<p>Why is it that when someone takes an opposing position they are labelled ‘haters’ by the other side? I never understood that, and given that I am reasonably intelligent, I assume it takes an esoteric explanation. Anyone care to enlighten me?</p>
<p>If they serve in the armed forces, they may be able to use the new GI Bill, which is very generous.</p>
<p>“Why is it that when someone takes an opposing position they are labelled ‘haters’ by the other side? I never understood that, and given that I am reasonably intelligent, I assume it takes an esoteric explanation. Anyone care to enlighten me?”</p>
<p>They are projecting their animosity of all internal turmoil that someone with a conservative predisposition has. They aren’t hating the real “issue” - they are hating themselves.</p>
<p>Psychology 101 isn’t esoteric.</p>
<p>Why is it that when someone takes an opposing position they are labelled ‘haters’ by the other side? I never understood that, and given that I am reasonably intelligent, I assume it takes an esoteric explanation. Anyone care to enlighten me?"</p>
<p>They are projecting their animosity of all internal turmoil that someone with a conservative predisposition has. They aren’t hating the real “issue” - they are hating themselves.</p>
<h2>Psychology 101 isn’t esoteric. </h2>
<p>huh, I thought the liberals were calling the conservatives “haters” of immigrants?</p>
<p>
I’m a conservative and I defy anyone to call me a hater of immigrants.</p>
<p>But let’s not get political lest the thread get pulled. I’m learning a lot.</p>
<p>
Would you want your daughter to marry one?</p>
<p>
If they were in love. I would make very clear that I would kill him if he ever tried to take their children out of the country and away from my daughter, though.</p>
<p>Remember, I’m the person who has had people who happen to be illegal immigrants living in her house (with my daughters!) at least 8 times over the course of their lives.</p>
<p>parent1986,</p>
<p>Do you have a degree in psychology? I took Psych 101 but don’t remember learning that those who label others “haters” actually hate themselves. </p>
<p>I have never called anyone a hater, but I have hated myself on more than a few occasions after finishing off a bag of Hershey’s kisses.</p>
<p>I didn’t expect or intend this to be a political discussion; if we are talking about the psychology of hate, I assume it is okay (?)</p>
<p>
Bay,
I am guessing perhaps you hated (for lack of a better word) what you did, the choice you made, the behavior you engaged in, or the lack of self control you felt, but I doubt you really hated yourself. </p>
<p>And yes, I have a degree in psychology ;)</p>
<p>And apparently some public schools are offering aid as well. These schools get state and federal funding, so it is the taxpayers business.</p>
<p>=======</p>
<p>Jym…which publics are giving these int’ls tax-payer funded aid? If they are giving them donor-supported scholarships, then that’s not the tax-payers business. Just like it’s not the tax-payers’ business if a state school gives an OOS student a scholarship that isn’t funded by that state’s tax-payers.</p>
<p>I don’t know where they are pulling the funding from, but if they accept any tax dollars they should, IMO, be held to a higher standard.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I really disagree with this view. Many public universities are now getting quite modest amounts of state funding, not nearly enough to equal the value of the huge tuition discount that in-state residents enjoy. The states are getting more than they’re paying for. At my undergrad alma mater, for example, the state chips in $300 million a year, and for that the 17,000 in-state undergrads are getting a tuition discount worth $25,000 per student per year. If you do the math, that means state residents are getting $425 million in tuition discounts each year for an investment by the state of $300 million–a one-year return of 42% on the taxpayers’ money. But it doesn’t end there; because the University chips in an addition $130 million in need-based and merit-based grants and scholarships out of institutional funds (i.e., these are not state-funded grants or scholarships), of which the vast majority goes to in-state residents. If even just $100 million of the $130 million total is going to state residents, that brings the total of direct financial benefits to state residents up to $525 million per year–a 75% return on the state’s investment each year. And of course, that doesn’t even begin to count all the taxes generated by the University’s payroll and the $1 billion or so the University spends on research each year, most of it spent in-state, or the ancillary jobs and spending in research firms that have co-located to be in close proximity to the University, or in businesses providing goods and services to the University and its students and employees, or . . . The list could go on and on. Add it all up, and the economic benefit to the state is in the billions annually; all in return for a modest annual taxpayer investment of $300 million, which amounts to about 7% of the University’s budget, at a cost per capita of about $35 to each of the state’s residents. </p>
<p>When you’re that small a funding source and you’re getting so much in return in direct and indirect benefits, I don’t think you’re in a position to tell the University how it should be spending its own money. And fortunately the citizens of my alma mater’s state had the foresight to set things up in a way that legally forecloses the kind of political interference you seem to be advocating. The University is older than the state, which ever since its first constitution and down to the present has recognized the University as an autonomous state entity, accountable to its own Board of Regents, who are statewide elected officials accountable ultimately to the people—not to the legislature. The legislature’s only constitutional responsibility with regard to the University is to make annual appropriations to help support it, something the legislature has not exactly done an impressive amount of in recent years. The Regents, not the legislature, are ultimately responsible for deciding how to spend the University’s money, including what its tuition policy will be. If the voters don’t like it, they can vote the regents out of office. But it’s no business of the legislature.</p>
<p>By the way, my alma mater currently has a policy of charging state residents who are undocumented aliens out-of-state tuition, but the student government just adopted a resolution calling on the University to charge a uniform tuition rate for all state residents whether they are citizens, legal resident aliens, or undocumented aliens. The students see it as a question of basic fairness. So do I.</p>
<p>Regardless of the percentage, you consider $300 million a <em>modest</em> annual taxpayer investment??? :eek:</p>
<p>
because some are so convinced that they are right, that anyone having an opposing opinion just has to be a “hater” or a “racist” because if they weren’t then they would have to agree with their views. The so called tolerant ones are not so at all…just tolerant with those who think like they do.</p>
<p>It is a risky investment on the part of the undocumented students to go to college. Many hope that one day, the immigration policy will change and the fact that they went to college will work in their favor towards citizenship. Citizenship is the goal.</p>
<p>Fun times in Guatemala City:</p>
<p>[Photo</a> of the Day: What in the world? - BlogPost - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/photo-of-the-day-what-in-the-world/2011/12/12/gIQA8LZvpO_blog.html]Photo”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/photo-of-the-day-what-in-the-world/2011/12/12/gIQA8LZvpO_blog.html)</p>
<p>La Chureca (which must translate as “hell”)</p>
<p>[Life</a> of a Scavenger ? Photo essay from Managua, Nicaragua](<a href=“http://www.jansochor.com/photo-essay/life-of-a-scavenger.html]Life”>Life of a Scavenger (Managua, Nicaragua))</p>
<p>Children at play:</p>
<p>[Work</a> in the garbage dump, Nicaragua | Jan Sochor Photography Archive](<a href=“http://latin-america.photoshelter.com/image/I0000oP6NEGcweSA]Work”>http://latin-america.photoshelter.com/image/I0000oP6NEGcweSA)</p>
<p>I know, I know…</p>
<p>Sylvan,
What is your point? That the world is unfair and that it is incumbent on Americans to allow every disadvantaged person in the world unfettered access to our country, so we can make it up to them?</p>
<p>A related issue which keeps cropping up in this thread is WHO (if anyone) should be eligible for in-state tuition rates:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1304070-outmoded-have-different-state-out-state-tuition-rates.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1304070-outmoded-have-different-state-out-state-tuition-rates.html</a></p>
<p>Another option is to have 3 rates. A third rate for immigrant students, slightly more than instate tuition. The Republican House in my state legislature turned this down after the Democratic Senate passed it.</p>
<p>
I don’t think that sounds quite right… </p>
<p>;)</p>