Going over my ballot, I hit a stumbling block. One of the questions is attached to the Dream Act, wherein illegal child immigrants, whose parents are filing income tax, may get in-state tuition.

I did a lot of research on this, but I just can't quite get my teeth around it.

It does seem just that a person who pays into the system via income tax get at least some of those benefits from paying in, but it's more just if people don't break the law in the first place, and helping them like this seems to be encouraging illegal behavior.

It would seem to be charitable as well, but as charity goes, this seems like something of a half-measure.

I'm all for having an educated workforce, and it would seem to be good for my community, but reducing the cost increases the competition, which will push out children like mine.

Of course on the news it seems to be a question of just charity vs. justice. That's also something I struggle with. We have the laws for a reason. We can't afford to just let every Joe and Sam come into the US. We have immigration laws for a reason and no one is arguing otherwise. Things like this, while charitable, seem to be undermining those same laws, not to mention encouraging illegal behavior.

I know this is sort of a post without a point, but I suppose my thoughts are muddled, and I was wondering how other people feel about the whole mess.

Well, simple problem once you understand and decide the law is bad/wrong/unhelpful.

In the same way, it was against the law to harbor a run-away (I prefer the term liberated) slave. They were property, property law is clear.

I would flout that law anyway.

Further, to be a lawrbreaker historically (not nearly enough currently) required a mens rea (or guilty mind), that is a there needed to be intent and understanding.

Hence, these children who were brought here often at ages so young there was no idea of nation and many young enough not to have no more purity of mind than to say "I do what may parents say"...

So there is no crime.

But some of these people are fully aware of what they're caught up in (I've met a few of them). And more to the point, what we're talking about is higher education. It's not basic health or medical care. If the question is 'should illegal immigrants be provided emergency medical services', or even preventative medical services, I think the answer is obvious. But the question is, should they be given reduced costs for school (and in doing so, push out other kids who are not here illegally).

And of course, it still doesn't address the fact of incentivizing bad behavior.

The choice of being here illegally is likely not the child's, but the parents' no?

Hopefully in having an illegal immigrant's child attend a post-secondary institution you are enabling your society to have a now legal (would they be legal at some point now?  How does that work in the US)  AND educated individual to contribute to that society.

I have some level of ignorance on the details here so you'll have to excuse me on that.

By the way, you really shouldn't be saying Illegal Immigrants.

That's like calling someone a fag or a N-word.  It's not at all an okay thing to say and it's meaningless.

They're under-documented immigrants or undocumented immigrants.

Again, it is not "bad behavior" to seek opportunity.

It is not "bad behavior" to work and pay taxes.

It is not "bad behavior" to get an education.

To the degree that enrollment is both meritocratic, as well as, socially leveling (i.e. affirmative action), is it not "bad behavior".

What is bad behavior is to maintain a marginalized, criminalized class of people.

I ALWAYS preferentially rent my apartments to underdocument people and their family.  I ALWAYS preferentially hire under document workers.

I consider it an ethical and moral imperative to do so.

In the same way, back in the day, I would be part of the Underground Railroad.

If they're attending college, they aren't kids any more :) I don't think there's any question about elementary or high school. But college is a special thing, for adults, that most Americans don't manage to get access to.



I see your message and raise you:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/06/...immigrant/index.html

It's not a slur, and the proposition is patently ridiculous. I'm talking about people who have migrated to this nation in violation of the law. It's perfectly appropriate. "Undocumented migrants" is not, because there are people who are here legally, but not properly documented, and I"m NOT referring to them.

(WIll have to continue tomorrow.)

Just did some (light) research on this and it seems like in some very specific cases the term is not approppriate, but in the context of this discussion it seems like the perfect description.

There's a lot of difficult questions about illegal immigrants (meaning people who are here after immigrating illegally), but this doesn't seem to be one of them.

If someone is willing to admit they are an illegal immigrant going to college, get them a student visa. Student visas are comparatively easy to get. Once they have one, and have documentation that their parents have been paying state taxes for the requisite number of years, give them in-state tuition. After they get out of college with legal status, they can work their way up through the green card chain to citizenship.

I went to grad school with mostly foreign students. They said the student visa was indeed easy to get, and every one who wanted to stay after graduation managed to do so legally. Their biggest problems were the exorbitant costs of the college admission process and moving.

Oh please. Check it out.

It is NEVER okay to call a group of people something they don't want to be called.

It is NOT okay to call people of colour, ...coloured people, blacks, negros, etc.

It is NOT okay to call people of asia, "Orientals"

Please show me this "research" that lead you to "conclude" this name is EVERY appropriate?

In reply to Revolutionary (msg # 10):

Let me be abundantly clear here.

If someone says "Illegal Immigrant" again and that is "allowed" without moderation. IMMEDIATELY remove me from this community.

In reply to hakootoko (msg # 9):

LISTEN...

This is more bullshit

meaning people who are here after immigrating illegally

NO, many people are here on expired visas.  So there is no "after" where they came here "illegally"

And, from now on, I will call you, Hakootoko an "Illegal driver" , and "Illegal This"
and an "Illegal that"

check all your alls privilege DAMN!

Can't be bothered because then you'll require me to jump through some other hoop to satisfy a mysterious offense.  I'm not buying what you're selling.  However, is it somewhat less offensive to refer to them as individuals who have immigrated illegaly?
This message was last edited by the player at 01:06, Tue 23 Oct 2012.

In reply to Doulos (msg # 13):

Oh really, what am *I* selling?

I very much hope you get a "reminder" not to be RUDE.

You're little game of "advancing" a stawman prediction is not cool at all.

Anyways, onto the topic at hand.  I think that Hakootoko's suggestion is actually a pretty good one, though I am obviously not one that is able to comment on the intricacies of such a suggestion.  Be curious to see what katisara thinks on it!