<p>
</p>
<p>I know you weren’t addressing me, but I think I should answer also, since I just brought up $. I do not argue primarily from a fiscal position, myself. I argue from a philosophical position – with respect to the mission of UC and to the issue of the unenforced immigration situation, in which the federal gov’t, and large portions of the US population, seem to be in sustained denial. However, others on this thread have brought it up as a rationalization for an exceptional definition of residency. So I’m challenging the “harmlessness” argument, which doesn’t apply in 2010 meltdown economy, statewide and nationally.</p>
<p>Out of excuses already.</p>