Did you read the paper at all? You're argument doesn't really address anything they say. They cite research saying that the most important thing in retaining graduates is availability of jobs, not housing, city lifestyle, etc... And that since Boston produces so many graduates, it's unrealistic to think they're all going to stay, simply because there aren't jobs for all of them.
You're arguing a point that the paper isn't making.
You're arguing a point that the paper isn't making.
EDIT: Spelling