What You're Missing on Immigration
Immigration Myths, Economic Realities, and Statistical Fallacies
Borders, Bias, and Belonging: A Critical Look at Immigration Myths and Economic Realities
Discover why immigration isn’t to blame for housing crises, wage stagnation, or social strain. This deep-dive dismantles common myths and reveals how policy—not people—is the real problem. Learn how to build a world unbound by fear, borders, or misinformation
"Immigrants, especially Muslims, are ruining our values and way of life!"
You've heard it before. But ask the person which values, and that's where the cat catches their tongue.
Let's take a look at two sets of values.
Respect for human dignity
Freedom
Democracy
Equality
Rule of law
Respect for human rights, including those of minorities
Religion
Life
Family
Mind
Wealth
Some contemporary scholars suggest either justice or liberty to be the sixth category.
Do you know which of these values are European and which are Islamic? The first set is European values according to the European Parliament, and the second set is Islamic values according to The Religion of Islam. American values? I can't find a reliable institution to get information from anymore (thanks, Trump). But according to…
Read the rest on Ghost.
Anti-Immigration Statistical Fallacies
Debunking immigration myths with data and context — from statistical fallacies to media bias, here’s how to think clearly about migration debates.
The Hard Problem of Social Research: Why Immigration Statistics Often Mislead
When immigration statistics appear in headlines or spew from indignant mouths, they often arrive with a false sense of finality — “Immigration raises unemployment,” “Immigrants cost taxpayers billions,” “Immigration boosts GDP,” and so on. But as political scientist Brian Klaas explains in his discussion of Nate Breznau’s groundbreaking 2022 study, reality is far murkier.
In a large-scale experiment led by Nate Breznau and colleagues, 73 independent research teams — all given the same dataset and the same research question — were asked to test whether higher immigration reduces public support for social safety nets.
The results showed striking variation:
60.7 % of teams found no effect.
14.8 % found a statistically significant negative effect (supporting the idea that immigration reduces support).
6.8 % found a statistically significant positive effect (suggesting immigration increases support).
13.5 % concluded the question was not testable with the provided data.
This wide range of results — despite identical data and hypotheses — underscores how much researcher choices can influence scientific conclusions.
As Klaas summarizes:
“If Breznau’s team had asked only one research team to answer the immigration question, there would be a nearly equal chance that they would find either that higher immigration increased support for social spending or decreased it. Once published, either a positive or a negative result might be considered a settled question. The irreducible uncertainty would be hidden from view… This is a much bigger problem than the replication crisis. It challenges the most basic assumptions of social research.” –
Read the rest on Ghost.
If you believe in research and writing that break down borders, foster cross-cultural understanding, and inspire people to live unbound, consider becoming a paid subscriber to Born Without Borders.
All my work is published on Ghost, a decentralized, non-profit, and carbon-neutral platform—free from VC funding and the grip of technofeudal lords.
I don’t use algorithms to hijack your attention.
My work can only exist if you share and support it.
This information is fascinating! You've given me so much to think about.
As SB who's laying the ground for immigration to Austria, the only thing I wanna work towards is that Austrians see me as a human being and not as a Muslim to be feared (I'm not a real Muslim).