Yes, even though immigrants take in the most welfare
[1][2], have high unemployment rates
[3][4], and are empirically a fiscal drain on the economy of Sweden to the sum of 1.35% of the GDP
[5][6], not including resettlement costs (to put that in to perspective, that's a larger share of the GDP than the USA spends on the navy, and also keep in mind, most of these immigrants are young and are yet to burden the healthcare system as they age), these immigrants somehow, and unquantifiably, a "boost the economy"? How are they an "essential part" of an economy that they just came in to, which is bending over backwards to accommodate them?
And maybe you've had a change of heart and gone full capitalist on me, but
profits aren't all that matter. Even if immigrants were a "boost to the economy" (or really, a boost in arbitrary macroeconomic markers), the increase in crime
[7][8][9] and breakdown on societal cohesion and social capital that inevitably results from increasing racial heterogeneity
[10] more than outweighs the benefits.
The fact is third world immigrants
are not compatible with the West as their lower IQ and other innate biological differences prevent them from successfully integrating. Sweden is for Swedes, France is for French, and everyone should be able to live among their own kind in their ancestral country of origin. Especially since people of the same ethnicity share similar characteristics thus are more inclined to get along (no, it's not just "you look like me, therefore I like you" tribalism).