and, just for the record.

if you're going to cite him or his work.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216

the way i would put it is that the error that the bourgeois press makes, often on purpose, is that it cites statistics that are true broadly for immigration in the context of debates that are specifically about low wage workers, and even more specifically about low wage workers from south and central america that migrate into the country over the mexican border. in the process of doing this, they skew the data, and often badly, as it simply doesn't make sense to use data about people coming from europe or asia to study in the universities and then apply it to people coming from mexico to farm the fields. if the source that you're reading or citing just talks about "immigration" as a uniform thing, without trying to separate into types of immigration, then it's glossing over data, and probably intentionally.

the issue with wage depression is very specifically applicable to workers in specific sectors, and you need to make sure your sources are being honest about it, if you want to make an honest argument, yourself.