shenxiaoqiang 发表于 2012-5-3 20:04 
You may misunderstand the report.
The report focus attention on international remi ...
Relax, bro. He just made an interesting discovery in this dreary report. This report presents too many figures, so many in a messy organization that readers have to guess the essence idea the author tries to convey. zhdefei's river finding can't be more fancy as in this irrelevant report, he touched the backbones of geo-economics. Those rivers mentioned in this article, are actually rivers originiating from inner land and running through entire nations and finally getting into the sea. It is the ocean port, rather than river that determines the growth difference since World War II and immigration is mainly a result of such growth difference. Such geo-economic thoery may lack conclusive evidence though, it is really popular for the average people to accept.
International remittance, in its nature, bears resemblance to any other goods traded between nations. Say, toys made in China is shipped to America and the factory in Guangdong just receives a payment. in "remiittance case, the good is "immigrant labor". Peopel from poor countries migrate and sell their labors to the richer countries, receive a payment for their labor and allocate a portion of its wage back to sustain his family. Two points make it worth academical attention:
Immigrant does not repay all his money back, he keep a retain for his life in working location;
Immigrant does not need to transfer money all through banking system, they could go back by feet and carry cash with them, which makes the exact number of remittance hard to catch.
I think lowly of remittance issue, since it is not important in immigration policy modification. It is barely a symptom of immigration, whereas immigration is mostly determined by employment conflict, culture conflict and birth policy