Economic Argument Against Immigration Is Wrong
Benjamin Harris
2:52 PM ET
... The debate has quickly reverted to familiar territory: crime; taxes; the safety net; national identity; and, of course, wages and jobs for native-born workers ...
While economists rarely agree on much, immigration has found a rare near-consensus among the profession. The University of Chicago periodically surveys a balanced panel of well-regarded economists on topical issues. In a poll on highly skilled immigration, a whopping 95% of economists who answered thought that the average American would be better off with more immigrants; the other 5 % were uncertain. The sentiment on low-skilled immigration was less overwhelming, but it was close.
Economists have found common ground on the topic because study after study reinforces the notion that immigration makes native-born Americans better off on a wide range of effects—innovation, the price of goods and services, the number of jobs, government finances, and even wages. Across the board, the overwhelming bulk of evidence points to improved livelihoods for Americans.
On innovation, the evidence is clear that immigration has a positive impact—from higher rates of patents to more entrepreneurship. For example, economists Jennifer Hunt and Marjolaine Gauthier-Loiselle found that a small increase in skilled immigration can boost patents on the order of 10 % to 20 % ...
http://fortune.com/2017/09/11/daca-immigration-economy-donald-trump/
= new reply since forum marked as read
George Borjas? He's the guy all those anti-immigration hate groups like FAIR, NumbersUSA, CIS love to cite. 
