Some more data about how immigrants don’t significantly inhibit wage growth.

https://ucalgary.ca/news/nobel-winner-david-card-shows-immigrants-dont-reduce-wages-native-born-workers

While the native of Guelph, Ont., has written too many high-impact papers to mention here, economists often associate his name with two landmark, highly influential studies, which we all learn in graduate school.

The first, which examines the effect of minimum wages on unemployment, has received much attention in the wake of the Nobel announcement. So let’s focus on the second, in which Card combined a clever technique with data generated by a unique historical event to credibly answer how large-scale immigration from a poor country affects the wages of native-born citizens.

More data

https://theconversation.com/nobel-winner-david-card-shows-immigrants-dont-reduce-the-wages-of-native-born-workers-169768

https://cdhowe.org/publication/parisa-mahboubi-no-immigrants-arent-stealing-jobs/

Indeed, a successful immigration policy is not necessarily about increasing the working-age population, but rather ensuring that more people are able to participate in the work force to fill the vacant jobs without negatively affecting the outcomes of the existing work force.

Evidence shows not only that an influx of immigrants has limited or no adverse impact on wages, at least in the medium or long term, but an inflow of highly educated immigrants can reduce wage inequality since these immigrants tend to be competing with highly educated native-born individuals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_immigration_to_Canada

In a 2007 study, economists Abdurrahman Aydemir and George Borjas found that a 10% increase in the supply of workers within a specific education–experience group may reduce that group’s wages by around 3–4%.[135] However, these results should not be interpreted as a universal 4% drop for all Canadian workers whenever immigration rises by 10%, since Aydemir and Borjas were examining group-specific wage impacts. Statistics Canada has likewise noted that overall wage effects of immigration in Canada tend to be relatively small, with more noticeable impacts confined to particular skill segments or regions.[136]

In part because of the credential issue, many immigrants are forced to find work below their education level and at lower wages. However, even for doing work of the same skill level, immigrants are much less well compensated than their native born counterparts. Immigration scholar Jeffrey Reitz calculated that in 2001 native Canadian employers were benefiting from, and immigrant employees were losing out on, between $2 and 3 billion per year due to this imbalance.[137] A study published by Statistics Canada reviewed data from 1991 to 2010 regarding the convergence of wages between immigrants and native-born Canadians. The study found that there was a convergence of relative earnings for immigrants. Immigrant men’s average annual wages were 86% of those of native-born men in 2010, up from 76% in 1991.[138]

There are a number of possible explanations for why newcomers earn less than native Canadians in the same jobs with the same skills. Lower hourly wages might be an indication that the labour productivity of immigrants is lower, and employers thus have reason to pay them less. New workers are also less familiar with the Canadian labour market and will thus not be able to maximize their salaries. Employers will also be less familiar with an immigrant’s background and thus less willing to offer the same salary as to a native.[139] Due to lower mobility, they do not access better-paying jobs, such as in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/economic-impact-immigration-cuts-1.7362448

“If it was not for the population growth that we had last year, the Canadian economy would have been in a recession at the end of 2023,” said Charles St-Arnaud, chief economist with credit union group Alberta Central.

With more people coming to Canada, more money is being spent overall, he said — even if each individual has been spending less as they feel the pressures of a more sluggish economy.

This one is about the US but same findings

https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/revisiting-immigrations-effect-us-wages-and-employment

Immigration is not costless. Short-run adjustment costs, local labour market frictions, and non-labour-market margins such as housing and public services remain legitimate concerns. However, our results show that the claim that immigrants depress wages and reduce employment opportunities for natives, especially less-skilled ones, is not supported by the empirical evidence on the impact of immigration over the last two decades. The complementarity between immigrants and natives, and the large inflow of college-educated immigrants, combined to produce positive wage effects for less-educated US-born workers. These suggest that cutting immigration further would not help low-income Americans; rather, it may hurt the economy as a whole, as well as the job and earnings prospects of that group.

https://www.ppic.org/publication/immigrants-and-the-labor-market/

Although debate remains, the vast majority of economic studies find that immigration has little or no effect on the wages of the average American worker. A recent PPIC study estimates that in California, immigration between 1990 and 2004 caused a 4% real wage increase for the average native-born worker. Most agree that low-wage native-born workers face the most competition with immigrants because, on average, these populations have similar skills; yet most studies that focus on the impact of immigration on low-wage workers find zero or very small adverse effects on wages.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-labour-market-effects-of-immigration/

https://www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/immigration/collins-immigration-myths

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/20/business/economy/immigration-economic-impact.html