the labor market.
So when I describe the distribution of talent in the domestic labor force as an arch, that is relative to the distribution of immigrant labor.
Again, if you would like empirical support check out the work of Peri.