Second, the "educated young person" was educated courtesy of the United States, not her country of origin. I agree with you somewhat that immigrants have a higher drive to succeed. But, how do poorer uneducated, possibly illegal immigrants fare in this regard vs. self-supporting well-educated immigrants who are better able to integrate easily into the mainstream?

I believe immigration is essential to keep growth going, and to keep various social support systems such as Medicare and Social Security solvent in the current state. However, there is the subtle question of whether that is accomplished by having control and a say over what type of immigration it is that we want, or by relinquishing any semblance of control in the matter. Any democratic society with a right to self-determination should be able to have a frank discussion and the ability to decide for themselves how they proceed on this.

I am myself a highly skilled immigrant (different country). It is convenient to be able to pick and choose, but this can end up in a kind of immigrant monoculture. I know of less skilled at the time of entry immigrants that have achieved more than me, by sheer passion and entrepreneurial spirit. Education is a good indicator but not the end all. Finally, this selection will work for first generation, what you get from the following generations is correlated perhaps, but not defined, and statistically as per my previous answer, the US got pretty good outcomes with minimal controls at the point of entry and with a pure aspirational system of values that self-selected success (big discussion now that we move on this and it’s relationship with generational poverty).