Minor changes are by default collapsed in the page history.
No changes
The page does not exist yet.
Failed to load changes
Version by on
Leave Collaboration
Are you sure you want to leave the realtime collaboration and continue editing alone? The changes you save while editing alone will lead to merge conflicts with the changes auto-saved by the realtime editing session.
American Immigration: Origins, Shifts, and Consequences
This page explores the legislative, demographic, and fiscal history of immigration to the United States—from the Naturalization Act of 1790 to the post-1965 Hart-Celler paradigm shift—integrating findings from recent economic impact studies and Census projections.
Historical Foundation
- 1790 Naturalization Act: Limited citizenship to “free White persons of good character.” - 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act: First significant federal restriction targeting a specific ethnic group. - 1924 Johnson-Reed Act: Capped immigration by nationality to preserve historic U.S. demographics. - 1965 Hart-Celler Act: Abolished quotas; shifted focus to family reunification and skills, radically altering immigration origins.
*Note: The “Give me your tired…” poem was added to the Statue of Liberty in 1903 by Emma Lazarus, 17 years after the statue was gifted. It was not part of the statue’s original meaning.*
Demographic Projections
Scenario
2060 US Pop.
Change vs. 2017
Working-Age Ratio
Immigrants Needed to Maintain Ratio
Current Trend
404 million
+79 million
2.5:1
n/a
Stabilization
354 million
+29 million
2.2:1
n/a
Maintain Ratio
706 million
+381 million
3.0:1
5× more than projected
- 95% of U.S. population growth by 2060 will come from immigration and their descendants.
- Raising the retirement age by two years has the same effect on dependency ratios as all projected immigration.
Fiscal Cost of Immigration
Immigration and the Fiscal Burden on the Dutch Welfare State
The 2023 report Borderless Welfare State presents a comprehensive analysis of immigration's impact on Dutch public finances. Between 1995 and 2019, immigration—including the second generation—incurred a net fiscal cost of approximately €400 billion. Projections indicate that, if current patterns continue, this figure could exceed €1 trillion by 2040.
This cost arises from increased per capita spending on education, healthcare, social security, and justice services for immigrants, combined with lower average tax contributions. In 2016 alone, the net fiscal cost of immigration peaked at €32 billion.
Source: *Demo-Demo Publisher (Netherlands)* Date of Publication: *2023* Author(s): *Jan van de Beek, Hans Roodenburg, Joop Hartog, Gerrit Kreffer* Title: *"Borderless Welfare State: Immigration and the Sustainability of Dutch Public Finances"* DOI: N/A Subject Matter: *Immigration policy, fiscal sustainability, welfare state, demographic projections*
Total Net Cost (1995–2019): €400 billion 2. Projected Cost by 2040: Exceeds €1 trillion if trends continue 3. Annual Fiscal Cost in 2016: €32 billion 4. Second Generation Still Net Negative: Despite education improvements 5. Cito Score Correlation: +€20,000 per 1-point increase
Only labour migration yields positive fiscal returns. Other categories—study, family, asylum—are net burdens.
Motive
Labour
Study
Family
Asylum
Estimate A
125000
-75000
-275000
-475000
Estimate B
125000
-75000
-275000
-475000
2. By Region of Origin:
Western migrants contribute marginally, while those from Islamic and African regions are highly negative. Japan/NA/Oceania immigrants are highly positive.
Region
Western (avg.)
Non-Western (avg.)
Japan/NA/Oceania
Morocco
Horn of Africa/Sudan
Estimate A
25000
-275000
200000
-550000
-600000
Estimate B
25000
-275000
200000
-550000
-600000
3. Demographic Pressure:
Maintaining current dependency ratio would require a population of 100 million by 2100.
Strengths of the Study: - Includes second-generation effects - Clear cost modeling by motive & origin - Connects fiscal performance to educational scores
2. Limitations: - No cost breakdown by sector - Limited modeling of non-fiscal outcomes
3. Suggestions for Improvement: - Disaggregate scores by family structure - Add enforcement cost modeling - Compare against control group baselines
- Demonstrates the structural fiscal unsustainability of mass immigration - Highlights the value of selective, skilled migration with native integration - Useful for countering myths about second-generation economic assimilation
Compare these fiscal trends to France and Sweden 2. Estimate cultural cohesion loss alongside fiscal cost 3. Track welfare dependence by cohort length and generation