|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 8, 2011 13:42:32 GMT -5
Haven't really came up with a solution that's why I didn't comment too much on the problem. But I do feel that there would be sort of an upside down pyramid of preferential treatment when it comes to accepting students into higher education.
(top-bottom)
1. Minorities (Illegal Immigrants/Undocumented Youth )
2. Minorities (U.S. Citizens)
3. Caucasians (U.S. Citizens)
Like someone said it is different for though that were unwillfully brought here as youth by their parents but even still I don't think it is fair for them to reap greater benefits than those people who were born here.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 13:50:11 GMT -5
^^^I'm not sure I understand the point you're making here. My question was about listing the areas where you think the government needs to be assisting existing citizens, which I presume (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that you have already identified, hence your belief that its needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 8, 2011 14:00:27 GMT -5
Instead of focusing on illegal immigrants so they can "It would give an opportunity to undocumented immigrant students who have been living in the U.S. since they were young, a chance to contribute back to the country that has given so much to them and a chance to utilize their hard earned education and talents."
Focus on the current legal ciizens that are lacking higher education.
My argument is we are spending time ,energy, and money to make illegal immigrants legal and make them more advanced educationally. Spend that same time, energy, and money to reform schools, give more access to those that can't afford higher education. Not asking for freebies but fix the systems you have in place for U.S. Citizens FIRST before trying to create a system to help illegals.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Feb 8, 2011 14:35:51 GMT -5
I agree with RC.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 14:39:23 GMT -5
@ the bolded...2 points... 1- We either spend time, energy & money for them to become legal (which would happen whether it was via the standard naturalization process or the process proposed by the DREAM Act) or we spend time, energy & money to deport them...either way, the resources are being used 2- From reading the points of the DREAM Act, its not about educational advancement...its about providing a means for them to become citizens. It would grant them the opportunity to receive in-state tuition in the state in which they reside (just like any natural-born citizen), but that's its. They would still be paying to go to school (and wouldn't be eligible for federal assistance to do so). Instead of focusing on illegal immigrants so they can "It would give an opportunity to undocumented immigrant students who have been living in the U.S. since they were young, a chance to contribute back to the country that has given so much to them and a chance to utilize their hard earned education and talents." Focus on the current legal ciizens that are lacking higher education. My argument is we are spending time ,energy, and money to make illegal immigrants legal and make them more advanced educationally. Spend that same time, energy, and money to reform schools, give more access to those that can't afford higher education. Not asking for freebies but fix the systems you have in place for U.S. Citizens FIRST before trying to create a system to help illegals. |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Feb 8, 2011 14:48:39 GMT -5
@ the bolded...2 points... 1- We either spend time, energy & money for them to become legal (which would happen whether it was via the standard naturalization process or the process proposed by the DREAM Act) or we spend time, energy & money to deport them...either way, the resources are being used Isn't there another option? Revoke the ability to work, go to school, receive health care, etc and let them go back of their own volition? When the construction market crashed and jobs were no longer plentiful, many went back on their own, no resource intensive deportation necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 14:52:39 GMT -5
Now we BOTH know there will ALWAYS be somebody ready to head over to the Home Depot off Buford Hwy to get day worker(s) to do something around the house! LOL Revoke the ability to work |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 8, 2011 14:53:51 GMT -5
I beg to differ it is partly about education. "The purpose of the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act, also called the DREAM Act, is to help those individuals who meet certain requirements, have an opportunity to enlist in the military or go to college and have a path to citizenship which they otherwise would not have without this legislation" -http://dreamact.info/students
The point I am trying to make is instead of making new systems (DREAM Act) to help the illegals fix the ones in place. If the deportation system is not working find out why and fix it but no they try to circumvent it by creating the DREAM Act so now they have two possible avenues to citizenship. If you want to go to school or get in the military hey we have another easier way to help you gain citizenship. That is just ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 15:02:27 GMT -5
That "help" isn't financial...its essentially just making it legal (and actually a requirement in order to eventually obtain full citizenship) for them to attend college or enlist in the military. I beg to differ it is partly about education. "The purpose of the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act, also called the DREAM Act, is to help those individuals who meet certain requirements, have an opportunity to enlist in the military or go to college and have a path to citizenship which they otherwise would not have without this legislation" -http://dreamact.info/students |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Feb 8, 2011 15:03:05 GMT -5
Now we BOTH know there will ALWAYS be somebody ready to head over to the Home Depot off Buford Hwy to get day worker(s) to do something around the house! LOL Revoke the ability to work At Home Depot on Cascade they daggone near jump in front of your car! I hear you though. I agree that costs for many services are controlled by this "off the books" workforce. I was speaking of more full-time Jay has a W-2 and but Hernando does not for the same job, legit employer kind of work. |
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 15:09:06 GMT -5
At the end of the day, when you get rid of all of the propaganda & spin (from both sides), the DREAM was never about helping illegals...it was about helping ourselves. It doesn't fully address the immigration issues...it would have simply been a way to increase this nation's revenue base (at a time when we're cash-strapped) and increase the pool of potential military personnel (at a time when people are wary of enlisting).
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 8, 2011 15:17:10 GMT -5
I never said it had to be financial help just assistance but I agree it was never SOLELY about helping them but that is how they pushed it. Points can be debated on both sides the pros and cons.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Feb 8, 2011 15:17:37 GMT -5
We'll just have to agree to disagree Soror, it's def about helping illegals. It doesn't impact legal immigrants or people in the process of becoming citizens. The fact that the US economy benefits is a HUGE reason that this won't get fixed but this, along with birthright citizenship, definitely provide some rewards for bringing in and having children in the US, even if you as an adult are limited by your lack of proper entry.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 8, 2011 15:23:34 GMT -5
That may be a side effect, but it definitely isn't the purpose. Lawmakers weren't sitting in meetings talking about "what can we do to help illegal immigrants??" It was "what can we do to pay our bills?" Or "what can I do to make sure I get re-elected??" We'll just have to agree to disagree Soror, it's def about helping illegals. It doesn't impact legal immigrants or people in the process of becoming citizens. The fact that the US economy benefits is a HUGE reason that this won't get fixed but this, along with birthright citizenship, definitely provide some rewards for bringing in and having children in the US, even if you as an adult are limited by your lack of proper entry. |
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 8, 2011 16:11:30 GMT -5
... this, along with birthright citizenship, definitely provide some rewards for bringing in and having children in the US, even if you as an adult are limited by your lack of proper entry. now, THAT is true. As you know though, the impetus behind the DREAM act though, is to properly identify the party that broke the law and not punish the innocent child. If you think that the innocent child ought to be deported as well, then I can see why you're not beat for the act. |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Feb 8, 2011 16:23:14 GMT -5
Often the sins of the father do affect the child. I don't think you can separate the two when it comes to issues of immigration and deportation.
The guy in Cam's example is not innocent. He chose to drive without a license or with an illegal one. at 5 he was an innocent but he knew his status and decided that to maintain the lifestyle here he would take certain risks. The option being a sacrifical one doesn't mean that people don't have a choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 8, 2011 17:16:24 GMT -5
not for nothing, the guy in Cam's example would not have been protected under the DREAM act anyway. I'm not actually sure why he was used in the first place, lol.
It's like d9 orgs offering amnesty for renegades. You only think it's a good idea if you're willing to accept that the renegade's situation is not his fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Feb 9, 2011 12:32:08 GMT -5
Which example does not apply?
1. I'm confused about what the US needs to do to insure that citizens have greater access to higher education. There are 50-11 degree granting institutions out there SALIVATING at the antropomorphic mouth to help people get degrees. Immigrants arent taking American's spots in higher ed...
2. We don't want to do away with illegals any more than we wanted to do away with the paper check (prior to instant payment check readers) because we liked the two -three day float. Many industries are now dependent on illegal labor...many have W-2's (althought they have fake SSN's), many pay income taxes, all pay sales taxes, so they are a very important part of our economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 12:57:31 GMT -5
Yes they are taking away spots in higher education. I know for a fact at my school... Yeah they are important to our economy kind of like a necessary evil.On one hand we claim we can't live without them on the other hand they are here ILLEGALLY hello! Since the DREAM Act has not passed some states have taken it upon themselves to create laws allowing illegals to pay in-state tuition. So if Billy from AZ can't go to his fav. school in CA because he can't afford out-of-state tuition why does an illegal get to?
" Revenue would increase not only because of illegal immigrants paying out-of-state tuition, but also because schools would spend less money on verifying immigrant status."
In 1982, in Plyler v Doe, the Supreme Court decided that illegal immigrants and their children, although not citizens of the United States, are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. WTH.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Feb 9, 2011 13:12:02 GMT -5
I would like to see the data describing how many illegals are enrolled in American colleges and Universities and how that has negatively affected the enrollment or admission of citizens. These students, like Mario, are typically paying tuition in cash. Unlike citizens relying on financial aid, immigrants do not qualify for most (if not all) aid.
These people pay taxes in their home state so why shouldn't they pay in-state tution? If we want to argue the point about increased revenues, we can also point out to the fact that immigrants also have a higher graduation rate and since they don't qualify for student loans, they lower the default rate. So they are a triple threat....Not on financial aid, increased graduation rate, no default rate on student loans, plus they pay in cash.
If you aren't going to deport them then you must service them. That's the bottom line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 13:16:08 GMT -5
I will try to find some statistics. I agree fix the systems in place but I don't favor accomodating an illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 9, 2011 13:34:35 GMT -5
Yes they are taking away spots in higher education. after this sentence, I wasn't able to take anything else you said seriously. I thought I peeped a Plyler reference, so I'll probably try back later. |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 13:40:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 13:41:39 GMT -5
Yes they are taking away spots in higher education. after this sentence, I wasn't able to take anything else you said seriously. I thought I peeped a Plyler reference, so I'll probably try back later. And we all have our own opinion. You made yours and I made mine. |
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 9, 2011 13:47:23 GMT -5
after this sentence, I wasn't able to take anything else you said seriously. I thought I peeped a Plyler reference, so I'll probably try back later. And we all have our own opinion. You made yours and I made mine. and yours appear to based, at least in part, on wholesale anti-immigrant propaganda (as illuminated by your citation of mnforsustain and usillegalaliens.com; both notorious propaganda mongers). I'll never beef with anybody about how they feel, so long as it is actually how they feel. If, however, someone is simply spewing hate-lobby talking points without any objective citation, I don't mind pointing out the abundant logical fallacies in their "argument" |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 13:54:06 GMT -5
Yes I used two kind of old and not as reputable sources but there are others. I wasn't writing a thesis paper nor am I arguing for a client in court just throwing out some of the stats that popped up when I googled.
Before I even found the articles I had my own views. I live in a state heavily populated with immigrants so my views are my own based on the things I have seen.
As I stated there are stats and opinions that can be found on both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 9, 2011 14:01:55 GMT -5
I guess you're right. This is just an internet site, not a college classroom. Therefore, I suppose there's no need to back properly back up your claims in this forum. To that end, however, expect assertions based summarily on your anecdotal experience to be wholly disregarded by people who are actually informed on the subject. Still...if that's how you feel, I won't try take it away from you.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Feb 9, 2011 14:10:54 GMT -5
Which example does not apply? Oh, I was talking about the guy driving w/o a license. Once he was "convicted" of that, his newfound criminal record would have excluded him under the DREAM act. DREAMers would have had to be completely clean. |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Feb 9, 2011 14:19:57 GMT -5
^ Not necessarily he may still qualify if passed. It just says he has to have Good Moral Character (http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/78335.pdf) ; says nothing about having a clean background just states they need to pass a background check. If the warrant for tickets was not a felony it should be ok. dreamact.info/node/5262 |
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Feb 9, 2011 14:32:06 GMT -5
Which example does not apply? Oh, I was talking about the guy driving w/o a license. Once he was "convicted" of that, his newfound criminal record would have excluded him under the DREAM act. DREAMers would have had to be completely clean. I don't think the second offense would have disqualified him but a third definately would have. Maybe a failure to appear might have disqualified him if we assume the bill would have passed while including that specific language about the crimes. Republicans wanted it to be more restrictive and many Democrats wanted to exclude some charges like certain traffic violations. |
|
