'Not an American city anymore?' Critics call NYC ‘a disgrace’ for being 40% immigrant, yet it’s thriving like never before: Report
For a city built on arrivals, immigration isn’t a threat, it’s the very foundation of New York’s identity and resilience, says report
- Jul 8, 2025,
- Updated Jul 8, 2025 11:06 AM IST
When right-wing commentator Matt Walsh wrote on X that “NYC isn’t an American city anymore by any reasonable definition of the term,” citing that 40% of the city’s residents are foreign-born, he called it “a tragedy and a disgrace.” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller chimed in soon after, claiming, “NYC is the clearest warning yet of what happens to a society when it fails to control migration.”
But Bloomberg’s analysis says their argument falls apart when stacked against the city’s own history.
“Their insinuation that this is something new is… ridiculous,” Bloomberg noted. “New York City’s foreign-born share was higher in the 1800s and early 1900s than it is now, and has risen only slightly over the past quarter century.”
In fact, “the city’s most troubled era in living memory… came after immigrants fell to just 18.2% of the population in 1970,” the report said. “The subsequent decade was a time of high and rising crime, falling employment and fiscal crisis.”
“By almost every measure (economic indicators, health outcomes, crime rates), New Yorkers of all backgrounds are much better off now than they were in the 1970s,” Bloomberg added.
Nationwide data also complicates the anti-immigrant narrative. “It’s not just in New York where high immigrant populations have gone hand in hand with good times and low immigrant populations with struggles.”
And when immigration drops? “Cities in what came to be known as the Rust Belt had some of the highest foreign-born shares in the mid-1800s,” Bloomberg said. “Now, despite modest gains… most are in the single digits.”
Citing a 2022 American Economic Review paper, Bloomberg added: “Immigrants… tend to congregate in and around the country’s most productive, most expensive cities… making the US economy a bit more productive and all of us, on average, better off.”
For Walsh and Miller, Bloomberg concluded, their response “appears to have mainly been grasping for talking points.” Their claim? “That more immigrants equates to more-leftist politics.” The reality? “Immigrants do lots of different things. Destroying American cities just isn’t one of them.”
When right-wing commentator Matt Walsh wrote on X that “NYC isn’t an American city anymore by any reasonable definition of the term,” citing that 40% of the city’s residents are foreign-born, he called it “a tragedy and a disgrace.” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller chimed in soon after, claiming, “NYC is the clearest warning yet of what happens to a society when it fails to control migration.”
But Bloomberg’s analysis says their argument falls apart when stacked against the city’s own history.
“Their insinuation that this is something new is… ridiculous,” Bloomberg noted. “New York City’s foreign-born share was higher in the 1800s and early 1900s than it is now, and has risen only slightly over the past quarter century.”
In fact, “the city’s most troubled era in living memory… came after immigrants fell to just 18.2% of the population in 1970,” the report said. “The subsequent decade was a time of high and rising crime, falling employment and fiscal crisis.”
“By almost every measure (economic indicators, health outcomes, crime rates), New Yorkers of all backgrounds are much better off now than they were in the 1970s,” Bloomberg added.
Nationwide data also complicates the anti-immigrant narrative. “It’s not just in New York where high immigrant populations have gone hand in hand with good times and low immigrant populations with struggles.”
And when immigration drops? “Cities in what came to be known as the Rust Belt had some of the highest foreign-born shares in the mid-1800s,” Bloomberg said. “Now, despite modest gains… most are in the single digits.”
Citing a 2022 American Economic Review paper, Bloomberg added: “Immigrants… tend to congregate in and around the country’s most productive, most expensive cities… making the US economy a bit more productive and all of us, on average, better off.”
For Walsh and Miller, Bloomberg concluded, their response “appears to have mainly been grasping for talking points.” Their claim? “That more immigrants equates to more-leftist politics.” The reality? “Immigrants do lots of different things. Destroying American cities just isn’t one of them.”