Study Claims Lower Immigration Boosts American Prosperity
A recent study, backed by a significant lobby group for investors interested in migration, argues that keeping immigration at moderate levels is the best way to enhance American prosperity. The findings indicate that with medium and low immigration, skilled labor immigrants contribute to a smaller yet more proficient workforce, resulting in higher GDP per person. This stands in contrast to the effects of a large influx of immigrants and their families.
“It should be straightforward, considering that countries like Mexico have high GDP potential, but our per capita income would drop,” remarked Rosemary Jenks, co-founder of the Immigration Accountability Project. “It’s just straightforward!”
On the other hand, Stephen Camarota, a research director at the Center for Immigration Research, expressed opposition to mass migration, stating, “I believe immigration isn’t beneficial for the average American.”
The study’s conclusions align with conditions seen in Canada, Australia, and England, where increased immigration has led to declining productivity as elites bring in more consumers, which, in turn, escalates real estate and stock prices.
The immigration report reveals that it received funding from the FWD.US Education Fund, which appears to have created a spin-off from its parent organization. FWD.US was founded by West Coast investors who had previously lobbied for significant consumer, renter, and worker immigration.
Initially spearheaded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to promote the 2013 “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill, Zuckerberg has since distanced himself from direct involvement, passing the leadership role to other funders like Ron Conway, Reed Hoffman, and Mark Benioff.
The report thanked various contributors for their feedback throughout the research process. It also highlights that higher GDP growth is linked to mass immigration, as families need to work to manage living expenses, contrasting with the potential benefits of limiting immigration to skilled workers.
The scenarios evaluated in the report involved “family emphasis” and skilled migration. It noted that the labor situation would differ significantly, suggesting a concentration on working-age immigrants and a decrease in the numbers from Asia, Europe, and Latino populations compared to family-focused scenarios.
Ultimately, the findings suggest that family-oriented immigration scenarios would lead to slower per capita GDP growth due to a larger population size supplemented by a lower working-age population. Surprisingly, even a zero immigration option is shown to yield higher per capita growth than the influx associated with family migration.
President Joe Biden’s current immigration policy has maintained 2021 levels while emphasizing skilled foreign workers, which has positively impacted per capita income.
The new research aligns with earlier outputs from the FWD.US Group. A November 2024 report by FWD.US asserts that significant reductions in legal immigration could negatively affect wages, ultimately leading to higher prices for consumers.
In 2020, a FWD.US study had indicated that limiting immigration in Florida could raise local wages. In this context, anecdotal evidence suggests that employers often struggle to hire enough traditional workers, underscoring the potential consequences of hiring restrictions.
The discourse surrounding immigration continues, with proponents asserting its economic benefits while critics highlight resultant challenges, such as housing affordability, congestion, and stagnant wages, especially seen during Biden’s administration. For instance, a report indicated a 56% increase in US housing prices from 2020 to 2025.
Critics like Camarota argue that immigration does not enrich the country and merely inflates GDP while increasing competition for jobs. He emphasizes that a more selective immigration system could potentially lead to greater prosperity.
Meanwhile, alternatives to mass migration for addressing labor shortages are acknowledged in the latest FWD.US report, which suggests enhancing workforce participation and improving birth rates among native-born citizens could provide long-lasting economic benefits.
Overall, the debate remains complex and multifaceted, revolving around how best to balance immigration levels with economic growth and societal needs.
