[random314]

This unfairly discounts the immigrants that California attracts , while counting folks who leave. To be consistent we must look at population growth as a whole, possibly split by age group. California will typically attract younger folks looking for work.

[deep-root]

Well said. CA immigrants paid ~$50bn in taxes in 2018, ~50% naturalize, a million are business owners.[1] Almost 40% of Silicon Valley is immigrants. Half of all immigrants that come to the US land in California. Most from Asia and Europe.

On paper this is an exceedingly productive population, and represents 25% of California.

[1] https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigran...

[rayiner]

It discounts international immigration in from every state, so California isn’t especially penalized in that regard. It’s not unfair—all it does is separate the question of what makes a state a good destination for international immigrants (which involves very specific factors) and the question of what makes a state a desirable place to live for Americans who have unrestricted choices about where to live.

[random314]

Discounting international immigration from every state is obviously unfair. United States is a country built by immigrants.

It is true that most American states are unable to attract immigrants. However, they do reap the benefits from the powerhouse states that keep America competitive in the global economic sphere.