The Fraser Institute has released a study on immigration policy, but there's not much point in telling you its conclusions: the questions they ask are not worth answering.
- Costs: Expenditures made by governments
- Benefits: Tax revenues received by governments
This is curious choice for a libertarian think-tank. A framework in which taxes are unambiguous benefits is not something that the Fraser Institute would ordinarily adopt for policy analysis, and no attempt is made to explain why it is used here.
More egregious is the fact that the biggest benefits - the welfare gains of immigrants themselves - appear nowhere in the analysis. Moreover, the recommended policy agenda involves a welfare transfer from immigrants to those who are already here. The only people whose interests seem to matter are those who are in a position to refuse entry to Canada. This is just crude nativism. Birth in Canada is not an accomplishment that confers special privileges; it is a winning lottery ticket.
The costs of immigration are real, and should not be neglected. But a framework that looks at all the costs and only some of the benefits does not add to the public debate.