Do you agree with GOP's nativist immigration policies

[HAL 9000 96]

Probably true, given the nature of their existence within the borders of the US. However, its not an immigration topic, rather an economical one. The premise is in having colleges and universities provide higher-caliber graduates (independent of immigration status) into the workforce and as a result, society.

It is an (illegal) immigration issue. ####### legislation like the DREAM Act is bad public policy. First off, it gives benefits to illegal aliens that are denied to US citizens (i.e.: lower in-state tuition rates to foreigners illegally in our country while denying those same rates to US citizens). Also, training illegal aliens to work illegally in the US workforce is rather moronic. It's on par with giving driving privileges to people that are in our country illegally. Whether they are present here and now in the USA is irrelevant. They are arrestable, detainable, and deportable under long standing US laws. They have absolutely no entitlement to be rewarded for breaking numerous laws of our country.

It disgusts me to no end that politicians whether Republican, Democrat, or whatever would pander to this illegal community and its cheerleaders for cheap votes or political gain when the negative effects of open borders is more than obvious.

Rewarding illegal aliens is a recipe for more and more of the same. Don't believe me? Just look at what 7 illegal alien amnesties have wraught since the first in 1986.

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Illegal presence hardly qualifies as legal residency in my dictionary. You are refering to a community that has no legal residecy and, as such, are arrestable and deportable. It is unfortunate that taxpayer funded community or state college takes it upon itself to piss away taxpayer moneys educating adults that have no legal right to this benefit. While the US courts have ruled that minor illegal alien children cannot be denied a public education...adult illegal aliens are a far different matter.

Your dictionary is not the dictionary that defines the physical residency of a person with respect to college tuition. Which so happens to be, again, the topic at hand.

Discussion of the merits of immigration status is well... related to the topic, and many universities require that their students be legal residents of the US. No debating that.

Show me where in the law where illegal presence = residency.

There are also cities that violate federal law by harboring illegal aliens and declaring themselves "sanctuary cities". That doesn't stop ICE one iota from arresting illegal aliens in their cities and deporting them.

Your definition of "resident" is a declaration with no merit or legal standing. If fact, it is against federal law to give benifits to illegal aliens that are not also available to US citizens. But like many other aspects of the illegal immigration issue, laws that should be enforced are not enforced and have not been enforced.

Knee-jerk again?

I did not state the law. I stated statutory rules for a person physically residing in a state would be able to claim residency in that state. US Immigration status is a federal, national realm, not a state issue. Sure, it doesn't stop ICE from doing its lawful job. But again, the discussion you deviated from once again had to do with higher ed institutions using local definitions to define people as eligible students for tuition purposes.

Hence, I really don't know where you get off on making baseless declarations, but I suspect it has to do with your predictable obsession with the theme that encompasses illegals- even though that is not what I am referring to in this thread.

[Heracles 417]

Perhaps these 'teachers' could inform you that these ESL students spend X amount of hours in regular coursework and Y amount of hours in ESL coursework. You can't be in two places simultaneously. This is called teacher rotation. ESL teachers get paid to be ESL teachers. They earn their paycheck just like English, Math, Science, etc, do. Claiming there are additional funds above and beyond other students is ludicrous since part of the investment that would otherwise go into providing these students with a full schedule goes into ESL instead. Again... these teachers should have been able to tell you that.

Furthermore, do look up funding rates at federal levels for pre-NCLB school districts (that supplement state funds that supply these districts, on top of county supplements). Federal funds that are depleted whenever an idiot in Washington wants to do something brash where he's not supposed to.

No money should be going towards educating illegal immigrant's children. If these kids are to attend a public school, their parent/s should have to pay for their child's education out of their pocket.

The country also needs to bring the laws into the 21st century and eliminate the anchor baby loophole. As have a lot of other OECD nations.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[dalegg 143]

This is really the most topsy turvy issue there is in my opinion. Immigration should be the number 1 issue for Democrats, not Republicans seeing how the jobs that are lost to most immigrants are the so-called "blue collar" type jobs. The CEOs of companies are not really at risk of losing their job to a foreigner who will manage their companies for 1/4 of their salaries.

Democrats have a really good opportunity here. They could accuse Republicans of not caring about illegal immigration because they are trying to allow corporations to suck up more profits since Republicans only care about corporations and not the average blue collar working joe who doesn't vote for them. But, its really not like that for whatever reason. They seem to embrace illegals the same as Republicans. One of these days the working class segmant of the Democratic Party is going to get fed up and revolt.

Yes, the National Security first segmant of the Republican party is angry about this issue too, but until an illegal actully brings a dirty bomb across the border, the issue is not going to be as personal as the Democratic Union member who has lost his $22/hour job.

[HAL 9000 96]

Perhaps these 'teachers' could inform you that these ESL students spend X amount of hours in regular coursework and Y amount of hours in ESL coursework. You can't be in two places simultaneously. This is called teacher rotation. ESL teachers get paid to be ESL teachers. They earn their paycheck just like English, Math, Science, etc, do. Claiming there are additional funds above and beyond other students is ludicrous since part of the investment that would otherwise go into providing these students with a full schedule goes into ESL instead. Again... these teachers should have been able to tell you that.

Furthermore, do look up funding rates at federal levels for pre-NCLB school districts (that supplement state funds that supply these districts, on top of county supplements). Federal funds that are depleted whenever an idiot in Washington wants to do something brash where he's not supposed to.

No money should be going towards educating illegal immigrant's children. The country also needs to bring the laws into the 21st century and eliminate the opportunity, loophole, of anchor babies.

If these kids are to attend a public school, their parent/s should have to pay for their child's education out of their pocket.

Someone here fails to understand the concept of a public school.

[HAL 9000 96]

This is really the most topsy turvy issue there is in my opinion. Immigration should be the number 1 issue for Democrats, not Republicans seeing how the jobs that are lost to most immigrants are the so-called "blue collar" type jobs. The CEOs of companies are not really at risk of losing their job to a foreigner who will manage their companies for 1/4 of their salaries.

Democrats have a really good opportunity here. They could accuse Republicans of not caring about illegal immigration because they are trying to allow corporations to suck up more profits since Republicans only care about corporations and not the average blue collar working joe who doesn't vote for them. But, its really not like that for whatever reason. They seem to embrace illegals the same as Republicans. One of these days the working class segmant of the Democratic Party is going to get fed up and revolt.

Yes, the National Security first segmant of the Republican party is angry about this issue too, but until an illegal actully brings a dirty bomb across the border, the issue is not going to be as personal as the Democratic Union member who has lost his $22/hour job.

Agreed. I do believe Obama and McCain have similar views that border enforcement needs to be a priority, but not an obsession. Obama may be that way for humanistic reasons while McCain for profitability reasons. Or not. They do differ on what to do about fixing the root of the problem, which goes farther beyond locking up the border. One favors doing something proactive while the other is content with doing nothing.

[IAMX 3,055]

I don't see how not clamping down on the current immigration crisis is an option, really. I want to be healthy, people coming in here illegally already tax the healthcare system, and bringing it to universal will just keep the trend going. If illegal immigrants are outright denied, it would be inhumane. So really we're stuck footing the bill until Republicans want to pull their heads out of their ### and allow universal, and Democrats pull their heads out of their ### and enforce/strengthen our immigration enforcement. The laws are already there.

It is not going to happen. No country can simply cover 20,000,000 for free. Yet the reality is that they will need to be covered under a UHC.

Keep in mind Australia spends over $60 billion a year to cover 21 million people.

Australia also just address the fact that they simply overspend in that category. Like any government department, there needs to be fiscal responsibility. I've paid pretty close attention to how big of the tax pie the health industry takes, and it's simply ridiculous, but the fault isn't the health care industry, it's the people who budget the money.

Here, we pay for the uninsured anyways, so what exactly will that change? No one is suggesting illegals get it, and no one is suggesting lazy people who don't want to ever work get it. It is paid through taxpayers, as in, you have to work, or have a damn good reason not to be, like maternal, education, or disability/age reasons.

There is a compromise that can be done, however, when both sides are looking at this with far too much an ideologue's terms, there won't ever be a solution, and so the health care problem will get worse, and worse, and worse. Keeping in mind that sick people around you make you sick as well. You're not suddenly immune just because you have insurance. You'll pay doubly for it.

[Heracles 417]

Someone here fails to understand the concept of a public school.

You cannot have your cake and eat it. Heck free stuff for all does not even work in socialist countries with 50% tax rates for all.

America is either going to start looking after its people or it's going to provide free access for all, at the expense of Americans.

PS the latter usually leads to becoming a poverty stricken 3rd world nation.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

Someone here fails to understand the concept of a public school.

You cannot have your cake and eat it. Heck free stuff for all does not even work in socialist countries with 50% tax rates for all.

America is either going to start looking after its people or it's going to provide free access for all, at the expense of Americans.

PS the latter usually leads to becoming a poverty stricken 3rd world nation.

50% tax rates? Are they getting their collective knobs polished with that?

As far as I know... there really aren't any socialist countries around to substantiate your claim.

But I do think that it can be done as long as priorities are realigned to work for the American people instead of for those in the 'upper crust' of society. The money is there.

[symbiosis 0]

Probably true, given the nature of their existence within the borders of the US. However, its not an immigration topic, rather an economical one. The premise is in having colleges and universities provide higher-caliber graduates (independent of immigration status) into the workforce and as a result, society.

It is an (illegal) immigration issue. ####### legislation like the DREAM Act is bad public policy. First off, it gives benefits to illegal aliens that are denied to US citizens (i.e.: lower in-state tuition rates to foreigners illegally in our country while denying those same rates to US citizens). Also, training illegal aliens to work illegally in the US workforce is rather moronic. It's on par with giving driving privileges to people that are in our country illegally. Whether they are present here and now in the USA is irrelevant. They are arrestable, detainable, and deportable under long standing US laws. They have absolutely no entitlement to be rewarded for breaking numerous laws of our country.

It disgusts me to no end that politicians whether Republican, Democrat, or whatever would pander to this illegal community and its cheerleaders for cheap votes or political gain when the negative effects of open borders is more than obvious.

Rewarding illegal aliens is a recipe for more and more of the same. Don't believe me? Just look at what 7 illegal alien amnesties have wraught since the first in 1986.

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Illegal presence hardly qualifies as legal residency in my dictionary. You are refering to a community that has no legal residecy and, as such, are arrestable and deportable. It is unfortunate that taxpayer funded community or state college takes it upon itself to piss away taxpayer moneys educating adults that have no legal right to this benefit. While the US courts have ruled that minor illegal alien children cannot be denied a public education...adult illegal aliens are a far different matter.

Educating illegal aliens costs an estimated $11 billion a year, but that is easily balanced against the $7 billion collected from them in SS alone, not to mention Medicare and other payroll taxes. An estimated 75% pay income tax because their employers are required to withold it, even if they're using a fake SSN. (see above Businessweek link)

Edited September 2, 2008 by symbiosis

[Heracles 417]

50% tax rates? Are they getting their collective knobs polished with that?

As far as I know... there really aren't any socialist countries around to substantiate your claim.

But I do think that it can be done as long as priorities are realigned to work for the American people instead of for those in the 'upper crust' of society. The money is there.

Well you need to travel to the various top 10 OECD nations. No free lunch in any of those nations. Hence their high standard of living.

[Heracles 417]

Educating illegal aliens costs an estimated $11 billion a year, but that is easily balanced against the $7 billion collected from them in SS alone, not to mention Medicare and other payroll taxes. An estimated 75% pay income tax because their employers are required to withold it, even if they're using a fake SSN. (see above Businessweek link)

Interesting considering that people being paid under the table pay no tax..

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[IAMX 3,055]

You can usually tell a person is trying to delude themselves when they suggest "free stuff". Because it if were free, why am I paying taxes for it?

Yeah. Nonsense.

[HAL 9000 96]

50% tax rates? Are they getting their collective knobs polished with that?

As far as I know... there really aren't any socialist countries around to substantiate your claim.

But I do think that it can be done as long as priorities are realigned to work for the American people instead of for those in the 'upper crust' of society. The money is there.

Well you need to travel to the various top 10 OECD nations. No free lunch in any of those nations. Hence their high standard of living.

I've been to 18 of the 30 members and previously lived in Spain, as well as currently live in the USA. I can tell the difference between wasteful spending on military contracts while ignoring basic healthcare needs for the population.

Educating illegal aliens costs an estimated $11 billion a year, but that is easily balanced against the $7 billion collected from them in SS alone, not to mention Medicare and other payroll taxes. An estimated 75% pay income tax because their employers are required to withold it, even if they're using a fake SSN. (see above Businessweek link)

Interesting considering that people being paid under the table pay no tax..

Interesting counter...

Who's got the notepad again??

[symbiosis 0]

Perhaps these 'teachers' could inform you that these ESL students spend X amount of hours in regular coursework and Y amount of hours in ESL coursework. You can't be in two places simultaneously. This is called teacher rotation. ESL teachers get paid to be ESL teachers. They earn their paycheck just like English, Math, Science, etc, do. Claiming there are additional funds above and beyond other students is ludicrous since part of the investment that would otherwise go into providing these students with a full schedule goes into ESL instead. Again... these teachers should have been able to tell you that.

Furthermore, do look up funding rates at federal levels for pre-NCLB school districts (that supplement state funds that supply these districts, on top of county supplements). Federal funds that are depleted whenever an idiot in Washington wants to do something brash where he's not supposed to.

No money should be going towards educating illegal immigrant's children. If these kids are to attend a public school, their parent/s should have to pay for their child's education out of their pocket.

The country also needs to bring the laws into the 21st century and eliminate the anchor baby loophole. As have a lot of other OECD nations.

the estimated cost of educating illegals is $11.5 billion annually, a sum they easily make up for in income and payroll taxes (of which they cannot legally claim benefits). Don't trust me, the Congressional Budget Office did a study in 2007.

50% tax rates? Are they getting their collective knobs polished with that?

As far as I know... there really aren't any socialist countries around to substantiate your claim.

But I do think that it can be done as long as priorities are realigned to work for the American people instead of for those in the 'upper crust' of society. The money is there.

Well you need to travel to the various top 10 OECD nations. No free lunch in any of those nations. Hence their high standard of living.

I've been to 18 of the 30 members and previously lived in Spain, as well as currently live in the USA. I can tell the difference between wasteful spending on military contracts while ignoring basic healthcare needs for the population.

Educating illegal aliens costs an estimated $11 billion a year, but that is easily balanced against the $7 billion collected from them in SS alone, not to mention Medicare and other payroll taxes. An estimated 75% pay income tax because their employers are required to withold it, even if they're using a fake SSN. (see above Businessweek link)

Interesting considering that people being paid under the table pay no tax..

Interesting counter...

what's the source on your counter?

The IRS says about 6 million illegals pay income taxes, that's about half the 12-13 million total. You need to check out some credible sourcing before spouting such nonsense.

Who's got the notepad again??

[HAL 9000 96]

Damn the CBO and the IRS... bunch of crooks!