<p>alopez, this is what I mean by not making general claims and not backing them up with anything resembling factual evidence, from your last post:</p>
<p>“Either way, we can all agree 37 percent and growing is very alarming.”
Please look at the posts by Finnlet, kmcmom, and Samurai. You are the only one that agrees with your statement. If you want to convince us you’re right, tell us why 37 percent should really be alarming.</p>
<p>“One long-term impact is that the grads that leave never return to the state of Michigan.”
Please prove that. Furthermore, please prove how this matters to the University of Michigan.</p>
<p>“So their children, which are very high potential with parent(s) of high socio-economic status, are never enrolled in Michigan high schools.”
Please prove why this is relevant.</p>
<p>“University of Michigan is in turn losing out on those high potential applicants. That’s just one long-term impact.”
A large portion of University of Michigan students are out of state. Being an out of state student does not prevent you from applying to Michigan, last I checked. Since you seem to be looking at the Michigan grads who move out of state, who you previously (likely correctly) presuppose are of high socio-economic status, those grads’ children can likely afford Michigan, and so the OOS tuition is not a deterring factor. So no, Michigan is not losing on these high potential applicants.</p>
<p>Even if they were, Michigan’s popularity (in terms of applications) is at an all-time high and set to continue moving higher. Losing out on some potential applicants doesn’t exactly hurt the applicant pool when so many other qualified students are ready to take their places.</p>
<p>I doubt you’ll respond to this since you aren’t interested in a reasonable discussion that isn’t incredibly one-sided, and it’s clear from this thread that your debating skills are indeed at high-school levels. Not surprising, of course.</p>