<p>Moderator’s Note:</p>
<p>Non-education political comments will continue to be deleted.</p>
<p>Yeah they deleted mine too…</p>
<p>Our educational system is being cut left and right. </p>
<p>We can’t help everyone educationally. We have to help ourselves educationally before we help others so that we can maintain a position to help in the future. </p>
<p>There is not enough money in our education system to pay for everyone. We MUST give preference to some group of students to stay fiscally afloat. Who is that someone going to be? CA students?</p>
<p>There, no mistaking/denying it. This post was about education :p</p>
<p>EDIT: Hahaha oh you are a mod… Hi :D</p>
<p>From post #59
“BUT, doesn’t that mean they have a falsified social security number or taxpayer identification number?! - People with false legal documents are NOT ok in my book.”</p>
<p>I agree. How sad that a well-intentioned policy can stray so far from what is right, and in the name of EDUCATION.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, a person can have an SSN/ITIN number without being a legal immigrant, resident, or citizen. Examples would be those who were legally in the US with work visas and their dependents, but whose work visas have expired. Or those who have SSN/ITIN numbers because they were foreign dependents of someone paying US income tax.</p>
<p>To me, ‘legal resident’ includes those over here on work visas.
We have tons of those here in Silicon Valley, some on the path to U.S. citizenship, some planning to return to their previous country.</p>
<p>While my main point is I disagree with this scheme in the first place, I also just can’t understand adding to government bureaucracy - now in particular - since it will require bureaucrats to “check up” on many details including the one just posted, that students must have attended past 3 yrs in CA high schools. This is a large state with millions of residents and even that paperwork will be a burden on taxpapers.</p>
<p>I wish California had a part-time legislature; THAT would be an improvement!</p>
<p>“… that students must have attended past 3 yrs in CA high schools. This is a large state with millions of residents and even that paperwork will be a burden on taxpapers.”</p>
<p>It’s actually on the HS transcript for adcoms to review, a few additional seconds per applicant for the adcom, no taxpayer burden, no additional bureaucrats involved.</p>
<p>^^Actually, not even a “few seconds” required by an adcom. The applicant lists all high schools attended and courses taken on his/her online application. The UC computer in the sky can count years of attendance in a Calif HS. Moreover, the apps are automatically sorted by instate and OOS.</p>
<p>I’m seeing a lot of what looks like excuses amongst the scorpions in the bottle here. California high school kids - wherever they were born - are not the enemy. If they’ve lived here for years, with their families working and paying taxes in California, they should have every bit as much claim on the diminishing benefit California taxes provide to our Universities as any other California family. Comments like
are an excuse, plain and simple. Whether or not some kid’s parents have a false federal document has no more relationship to whether California provides a discount to them as a California taxpayer than whether or not some kid’s parents have a DUI or don’t mow their lawn. Those things can be as “NOT ok” with you as you like, but they’re not actually a rational reason for discriminating against those kids in this way.</p>
<p>The parents of high school and college age kids shouldn’t be fighting amongst ourselves over the table scraps. We should be questioning why our society has apparently decided that the education of all of our best and brightest is of so little importance to our society that it’s no longer worth paying taxes for.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The voters in California should look in the mirror, since they have mandated that other budget items are higher priority.</p>
<p>It is so easy to agree with Kluge. All it takes is having a thread centered on education.</p>
<p>Not fair, Xiggi! I’ve always agreed with your argument that gas taxes should have been much higher in the past! :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you mean by “our?” ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True dat! And I have agreed with you about the actions of the vigilantes along the border. </p>
<p>Perhaps we could start a movement to tax (to death) the gas-guzzlers and the fancy weaponry used by the rednecks who patrol the border to reimburse the UC system for its largesse. How about the Amnesty Tax Act. :)</p>
<p>Where I live in Ca., the city is approximately 35% Hispanic while the public schools are around 70% Hispanic. I don’t know how many of the students are illegal, because those statistics are not collected. Because of severe budgetary problems, teachers are being laid off and the number of school days have been cut. I also believe close to 90% of the Hispanic students are eligible for the free lunch program. I don’t know the answer to the illegal alien problem in Ca., but to suggest it isn’t having a tremendous impact on the state’s fiscal situation or hasn’t affected communities in other profound ways (gang crime) is naive.</p>
<p>If you would study the dream act you would understand its focus. It will allow for PRIVATE funding to go towards their tuition. Not our tax money. Do you know the amount of taxes that they do pay but cannot get because they do not have a real social security number? Billions of unclaimed tax money that the IRS is sitting on. I don’t know why you guys are getting upset over the dream act. I was born here and I dont find it offensive. One of my friends is just like these kids. He graduated valedictorian and got a full ride to a top state school but could not go because he is not documented. A lot of states are pushing for the dream act and im all for it. </p>
<p>I also know that if you are low income and a citizen, they help you as much as they can with tuition costs. With grants, scholarships and low interest loans or differed interest loans.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If he lived in CA, he’d get to go for free if his family makes less than $80,000. And yes, payment for his tuition would include tax-payer dollars.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UC Blue and Gold Opportunity is not a full ride; it is just a “top off” that makes the total grant financial aid at least as high as UC systemwide in-state tuition. Living expenses, books, and campus fees may or may not be covered by grants.</p>
<p>wow that might change things for the campus!</p>
<p>Yes, the Blue and Gold plan is not a free ride. It covers tuition only, and that does not include all of the associated fees. We are able to take advantage of that this year, and we are still having to cover another $15K for housing, etc.</p>