<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve got 1,833 notifications. I’m notified every time someone comments on a thread I’ve commented on, so I don’t check the notifications, I check the thread if I’m interested in keeping up.</p>
<p>@LakeWashington </p>
<p>LOL</p>
<p>That’s a well supported parallel you’re drawing. I doubt you adequately grasped my “tone” through a single sentence statement on an internet forum.</p>
<p>OK, then my apologies.</p>
<p>Just so you know Bay, you can change the settings so you’re only notified when someone responds directly to you, or on a thread you created. It’s more useful that way, I think. But perhaps you’re already aware.</p>
<p>
Grow up. No one is disputing the achievements of these kids. The issue is that these kids are illegally residing in the country.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They can go to college in a country where they can legally reside. My kids also didn’t ask to get dragged all over the world. They’ve spent more of their lives outside the US than in it. No doubt they would love to go to college in some of the countries we used to live in, but they no longer have legal residency there. They would have to apply as int’l applicants.</p>
<p>Whenever I go to the US Embassy, I can overhear visa interviews for people who are applying to get a tourist visa, student visa, work visa. These people are playing by the rules. Why are they being thrust to the back of the line? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t see any insults about the author’s accomplishments. Please point them out.</p>
<p>@GMTplus7 </p>
<p>I already asked this, but if something is illegal does that automatically make it wrong? So whether something is legal or illegal is how you measure its morality?</p>
<p>
What “path” is that? The lottery?</p>
<p>Yes, I believe there is a lottery included in the annual immigration queue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, and in countries that provide free or cheap publicly funded higher education, they don’t give it away to people who are in their country illegally. </p>
<p>Bay</p>
<p>The entire premise of the thread is insulting. Its basis is that the author was simply admitted for having a “compelling back story.” That claim (albeit in the form of a question) disregards his probable academic merits. The thread also suggests that his acceptance was not fairly earned due to his immigration status.</p>
<p>@GMTplus7 </p>
<p>You ignored my question concerning legality’s relationship with morality, likely because it is problematic to your argument.</p>
<p>And my comment that education should be free was directed at someone who is here legally, anyways.</p>
<p>
Lovely place. That’s why no one an bear to leave. Hoards of Canadians crossing the Canadian border OTOH. </p>
<p>“The congressionally mandated Diversity Immigrant Visa Program is administered annually by the Department of State. Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides for a class of immigrants known as “diversity immigrants,” from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States. For fiscal year 2015, 50,000 diversity visas (DVs) will be available. There is no cost to register for the DV Program.
Applicants who are selected in the lottery (“selectees”) must meet simple, but strict, eligibility requirements in order to qualify for a diversity visa. Selectees are chosen through a randomized computer drawing. Diversity visas are distributed among six geographic regions and no single country may receive more than seven percent of the available DVs in any one year.
For DV-2015, natives of the following countries are not eligible to apply, because more than 50,000 natives of these countries immigrated to the United States in the previous five years:
Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China (mainland-born), Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, South Korea, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and Vietnam.”
<a href=“http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/DV-2015-Instructions-Translations/DV_2015_Instructions.pdf”>http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/DV-2015-Instructions-Translations/DV_2015_Instructions.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>music,
Everyone admitted to Harvard has a compelling back story. And discussing their academic merits is irrelevant, because they are all top notch. Besides, it was the author himself who made a big deal about his backstory and didn’t say a peep about his academics. Perhaps you should stop assuming the worst in peoples’ motives. You may end up with high blood pressure.</p>
<p>I wish we could all get along like we used to in middle school… I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy… </p>
<p>Of course, just bcs something is illegal doesn’t make it automatically immoral. There’s no argument there.</p>
<p>It’s illegal for stores to sell liquor on sunday in some states. If I want to buy a sixpack, I need to drive across the border to get it. No moral dilemma. </p>
<p>
Seem like a wacko comment. I never mentioned anything immoral. How about this? if there is one billion Chinese or Indian kids at the border to California, should we let them all go in?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well of course not, because Canada is ranked higher than the US!</p>
<p>What point are you trying to make? That people from any country not ranked as high on some scale should be able to walk into the US and be eligible for everything available to US citizens? Is that what you want?</p>
<p>I understand that some people do want that. They want open borders everywhere.</p>
<p>Bay</p>
<p>Haha maybe you’re right, in some aspects. I strongly disagree with children being punished for their unfortunate circumstances, but I will give it a rest for right now. I think this argument has been exhausted.</p>
<p>I’m all for open borders as long as gov’t provided benefits are limited to people who legally residing. Otherwise, it’s not fiscally sustainable. </p>