Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a small-government libertarian, are you okay with these small investments made in people (regardless of citizenship status) from an early age, so as to better guarantee they will need less assistance later on in life? I mean it's proven that higher education leads to higher income. Higher incomes means someone is less likely to need government assistance. Allowing more people to become better educated and therefore raise more people to an income that allows them to be self-sufficient is a positive for you?
Or, would you rather that no investment be made in people from an early age, thereby heightening their likely need for government assistance? Because then, under small government theories, there should be no social programs to help those in need. So, in this scenario, what do you propose society do to help those who cannot feed their families or provide sanitary living conditions for their families?
The main question I'm trying to ask, though, is this. We live in a country with social safety nets. Are you in favor of or against allowing your tax money to give someone money to attend college, regardless of citizenship status, if it means they'll likely need no/less assistance in the future?
Again, not attacking your viewpoints. Genuinely curious about your standpoint on this issue.
well, firstly im not in favor of the government having any of my money. so they cant really provide social assistance programs with my money if they dont have my money. my ideal world would probably involve some form of voluntary donation to help those in need or safety nets offered to those who choose to join a "governing organization." i dont support the existence of nations.
but maybe we should stop dreaming and talk about the real world where there is nations, taxation and poor people. i dont really see the need for subsidizing universities by the government being involved in higher education or subsidizing it. from what i can see, that just leads to people needing a bachelors degree for a minimum wage job. they are probably better off learning skilled trades and we should probably have a more diverse education system which can adjust to trends, technology and needs. that would probably be better driven through businesses/corporations and not government. the government is already the reason why the cost of higher education has skyrocketed and so many people are getting worthless degrees.
in my business, we do training/certification for our employees (employees to be). i remember years back i met with some guy from nyc who had some control over government money for education. the guy started talking to me about offering to pay like 3-4 times the going rate for training if i threw in some additional bs to the program. government is retarded.
Again you keep missing the point that sending these kids to school will keep them from being poor people. What’s the difference if we bring over educated people from Norway or just educate these kids who are already here and know no other life?
As an aside, both sets of my grandparents were “poor people” when they arrived as were the majority of our ancestors who emigrated here.
How did the illegal parents of these illegal kids, brought here as infants, manage to "survive" in the US as illegals?
Supposedly they all work, have a Tax ID number and pay taxes.
So, then, their kids, who were "brought here as infants" can, too.
They can get a tax ID number, a job, and work their way through college just like legal immigrants and citizens have to.
How did the illegal parents of these illegal kids, brought here as infants, manage to "survive" in the US as illegals?
Supposedly they all work, have a Tax ID number and pay taxes.
So, then, their kids, who were "brought here as infants" can, too.
They can get a tax ID number, a job, and work their way through college just like legal immigrants and citizens have to.
There is plenty of financial aid for citizens. Not all kids have to work their way through college and there’s no reason to think these kids won’t too. What do you want them do go pick blueberries after band practice and their prom committee meetings until they save $80,00 LOL? These are not shadow kids they are indistinguishable from any other high school high achievers except for the color of their skin. Many of them probably will work while attending, as 3.5 million is not a big enough pot to provide full scholarships (it is only financial aid). They’ve already shown their willingness to work hard as evidence by getting the grades required to get into college and to be eligible for this financial aid.
Again, to me the tone here seems more like vindictiveness then rationality. It doesn’t make sense to oppose a path for citizenship in my opinion. It doesn’t make sense to not want them to be as productive and contributing members of society as possible in my opinion.
It seems like very contradictory arguments here from the same side. On the one hand, we don’t want poor people who are going to suck up social service resources. On the other hand we’re going to oppose any chance they have to educate themselves so they’re not poor people. Again I think because people are so hung up on the “crime” of their parents (It’s actually only a misdemeanor by the way) they can’t see past “Someone must be punished”.
And the argument that this will only incentivize more to come seems to make sense, if you look at historically the numbers of people coming here illegally it turns out not to be the case. Again 2016 began with immigration at 50 year historic lows. The crueler and harsher we have gotten, the numbers have increased. All you have to do is look at the numbers and you can see that they’ve increased the harsher we have gotten. It’s never been harder to get here, yet the numbers of people trying to have never been higher. So quite obviously it’s not because they think it’s a piece of cake to come here and get on social services and college aid. So at some point maybe say that this argument doesn’t make play out in reality.
Again you keep missing the point that sending these kids to school will keep them from being poor people. What’s the difference if we bring over educated people from Norway or just educate these kids who are already here and know no other life?
As an aside, both sets of my grandparents were “poor people” when they arrived as were the majority of our ancestors who emigrated here.
Your premise is all wet.
Since when is sending children to school a cure for their becoming poor????
To assume all children that are given an edu will be wealthy enough to be independent and contribute to society isa fallacy especially in Nj given the success rate in many of our cities.
The link between edu and wealth is more of an association than a cause and effect. In theory is works, like most liberal fantasy versions of reality.
Any given individual can succeed and survive our edu system. As a generalization, sending kids to school to keep them from being poor people does not a panacea make. It is a hopeful start but not a forgone conclusion. Poor in the US constitutes being in the top 1% on a global scale.
At any rate, the conversation is not the value of an education, it is still about illegal entry and the economic and social consequences it forces. Especially at the volume of illegal aliens involved in the equation. If it were a dozen or so, not a problem, when it numbers into the thousands and millions, it becomes a crisis. when illegal aliens are baited into a concentrated area, like NJ, the problem of culture assimilation and cost to taxpayers is monumental.
The diff in bringing in educated vs uneducated is huge in terms of taxpayer cost and benefit to society. Ask yourself why other countries require immigrants to be self sufficient, have a skill and must learn to speak the language. I'm sure not one illegal alien has ever used a stolen ID.
Again, any individual may become a superstar despite obstacles.
Since when is sending children to school a cure for their becoming poor????
To assume all children that are given an edu will be wealthy enough to be independent and contribute to society isa fallacy especially in Nj given the success rate in many of our cities.
The link between edu and wealth is more of an association than a cause and effect. In theory is works, like most liberal fantasy versions of reality.
Any given individual can succeed and survive our edu system. As a generalization, sending kids to school to keep them from being poor people does not a panacea make. It is a hopeful start but not a forgone conclusion. Poor in the US constitutes being in the top 1% on a global scale.
At any rate, the conversation is not the value of an education, it is still about illegal entry and the economic and social consequences it forces. Especially at the volume of illegal aliens involved in the equation. If it were a dozen or so, not a problem, when it numbers into the thousands and millions, it becomes a crisis. when illegal aliens are baited into a concentrated area, like NJ, the problem of culture assimilation and cost to taxpayers is monumental.
The diff in bringing in educated vs uneducated is huge in terms of taxpayer cost and benefit to society. Ask yourself why other countries require immigrants to be self sufficient, have a skill and must learn to speak the language. I'm sure not one illegal alien has ever used a stolen ID.
Again, any individual may become a superstar despite obstacles.
Studies have consistently shown higher incomes with college education (but I'd be okay with financial aid for trades, too). I'm not going to argue points I've already argued, I just see it very differently than you do. I've seen firsthand the value they lend to a community. They've done a lot to revitalize Ocean City, which lost yearly population for the past couple of decades. The downtown stores were going out of business. Having immigrants move to town to work helped prevent that. It also helped businesses fill jobs that were getting harder and harder to fill due to the decline in year round population (the boardwalk stores were using agencies in Ukraine, Eastern Europe and even Taiwan to fill the jobs in the past decade or so, as American kids more and more don't need to work or rather do jobs that enhance college resume).
When immigration slowed in 2017, California crops died on the vines as they couldn't get anyone to pick them. There would be no one to pick blueberries right here in Hammonton. These are jobs that kill your back (if you ever see them they spend the entire day bent over) for pennies, and only last for 2-3 months. The factories in Mississippi that got raided recently lost 650 workers, and had only 200 apply to replace them. I won't surprise me if some don't just end up moving to Mexico or go out of business.
I feel illegal immigrants have been used as political pawns ("Hey don't look at what us rich guys are doing to rip you off, it's those POOR people who are the problem...BS). While I think we should have secure borders (the wall is dopey though), I don;'t think these kids again are a problem and I think they should be given a path to citizenship. And I have no problem giving them financial aid with taxpayer money. Again I think it's a good investment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
