I was speaking case specific to the reality of the country in question.  I don't believe in free anything from the state. 

There is always a cost to state welfare.
And it is primarily used as a hook for control and exploitation disguised by philatrophic virtue signalling.

What I was implying is that welfare policy affects immigration value.  The less welfare the more beneficial the immigration.  The more welfare the more parasitic the immigration.
 

 If a hardworker makes a good salary and spends it all to support lazybones family members who hang around at the park whistling at girls all day. Did you have net positive or negative immigration value?  Thats the question in more words.