California - Bill to Fund College for Illegal Immigrants - STUPID

We've had discussions about this before, so I don't know if people have the stamina for another round:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=197196

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=195914

My position is I think it's probably a good long-term pragmatic decision. Illegals won't just disappear just because you don't educate them. Since they're going to be around, you want to make them as productive as they can be.

 

I'd be curious to know what currently educated illegal immigrants are doing. We still don't allow them to get jobs, so they aren't going to working higher paying white collar jobs. If they are ending up in the same jobs as the uneducated illegal immigrants, then it does seem like a silly use of taxpayer dollars to subsidize that education when you could instead pay for something else.

 

Agreed.
Either 1. They take their free education and go back to their native country . . thank you America
2. They get a job they over qualified for . .
3. this is nothing more than a gateway to Amnesty or In a few years they will argue that illegal status cannot be used as a 'discriminator' for hiring. The 'most qualified' should get the job regardless of immigration status . . or some such.

I do not see how the common American benefits from this.
Increased competition for jobs
Decreased opportunity for American kids to get funds
Increased tax burden on the state . . . .

Can someone explain what the Common Tax Paying American Citizen benefits from this? If there is no benefit to the American Citizen . . then why do it?

Rocket River

 

I agree with everything you say, I think this is a stupid law, but I have to slightly disagree with you.

The theory, I think, is that if the person IS educated, they might eventually become a "Common Tax Paying American Citizen" rather than a poor person sucking on government funds.

The caveat is: we should be using these funds for our own citizens and not citizens of other countries.

 

"illegal"(a subjective term given the historical background of the US's imperial acquistion of nearly half of mexico's land for dirt cheap) or legal- denying education to those who fullfill the requirements to attend upper level learning instiutions is not the way to go about fixing the californian economy.given the state of the US economy we should in general, be spending far more money in education. The fed could manage its recources far better, one thing that sticks out to me is defense. A third of the national budget goes into defense( another 3rd to social security, and another 3rd goes to misc.), we are in the buisness of dropping bombs and being the largest exporter of arms in the world.

Yet How much do we spend on educating our people?

I do think there should be strings attached to those grants given, such as giving incentives for those "illegals" to stayin the country, find a decent paying job, and pay yearly taxes.

 

They wouldn't be illegal immigrants if immigration law and policy didn't make it illegal for them to migrate here.

 

what about their kids, anywhere from 15 t0 early 20s ? A family member of mine, when he came here at age 17 didn't speak a word of english, now he is a chemical engineer. I'm sure that's the situation in many household of undocumented americans from the Americas who now reside in North America.


Everybody has the right to be in debt! :grin:

 

Didnt Perry sign something like this in Texas? I know illegal immigrants qualify for in state tuition now.

 

Two points:

1. That's sort of the question I'm asking. How did your family member go from 17 yr old illegal immigrant to chemical engineer? What was the process of becoming a citizen?

2. The second question then becomes a matter of resources. Is "illegal immigrant -> engineer" a common story? If so, then this bill is probably a good idea. If not, does it make more sense to spend that money on a different population?

If we had unlimited resources, I think everyone would agree this is a good idea. But in a time of universal budget cuts, the key is spending money where it can have the biggest impact.

 

so you wanna open the borders and let everybody and their mom in?

this bill is an f'n joke.

 

Not to that absolute, but borders should be as open as possible. The government shouldn't be manipulating labor markets and depriving people of the freedom to be mobile, and they shouldn't be hindering trade between our neighbors with immigration policy. The United States has one of the most complex immigration policies of any nation in the world.

 

Agreed. Even as a democrat this doesn't make sense.
I support benefits, especially MONETARY benefits, for citizens, not illegal immigrants.

 

The freedom to be mobile? That is not a right. The US has every right to do whatever it wants with its labor markets. Illegal immigration in my opinion hurts more than it helps.

 

*Beats head against table*

 

Which should tell the moderates and republicans that the long term benefits of an educated populace are more important than their middle-class or nativist outrage. Certain segments of society need to stop viewing college as the insurance policy for their enhanced socioeconomic status and more as the public resource it was meant to be.

 

I disagree. People have the right to do as the please as long as they don't prevent another from doing the same. The government is supposed to be the arbiter when that occurs. They don't have any right to manipulate labor markets because labor isn't theirs to regulate, nor have we given them the right to do so.

 

What? In the entire history of the world, your version of government has never been reality. Governments have always regulated who is and isn't in their country - because part of the function of government is to govern society. You can't govern if you don't have any ability to control who is or isn't in the country.

And yes, we have always given government the right to manage labor markets: child labor laws, minimum wage, licensing for various professions, etc.