That's from Brookings and the data/conclusion is disputed by other sources

They're literally the most cited think tank in the world [0], and they're a highly trustworthy source [1].

How can you even pretend to discredit Brookings?

	▲	CGMthrowaway 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You misunderstand me. I'm not discrediting. I'm not one to dismiss data just because of where it comes from, without looking at its merits. My point was there are other credible sources that come to a different conclusion (e.g. net inmigration). Most official trackers still estimate positive net migration rather than a net outmigration. Over the last year or so, Brookings estimates up to -300K, while US Census estimates +1.3M, CBO estimates +410K, Goldman Sachs estimates +500K, and CIS estimates positive (in)migration. Does that clear up my comment?

IAmBroom 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Every fact is disputed by other sources. You are mudslinging with imaginary mud.

But then the word "throwaway" in usernames has become an indicator of this, lately.