Election 2005

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Wycoff
It's not the illegals state, either.

So? We have decided to extend our largesse to them... which is our prerogative.

In fact, it's more "my state" than it is theirs. I've consistenly been here contributing for six years. Have they? I don't really mind paying out of state tuition, so long as the rules are consistently applied. This is a case in which the standards are not being consistently applied.

You're here for university; that the only reason you're actually in the state at all. They're here because they actually live in the state.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


1) They live here, more than a college student who could move anywhere in the country when he's done lives here.

Not true. Illegal immigrants are notoriously rootless, especially those in agriculture. College students at least spend 7 months a year in Virginia; most of them spend more.

2) Illegals are way more likely to need in-state tuition than a citizen.

Red herring, as in-state tuition isn't need based. If it were, then maybe I would receive it.

3) It's our state, we can do what we want with it. Once more, if you don't like it, no on forced you to come here.

The exact same thing can be said to illegals.

[Kuciwalker]

The exact same thing can be said to illegals.

Exactly. It can. We, however, choose not to (or would choose not to). Who are you to complain?

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker You're here for university; that the only reason you're actually in the state at all. They're here because they actually live in the state.

That's stupid for two reasons. First, many illegals don't live exlusively in Virginia. They're at least as migratory as college students. They could be in Virginia for 6 weeks, North Carolina for 4, Tenessee for 3, etc. Second, Virginia has a vested interest in attracting the best and brightest students to their schools, as many students who go to those school will actually decide to stay in Virginia after they graduate (as I am preparing to do). Adopting a policy that alienates these students is not in the state's interest, as the state is driving away potentially valuable citizens.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

The exact same thing can be said to illegals.

Exactly. It can. We, however, choose not to (or would choose not to). Who are you to complain?

Someone with a vested interest in the state and its education system.

[Ramo]

So do I. I'm also paying any tax taken from payrolls, because I'm a legal employee (whereas most illegals are getting paid under the table)

Y'all have state payroll taxes?

Why don't I get in state tuition?

You apparantly didn't fulfill the residency requirements first and have a part time job. You generally have to work a full time job for a year to become a resident (that's what my sister had to do before going to UT).

If your parents moved to VA while you were in high school, then graduated (as is the case with these illegal immigrants), you'd pay in-state tuition (that has been my case at UT).

Incidentally, the laws in other states require illegal immigrants to apply for legal residence to get in-state tuition. So they wouldn't be paying any less taxes than you. And their parents contributed (and are probably still contributing) to VA, while your parents did and are not.

[Ramo]

FWIW, I think the in-state/out-of-state disparities are stupid. But not allowing kids who have been in a state for a few years, and graduated from that state's high school in-state tuition is even worse.

[Kuciwalker]

Someone with a vested interest in the state and its education system.

Except you don't actually give us anything. Your education is already subsidized - you're claiming we don't give you enough? I repeat, go to university in your own state if you want in-state tuition.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Someone with a vested interest in the state and its education system.

Except you don't actually give us anything.

Not only do we give VA a significant amount of money in tuition, sales taxes, payroll taxes, volunteer work, etc., a large number of us stay after graduation and contribute to Virginia. I'm not complaining that Virginia residents get instate tuitions, I'm against allowing one otherwise unqualified group of people get instate tuition while other equally unqualified groups don't get the same benefit.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Ramo

If your parents moved to VA while you were in high school, then graduated (as is the case with these illegal immigrants), you'd pay in-state tuition (that has been my case at UT).

If only my parents had snuck illegally into Virginia, hid out, and worked illegally in the state for some indeterminate amount of time. Could have been days, for all the state knows. Then I could have gotten in state tuition. Great!

Incidentally, the laws in other states require illegal immigrants to apply for legal residence to get in-state tuition. So they wouldn't be paying any less taxes than you. And their parents contributed (and are probably still contributing) to VA, while your parents did and are not.

That's a different case. If the state evalutes the person's situation objectively and he's in the state legally, then I have no problem.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
The difference here with Prop 75 is public employee unions are a closed shop. You have no say. You gotta be a member of the union to keep your job. There is no requirement to investing in a company.

Furthermore corporations make donations from profits while unions do so from dues. Dues are taken every month from the paychecks of the workers. The shareholders only pay the previous owner for their share. The profits that are used don't flow from that share.

Not all public employee unions are closed shops. Mine happens to be...but those employees who don't sign union cards are not union members but are "agency fee payers" and pay only 2/3 of what members pay. And none of their fees go to political matters. Plus, any member can opt out of having their union dues go for political matters.

And members do have a say regarding the spending of the dues. One, they elect the leadership. Two, they vote on the local's expeditures. Everytime I fly up to Sacramento, I need a vote saying I can spend the money to do so.

Those members who say we're using their dues without their permission, either (a) did not show up the the meetings or (b) voted with the losing side -- most probably (a).

BTW: In the last two Presidential elections, corporations outspent unions 24 to 1. A "Yes" on 75 would have reduced opposition to corporate domination to a hint of a whisper. I really have no desire to live in a plutocracy.

[Ramo]

If only my parents had snuck illegally into Virginia, hid out and worked illegally in the state for some indeterminate amount of time. Could have been days, for all the state knows. Then I could have gotten in state tuition. Great!

Not an indeterminate amount of time. At least three years.

And if you were in that situation, you'd need in-state tuition a lot more. You would be far poorer, and you wouldn't get any federal financial aid.

That's a different case. If the state evalutes the person's situation objectively and he's in the state legally, then I have no problem.

Objectively, in general illegal immigrants who satisfy the requirements in the bills debated are more worthy of in-state tuition than out-of-staters who come for college. Since their parents paid plenty of taxes to VA and they have roots of at least three years in VA, while that's not the case for out-of-staters.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Ramo
Objectively, in general illegal immigrants who satisfy the requirements in the bills debated are more worthy of in-state tuition than out-of-staters who come for college. Since their parents paid plenty of taxes to VA and they have roots of at least three years in VA, while that's not the case for out-of-staters.

I'm wondering how they will prove 3 years uninterrupted residency. I'm guessing that few illegal immigrants have actually been in residency in Virginia for 3 uninterrupted years. That is a good standard if it is actually applied (putting aside the debate of whether illegals should be rewarded with amnesty)... but I get the feeling that it will be a requirement that simply gets ignored.

[Ramo]

They graduated from VA high schools. If you spent half of every year in Mexico, that'd be rather difficult.

And at least three years. That's the federal rule. States can have a longer requirement (most probably do).

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Ramo
And if you were in that situation, you'd need in-state tuition a lot more. You would be far poorer, and you wouldn't get any federal financial aid.

You Dan S'ed me.

Again, that's a red herring. In state tuition has nothing to do with income. Bill Gates' kids would get instate tuition if they were Virginia residents.