One source of immigrants were African Slaves. Their importation was an economic GAIN for the country, through most such slaves did NOT think it helped them.
Another group that did NOT benefit from such immigration were Native Americans, those immigrants were taking lands from Natives till the 20th century. Now, most people on the frontier after after 1750 had been born in the US (or the American Colonies pre 1776), but a sizable number were immigrants from overseas. They replaced those pesty First Americans who just wanted to hunt buffalo with hard working farmers.
The US had an very advance set of rules regarding women in the workplace, till the Irish came in and undercut those practices starting in the 1830s. US skilled Iron workers were replaced by immigrants for the skill workers demanded higher pay and the employers refused to pay them.
As to your photos of successful immigrants, so what? There have always been cases of people being successful in any society and such individual success proves NOTHING. Individuals have always done well, even when the rest of society is dying. German industrialists did well under Hitler, does that prove Hitler was good for Germany? No. Werner von Braun became known as a top notch rocket scientist under Hitler, does that prove Hitler was good for Germany? Again NO. Kalashnikov was a top notch weapons maker, did that make the Soviet Union a good place to live? Again NO.
My point is you can NOT cite individuals when it comes to immigration, you have to look at groups. Most Economists are most concerned about the top 1% for that is who pays for their services (which is why most Economists hate Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes and Henry George, all three proposed three different sets of economic theories that work to a degree, but at the cost of the 1%). You have to remember spending is what drives any economy. For that reason if one person earned a billion dollars that earning has little affect on the economy. On the other hand a billion workers getting an extra dollar has a HUGE affect on the economy, for they will spend that billion dollars, and SPENDING money is what drives the economy, not holding it is a bank (or in a saving account or even paying off debt). Thus anything that cut wages on the law end of the economy has a HUGE negative affect on the economy, even if the 1% gets more then what the bottom lost. On the other hand. most economists work for the 1% and justify any increase to the 1% even when it hurts the economy as a whole.
Side Note: Karl Marx is now out of favor do to the fall of the Soviet Union. Karl Marx was correct on two things and wrong on a third. First Karl Marx demonstrated how classic capitalism will grow and then destroy itself (Karl Marx relied on Adam Smith and took Adam Smith's economic theory to their logical conclusion). Karl Marx has also been proven correct in how revolutions occur, the CIA follows Karl Marx's teachings to the letter when it comes to causing a revolution (or preventing one). Karl Marx's failure was trying to determine what will replace Capitalism. Marx himself says it will take 500 years to come up with a replacement, most Marxists did not want to wait that long so developed ways to speed up the process, the problem was you ended up with excessive bureaucracy and military spending, both of which ended up killing the Soviet Union.
Henry George is interesting, he advocated the taxing of real estate only (and NOT improvements on the Real Estate, just the land itself, i.e. the lot your home sits on, not the home itself). George is hated by the 1% almost as much as Marx, for the 1% knows when it comes to value of land, location is everything and George wanted to tax any value of the land produced by its location as opposed to improvements to that land close to 100%. George rationale was that such value was NOT a product of who owned the land, but what others did around it and since most such improvement was done by the State, the State should get the value of such improvements.
More on Henry George:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George
More on Keynes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes
= new reply since forum marked as read
