*Businesses are always paying the actual market rate for the work within the context of their sovereign operating model.

There, I fixed it for you. In a purely globally democratized and free market, wages would be perfectly aligned to market rates, but this isn't reality. In other words, your labor supply is artificially fixed to birth rates in that sovereignty.

The overall point is anyway moot because you could also make an argument that says "because we're not having enough babies and therefore labor is relatively short from previous decades, wages are artificially high...maybe we should create policies to increase birth rates?".

Point is - trying to correlate wages and immigration dynamics is a fool's errand. IMHO, immigration policies need to be considered from an overall market perspective and not an individual wage one. i.e. does immigration provide a net benefit to the economy and that sovereign society? Given how much illegal immigration is used in our food system in the US to keep consumer prices low, I think Americans equivocally believe some level of immigration is necessary to generate wealth for the middle class.

this is a naive statement

I mean that the market is distorted by legal and illegal immigration. Since this mostly affects blue collar workers it helps drive wage disparities ensuring the unskilled labor losses economical power. This group is now starting to wake up to its plight and voting anti immigrant and against traditional labour parties which have been co opted by the progressive university elite.

Which is a good thing. A business model that requires paying net wages too low to compete is just laundering slavery. People working those jobs are losing money.