<p>I know Berkeley is poor and that they NEED MONEY.
To make up for that, accepting unworthy international kids and espeically more transfers???
Comon now...What would that make other students who were previously here?</p>
<p>trolley trolley</p>
<p>I know one international student who is a total ditz. She is like dumb blonde but asian.</p>
<p>i always thought it was REALLY hard to get in as an international student, meaning we only accepted the best of them?</p>
<p>hds is funnies</p>
<p>apps were just submitted…</p>
<p>hds is mad because international students are stealing all his learning.</p>
<p>can you spell correctly first? </p>
<ul>
<li>Transfer who pays the same amount you do</li>
</ul>
<p>that would make students who are previous here to have a higher GPA… ok?</p>
<p>there are a lot of them at Cal</p>
<p>I’m international, and I’d like to think I’m not dumb or stupid…</p>
<p>Sometimes these generalisations are so pointless, you know?</p>
<p>Obvious ■■■■■ is obvious.</p>
<p>Most internationals are very well equipped for Cal. </p>
<p>They be pushing the curve up :(</p>
<p>Well according to international site threads I have seen, it mostly goes like this…
Berkeley is a safety school. It is perceived as being even more safety school now b/c berkeley is accepting 1000s of kids from abroad now just b/c school is god damn poor.</p>
<p>Yeah, last year alone Berkeley accepted several million internationals.</p>
<p>After gotten in, you all have to compete on equal footing, right? If they are so dumb, they will be kicked out. It will all work out at the end, I suppose?</p>
<p>that’s not how it works</p>
<p>Well I don’t think Cal will randomly kick people out for getting 1+ GPAs.
Besides, you’d be surprised at the number of internationals that are good. Hypothetically, if Cal accepted the top 1% of internationals in the past and the top 10% of internationals now, the standard is still going to be high. Not as if they’ll start admitting ■■■■■■ and morons anytime soon.</p>
<p>PRIVATIZE! 40 grand a year for anyone who qualifies for being taught beyond the name. Utilize a special counsel to deal with admissions. Use CHS and CCC transcripts, AP, SATs as a formal guideline and not the deciding factor due to way too many discrepancies. For the ones that don’t know how the university functions or even researches then they would be put into seminar style classes for education of the system prior to admissions. </p>
<p>It is the fairest thing to do and the chancellors from UCB and UCLA know this. The students in general would benefit and it’s only political hogwash and a marketing scheme that California has relatively cheap tuition. It affects being able to manage such a large institution plus financial aid packages would increase.</p>
<p>The only negative outcome would be to native Californians’. Due to self entitlement many have contempt for the master plan and take way too much for granted so let them get a dose of reality instead of being overly protected and a burden on the system as a whole.</p>
<p>I personally don’t see any point in privatizing, and only teaching the people that would be accepted if they limited it to a Harvard sized freshman class for much more money, when you can teach those same people at the same high level, plus thousands of other people at that level. </p>
<p>If you increase the price by that much, you’re hurting the people in the top 10% by making them pay much more, and you’re hurting everyone else by excluding them from the university.</p>
<p>If you would keep roughly the same number of students and then charge them 4 times as much as we’re paying now, that would also be unacceptable.</p>
<p>o good grief, more accusations with such little basis. Sorry, but you do not know me or my personality to any degree to intuit such a conclusion through a written medium. I do not want to get into another petty debate nor play some childish blame or psyche out game.</p>
<p>I have a lot of respect for ramblinman and sincerely disagreed with him with no ill intent. My disagreement was more based on the state of the economy, politics, education currently and not the principles he shared. I truly believe if he has the time and interest and actually does watch some of the videos he would have something interesting to say. I am not a sarcastic person which I find unbecoming and a behavioral flaw in ones personality and tend to be quite grim and matter of fact although flawed myself. He actually engages with maturity, thought and consideration towards others and humbly request that you do the same.</p>
<p>If you were right by me you would witness that I am a very relaxed straight foward easy going guy even when I posted. I have the right to establish boundaries with another person and make such a request. His behavior reminds me of when I visited some chat rooms which is why I made the reference. I find it disgusting but some people seem to get off on it and do find many of comments uncalled for. </p>
<p>I truly don’t understand the lack of courtesy and respect many seem to show each other online these days which I find tragic. I think it is a form of cowardice to be able to feel safe hiding behind a computer and insult others when I have my doubts that these same people would have the gonads to be so bold and foolish in the physical world outside of the internet. </p>
<p>My hope is that people will use the CC forum for a more positive platform of exchanging ideas and experiences so that we may learn from each other instead of being at each others throats. I just don’t find what you are posting contributing to the discussion or opening up the door towards something constructive. You are entitled to your opinion but would much prefer feedback related to the subject at hand. I’m not interested in the sort of gang like mentality I have witnessed here nor debating petty matters that can’t be proved. Please at least try to understand what I’m saying and maybe even attempt, even just a little bit, to contribute to bringing more joy into the world instead of pain.</p>