• Andrew Thurston

    Editor, The Brink Twitter Profile

    Photo of Andrew Thurston, a white man with black glasses. He smiles and wears a maroon polo shirt.

    Andrew Thurston is originally from England, but has grown to appreciate the serial comma and the Red Sox, while keeping his accent (mostly) and love of West Ham United. He joined BU in 2007, and is the editor of the University’s research news site, The Brink; he was formerly director of alumni publications. Before joining BU, he edited consumer and business magazines, including for corporations, nonprofits, and the UK government. His work has won awards from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, the In-House Agency Forum, Folio:, and the British Association of Communicators in Business. Andrew has a bachelor’s degree in English and related literature from the University of York. Profile

  • Jackie Ricciardi

    Staff photojournalist

    Portrait of Jackie Ricciardi

    Jackie Ricciardi is a staff photojournalist at BU Today and Bostonia magazine. She has worked as a staff photographer at newspapers that include the Augusta Chronicle in Augusta, Ga., and at Seacoast Media Group in Portsmouth, N.H., where she was twice named New Hampshire Press Photographer of the Year. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 9 comments on Do Immigrants and Immigration Help the Economy?

  1. This article misses the point of what the problem with immigration is.

    Whatever one may think of legal immigration – in a democracy we can debate the pros and cons of different immigration policies regarding legal immigration – the thing that really angers people – the actual tax paying citizens of every color and ethnicity, who are already here – is the blatant violation of US immigration law by the US government itself and thew massive problems that violation is creating! Specifically by the Biden administration which has out done every other presidency in the amount of lawlessness it has facilitated regarding this issue.

    This administration violates the core principle of democracy where supposedly the citizens of the country consent to what the government does. That contract is being grossly violated by definition when the Biden administration not only does not enforce BUT blatantly subverts immigration law on a scale never seen in US history. The numbers speak for themselves – 6 -8 million have illegally come here since Biden took over, easily a record.

    The incredible numbers of people walking across the border is causing massive problems in this country with human trafficking, illegal drugs like fentanyl coming through the border which has caused unprecedented number of overdose deaths to the tune of about 100k per year and a huge strain on resources in communities all across the country – many of them with large homeless and low income populations as it is. That is a total outrage.

    To talk about immigration without distinguishing between lawful immigration and the 6 -8 million who have illegally jumped the border since Biden took over is gaslighting at its finest.

    It is no wonder this issue has become one of the top issues in US politics. It is the gaslighting by Biden and the media that tells people: “The problems you’re seeing with your own eyes, are made up by racist conservatives”, “the border is secure”, “immigrants built this country”, “diversity is our strength” and on and on with the dumb slogans – that totally dismisses the very real problems that unlimited illegal immigration is creating, that is what infuriates people.

    1. I also believe that this article and the research in question misses the point, but exactly what point is missed is where we differ. While everyone is entitled to their opinion on legal immigration policies, it’s crucial to ensure that arguments are grounded in accurate information and logical reasoning. Let’s break down your commentary point by point:

      -Blaming the Biden Administration for Record Illegal Immigration:
      ~The claim that the Biden administration facilitated record levels of illegal immigration lacks context. Immigration trends are influenced by various factors, including global events, economic conditions, and policies that precede the current administration.
      ~ It’s important to consider the historical context of immigration patterns and the complexities of migration, rather than solely attributing them to one administration.

      -Violation of Democracy and Government Consent:
      ~While it’s valid to expect a government to uphold and enforce laws, it’s an oversimplification to equate every immigration issue as a violation of democratic principles.
      ~Immigration policies often involve a balance between national security, humanitarian considerations (such as the prima facie asylum cases many immigrants have), and economic factors. This requires nuanced decision-making rather than blanket assertions of lawlessness such as the ones you have made.
      ~Democracies also have mechanisms for legal challenges and policy adjustments, reflecting ongoing debates and evolving perspectives within society.
      ~The underlying assumption that all immigration laws are benign and just, and should therefore be enforced, is blatantly incorrect. because immigration laws, like any other set of laws, can vary widely in their fairness, efficacy, and ethical considerations. Furthermore, what if their enforcement denies the dignity of immigrants? I hope we can agree that treating human beings with dignity is never up for debate.

      -Human Trafficking, Drug Smuggling, and Overdose Deaths:
      ~The connection between illegal immigration and specific criminal activities like human trafficking and drug smuggling is a complex issue that requires evidence-based analysis, none of which you provide.
      ~While border security is an understandable concern of those affected by narco cartels, attributing all societal problems to illegal immigration oversimplifies the root causes and potential solutions.
      ~Addressing issues such as drug overdoses requires a comprehensive approach that includes healthcare, fair and unbiased law enforcement, addiction treatment, and international cooperation on drug control.

      -Gaslighting and Media Narratives:
      ~Ah yes, “gaslighting,” the most overused word of our modern age…Accusations of gaslighting by the Biden administration and the media should be supported by specific examples and evidence of deliberate deception. You provide none.
      ~Public discourse on immigration should encourage factual discussions, respectful dialogue, and acknowledgment of diverse perspectives rather than resorting to labeling or dismissing opposing views as gaslighting.

      -Focusing on a boogie-man instead of the systems that cause inequality.
      ~Your comments focus on the so-called negative impacts of “illegal” immigration on existing working-class communities, such as strain on resources and economic competition. However, a proper analysis would also consider the structural factors that contribute to these issues.
      ~Capitalist systems often benefit from a vulnerable and easily exploitable labor force, which can be perpetuated by irregular migration patterns. This creates a divide among workers, where immigrants are often pitted against native workers, leading to tensions and resentment.
      ~Instead of solely blaming immigrants for economic challenges, we should highlight the systemic inequalities and capitalist dynamics that drive these conditions. Issues like wage suppression and job insecurity are rooted in the profit-driven logic of capitalism, not solely immigration status.

      Listen Sam, it’s essential to approach discussions on contentious topics with accuracy, nuance, and a commitment to constructive dialogue rather than rhetoric that may inflame tensions or distort realities. Think before you post bad takes on the internet.

      1. Quite the essay… Your rebuttal of Sam’s comments above clearly seem to be coming from a particular political viewpoint. Although his frustration with this topic is evident, Sam’s comments reflect factual events that can easily be verified through CBP operational statistics, DHS data, or even the various news outlets. Despite of the fact that there is some merit in your comments that there is no “accurate information” presented, or lack of “context”, or “evidenced-based analysis”, “complexities”, “root causes” etc., given the limited scope of this exchange seems like an attempt to deflect the immediate reality that everyone can see if they look truthfully. The author’s attempt at reflecting only on some perceived benefits of immigration is certainly incomplete with regard to immigration as a whole. Again, given the limited scope of the article, a full understanding of the subject matter is not possible. Anyway, your denouncing of capitalism as an economic system clearly illustrates the position from which your comments are derived (“Marxist” – as you have explicitly stated in some of your other BU Today comments – on April 12, 2024 for example). Considering the effects of Marxism or communism wherever it has been implemented in the world, it would be interesting to hear someone, perhaps you, explain why the vast majority of migrants flock to capitalist countries…

        1. Rex, I very much appreciate your response.

          First: I am not convinced that Sam’s perspective is entirely grounded in facts. There is additional misinformation that around immigration enforcement that needed to be addressed. While I acknowledge the limitations of our current exchange in the comments of an article, fully delving into every aspect of the immigration debate, I believe that providing a nuanced and evidence-based analysis is essential in fostering a deeper understanding of the issue, especially given the fact that this is a piece of public media. Rather than deflecting from reality, my intention is to engage in constructive dialogue that encourages critical thinking, informed perspectives, and respectful exchanges of ideas.

          Moreover, addressing the misinformation around immigration enforcement is essential. There are instances where narratives about immigration enforcement may not fully reflect the realities on the ground. For example, claims about the Biden administration’s “record levels of illegal immigration” need to be contextualized within broader immigration trends, historical patterns, and global factors influencing migration flows. Simply attributing all immigration issues to one president’s administration oversimplifies a complex issue.

          Additionally, discussions on immigration should consider the humanitarian aspects, including asylum seekers and refugees fleeing persecution and violence. It’s crucial to uphold human rights and dignity in immigration policies and enforcement practices, which may not always align with blanket assertions of lawlessness or gaslighting.

          Regarding your point about factual events and statistics from CBP, DHS, and news outlets, I fully acknowledge the validity of data-driven analysis. I conduct it regularly in my scholarship. However, it’s crucial to note that statistics can sometimes be interpreted in various ways, and the complexities of immigration dynamics go beyond raw numbers. Nuance is key in understanding the multifaceted nature of immigration issues.

          As for my own perspective, yes, I have explicitly stated a Marxist viewpoint in some of my previous comments, as you mentioned. While it’s true that I approach certain discussions from a Marxist viewpoint, it’s essential to recognize that Marxism critiques capitalist systems based on historical materialist analysis and class struggle dynamics. This perspective doesn’t negate the importance of acknowledging immigration challenges or addressing issues related to migration in capitalist societies. My area of research happens to be Marxist economics, philosophy, and history and it deeply informs much of my own worldview and politics. I do not believe there’s anything incorrect or flawed with taking a certain political perspective, though it does have its shortcomings, I will admit.

          While it’s important to consider the immediate realities and challenges related to immigration, it’s also crucial to recognize that discussions around immigration are multifaceted and require nuanced analysis. The focus of my comments was on highlighting additional aspects of the immigration discourse that are often overlooked or underrepresented. This doesn’t discount the validity of the concerns raised by Sam or others regarding immigration’s impacts and complexities, though there are corrigible aspects of Sam’s assumptions that I felt needed addressing.

          As for why migrants sometimes choose capitalist countries, it’s a multifaceted issue influenced by economic opportunities, the effect of climate change, geopolitical factors, historical ties, and global migration patterns. The assumption that migrants primarily flock to capitalist countries because of the supposed superiority of capitalism over Marxism or communism is oversimplified and ignores several key factors. People migrate for various reasons, including seeking better economic prospects, political stability that has been interrupted by internal and external forces, and social opportunities (such as being less likely to be persecuted for one’s sexuality or religious affiliation), which can be found in BOTH capitalist and non-capitalist countries. Perception also plays a role. Large capitalist countries such as the United States often offer perceived economic advantages and opportunities that attract migrants seeking better livelihoods. However, this does not mean that migrants are endorsing or preferring capitalism as an ideology or economic structure. In fact, 2 of the 5 (China and Vietnam) are mixed economies. In conclusion, the decision-making process behind migration is intricate and influenced by a multitude of factors beyond economic ideologies alone. While economic opportunities do play a significant role, migrants also consider political stability, social freedoms, safety, and quality of life when choosing their destination. It’s essential to recognize that migrants’ choices are not necessarily endorsements of specific economic systems but rather pragmatic decisions based on their unique circumstances and aspirations for a better future (assuming their displacement is not forced).

          I appreciate your input and encourage continued dialogue.

  2. The problem with U.S. immigration includes the significant backlogs and underfunded USCIS. Additionally, the lack of a clear pathway to a green card for foreign students who attend U.S. universities is also troubling. These students must navigate the H-1B visa lottery, administrative processing (for students with certain STEM backgrounds), and the lengthy green card application process. Even the family-based immigration process is not free of obstacles. Some individuals have to wait years before receiving a response to their initial application.

    Unfortunately, there’s no incentive for Congress to address this issue anytime soon, and the majority of voters are not directly affected by it. However, the U.S. is losing a huge talent pool due to the lack of immigration reform. The most recent major immigration reform enacted in the United States was in 1986.

      1. Emphasizing and developing local talent is undeniably beneficial. Indeed, there is a pressing need for the U.S. to overhaul its education system (from elementary to high school) to enable local students to compete on a global stage, especially in STEM. However, adopting a protectionist approach in the fields of science and engineering will not work. In fact, isolation could cause more harm than good.

        The United States has thrived on the contributions of immigrants since its inception. The impact of immigrants is particularly evident, with leaders like Jensen Huang of Nvidia, Elon Musk of SpaceX, Tesla, and Neuralink, Sundar Pichai of Google, and Satya Nadella of Microsoft—all of whom are immigrants.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *