That first one hits! I can never find files on my phone.

I figured rational discussion would be pointless. That's why you got the copy/pasta. I was right. I could literally lay out all the numbers and you'd argue. The numbers are out there. You, however, started posting things unrelated to immigrants and their contributions. You know why that is? I can guess, but it is still irrelevant.

The Epstein Administration likes people like you. That's really all you need to know about your ideas.

Immigrants in the United States contribute more to GDP per capita than native-born Americans when adjusted for key factors like labor force participation, age structure, and overall economic output relative to population share. Multiple studies show that immigrants' share of GDP exceeds their share of the population, often by several percentage points.
Nationally, immigrants (foreign-born individuals) make up about 14-15% of the U.S. population but account for 17-18% of total economic output (GDP). This pattern holds across states, where the immigrant share of GDP consistently outpaces their population share. This indicates higher average per capita contribution to economic production, driven by factors such as:
Higher labor force participation rates (around 67% for foreign-born vs. 62% for native-born).
A younger age profile (more working-age individuals).
Greater entrepreneurship and innovation in certain sectors.
These dynamics lead to productivity gains, specialization (e.g., immigrants filling manual or complementary roles that allow natives to specialize in higher-value tasks), and overall efficiency improvements that boost output per person.
However, this overall positive picture varies significantly by subgroup, particularly when comparing within similar income brackets or education levels:
Immigrants often start with lower earnings and are overrepresented in lower-wage jobs due to factors like limited initial English proficiency, credential recognition issues, or concentration in certain industries. Median personal incomes for foreign-born individuals are typically lower than for natives (e.g., around $20,000 vs. $28,000 in some older comparisons, with persistent gaps).
Within the same education or skill level, immigrants frequently show comparable or higher productivity in certain contexts. For example, less-educated immigrants tend to work more hours and have higher employment rates than similarly educated natives. Research indicates immigrants can increase total factor productivity through better task allocation and specialization, with positive spillovers (e.g., no significant crowding out of native employment and modest or positive wage effects for many native groups).
High-skilled immigrants (e.g., those with college or advanced degrees) contribute disproportionately more, often generating innovation, patents, and higher-value output that exceeds native averages in similar brackets.
Low-skilled or less-educated immigrants may have lower per capita output initially, though their contributions rise over time with assimilation, and they still add to overall growth without substantially reducing native per capita GDP.
Critics of high immigration levels (particularly undocumented or low-skilled inflows) argue that adding large numbers of lower-income individuals dilutes average per capita GDP by increasing population faster than proportional output gains, especially when many enter low-wage sectors with limited upward mobility. Some analyses suggest mass low-skilled immigration reduces per capita GDP and productivity metrics for the average resident.
The consensus from major reports (e.g., National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) and economists is that immigration's net effect on long-run economic growth and per capita income for natives is positive but small (often 0.2-0.4% of GDP as an "immigration surplus"). The benefits stem more from workforce expansion and dynamism than from superior per-person output in every bracket. High-skilled immigration tends to yield clearer per capita gains, while very low-skilled inflows can exert downward pressure in specific contexts.
In summary, immigrants as a group punch above their population weight in GDP contribution, implying higher average per capita impact. Within comparable income or education brackets, outcomes are mixed but often show immigrants performing comparably or better in labor supply and productivity, with the overall economy benefiting from their presence.

Based on extensive research from academic studies, government reports, and think tanks, immigrants in the United States— including undocumented immigrants— consistently show lower crime rates compared to native-born Americans across various measures, such as incarceration, arrests, and convictions. This pattern holds for both violent and non-violent crimes, and it has been observed over decades, even as immigration levels have risen while overall crime rates have fallen.
National-level data indicates that immigrants are far less likely to be incarcerated than the U.S.-born population. For instance, a 150-year analysis of U.S. Census data from 1870 to 2020 found that immigrants have never had higher incarceration rates than native-born citizens, and since 1960, the gap has widened: immigrants today are 60% less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born individuals.d5b5a7 When comparing to white U.S.-born men specifically, immigrants are 30% less likely to be imprisoned.c94104 This disparity persists even among less-educated groups, where native-born men without high school diplomas have incarceration rates three to five times higher than comparable immigrants from countries like Mexico, El Salvador, or Guatemala.6ed432
State-specific studies reinforce these findings. In Texas, which tracks immigration status in arrest records, undocumented immigrants had the lowest felony arrest rates from 2012 to 2018 compared to documented immigrants and native-born citizens.156d83 Undocumented individuals were arrested at less than half the rate of U.S.-born citizens for violent crimes (96.2 vs. 213 per 100,000), drug offenses (135 vs. 337.2 per 100,000), and property crimes (38.5 vs. 165.2 per 100,000).bca57b For homicide specifically, undocumented immigrants were convicted 26% less often than native-born Americans from 2013 to 2022.a4b834 Similar patterns appear in other analyses: undocumented immigrants are roughly half as likely to be arrested for violent crimes overall compared to native-born citizens.9c89eb
At the community level, areas with higher immigrant populations often experience lower crime rates. For example, as the foreign-born share of the U.S. population doubled from 6.2% in 1980 to 13.9% in 2022, the national crime rate dropped 60.4%, with violent crime falling 34.5% and property crime declining 63.3%.2f08fb County- and neighborhood-level research shows no positive correlation between immigrant concentration and crime; in fact, increases in immigrant populations are linked to reductions in homicides, assaults, burglaries, and larcenies.1c2f17 Homicide victimization rates are also lower for foreign-born individuals (3.28 per 100,000) than for U.S.-born (5.60 per 100,000), though rates vary by country of origin, with some like Honduras showing higher victimization.d1c405
While some political rhetoric and isolated studies suggest immigration could increase crime—such as claims tying it to economic pressures or specific subgroups like recent unauthorized arrivals—the overwhelming body of evidence contradicts this.a35d38 Factors like fear of deportation, stronger family ties, higher employment among less-educated immigrants, and community networks appear to contribute to these lower rates.

https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg_439b1b99-99aa-4ab7-9703-ec284173358a

My original post: (which, despite your maps, is still true)

Red states are higher utilizers of federal funds.

Immigrants, on average, have lower crime rates than regular citizens.

When you realize all politics are theater, you'll let go of listening to what they tell you and focus more on why they are saying it.

-----
Great maps. I've seen them before. They're accurate. None of them contradict what I said.

You're all over the place with your arguments. Immigrants are actually huge contributors to the economy. Yeah, the Minnesota stuff is messed up, but please realize the entire government is corrupt. We're basically led by lying Satanist pedophiles and people willing to associate with them. That still doesn't change the overall contribution or lower criminality of immigrants.

Depends on your country. I'm the US, immigrant crime is low. It's the opposite in Europe.

The numbers are very clear in the US. Hispanics (most of our immigrants) are less criminal and less violent than the average non-immigrant in the US.

As for Oklahoma, we are a red state. 72% white. That the number you're looking for?

We are a drain on the federal budget.