Undocumented students

Discussion in 'General Education' started by Caesar753, Feb 22, 2017.

  1. Caesar753

    Caesar753 Multitudinous

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,471
    Likes Received:
    2,488

    Mar 8, 2017

    If we are legitimately making this comparison, I would talk to my cheater about the benefits of not cheating, but I would also recognize that his cheating is legitimized, at least to me, because the results would be literally life-saving. Literally that. As for the other students, we would have the "fair is not always equal" talk. I'd also get real. "Do the lives of your family members literally depend on passing this test? No? Then zip it, do your work, learn this stuff, and do your best. If you fail, you can try again. If this kid fails, he's dead. Literally dead. You're privileged enough to not be in that situation, so you don't get a pass from me when it comes to cheating. What you do get, simply by virtue of being in my class and being someone whose success I care about, is a number of chances to try your best and to get as much help from me as you need."
     
    3Sons, Pashtun, dgpiaffeteach and 2 others like this.
  2. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Mar 8, 2017

    So how do you determine which ones left because they would be blown up or dead compared to those who wanted to send money back home (using those who will ignore the law to their advantage)?
     
    Backroads likes this.
  3. Pashtun

    Pashtun Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    435

    Mar 8, 2017

    I don't want to be "just like any other country".
     
    dgpiaffeteach likes this.
  4. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Mar 8, 2017

    Are you indicating you want open borders or you don't want immigration laws?
     
  5. Pashtun

    Pashtun Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    435

    Mar 8, 2017

    I think I stated exactly what I thought a solution could be, then EdEd suggested another one that I said "i think that would be a great idea" Reread my previous posts.

    I ended with "do you think the other side would agree to those solutions"....and here we are...
     
  6. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Mar 8, 2017

    I apologize that I missed your response.
     
    Pashtun likes this.
  7. Backroads

    Backroads Aficionado

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,120
    Likes Received:
    1,457

    Mar 8, 2017

    To venture my opinion... it seems that the U.S. has fairly liberal immigration allowances, compared to other developed countries where you pretty much have to be a billionaire doctor computer scientist to get in, but wow, we can certainly clean up the immigration laws. There has to be a better way.
     
    Pashtun likes this.
  8. a2z

    a2z Maven

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    1,513

    Mar 8, 2017

    How so?
     
  9. Backroads

    Backroads Aficionado

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,120
    Likes Received:
    1,457

    Mar 8, 2017

    Not really sure or I'd be in politics. But I've personally known people with messy immigration stresses that seem to declare inefficiency somewhere.
     
  10. swansong1

    swansong1 Virtuoso

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,420
    Likes Received:
    1,253

    Mar 8, 2017

    Here is an interesting example of the 'circle of life" regarding immigration throughout the years. Most of the opinions stated in this thread can be found in the history of Ellis Island.

    http://www.history.com/topics/ellis-island
     
    Backroads likes this.
  11. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,750
    Likes Received:
    217

    Mar 8, 2017

    Definitely agree with keeping it simple and straightforward.

    In terms of "the other side," don't roll your eyes here.....this is the kind of polarizing talk that I think hurts. In reality, there aren't 2 sides here. There are multiple, within each sub-conversation of immigration. Polarization is largely the byproduct of a political tool in which one party/side/group of people create an "other" and make them out to be singular and wrong. Over time, both major parties have done this and have created this perception that there are 2 camps of people, each with homogenous viewpoints that are very different from the other camp. The reality is much different, in my experience & opinion.

    So, to answer your question - I think many people would go for the solution, while some probably wouldn't. Some people - across the entirety of the spectrum - are open-minded about solutions. Some aren't. I don't think one side owns open-mindedness - at least not anymore.
     
  12. Pashtun

    Pashtun Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    435

    Mar 8, 2017

    I understand what you are trying to say. Call it whatever you want, the other side, another point of view, whatever. My point is and I think yours was would people with different view points be able to come to an agreeable solution, you posed a reasonable solution, I had no problem saying " I think that would be a great solution". I don't care if they call me "the other side", I can still see and agree to a reasonable solution when one is presented, even if it is presented by someone on the other side, different point of view, dear friend who thinks differently than me...
     
    EdEd likes this.
  13. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,750
    Likes Received:
    217

    Mar 8, 2017

    This works when analyzing things on an individual level, and truthfully - I'd say the same thing to that child. What happens when we zoom out, though, and start to think of immigration from a systems perspective - what would our policies look like formally? Would we allow anyone coming from a dangerous country permission to enter? What if that happens to be millions of people? What happens to our country, and our ability to take care of ourselves?

    To be real, I can sympathize with someone who believes in total open borders in the world (or de facto open borders) - from a political philosophy perspective. The following isn't realistic, but if you'd argue that anyone can go anywhere at anytime (or for any reason concerning safety), I can really understand that. We've got to understand, though, that this selflessness would have immense costs for everyone - the costs would be huge, and our lives would be fundamentally worse off in that there would be a great equalization of poverty, wealth, crime, etc. across the world. If we've got it great here, we'd no longer have it so. Even those who are struggling here currently - the kids who our hearts go out to because their families can't make ends meet - their lives would be exponentially worse off with a no-borders policy because most of the rest of the world is vastly more poor than the most poor here. This isn't necessarily a morally bad thing - after all, why are we as citizens any more entitled to safety & wealth than someone else? Who's to say that our citizens have earned that, or that those coming here wouldn't contribute to that? I get it. BUT, it has costs - the world would change. It IS changing - look at many towns in the US, Europe, etc.

    Here's a valid question: Does a country have a right to prosper if others don't?

    Here's another question: Do YOU have a right to a house even if others don't have one? Should a homeless person without a home through no fault of their own be allowed to come into your house, illegally, and stay because of imminent danger outside? If you argue "yes," I get it. I can see where you're coming from.

    BUT...if you think we have a right as a country to develop, grow our economy, and build our education system for our citizens, then by default you have to accept the premise that there are borders, and therefore rules about who can come in and who can't. From a policy perspective, you can't have it both ways: Either we can have borders and keep people out, or we don't have/enforce borders and we acquiesce to no inherent right to be where we are.
     
    2ndTimeAround likes this.
  14. EdEd

    EdEd Aficionado

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,750
    Likes Received:
    217

    Mar 8, 2017

    I'm with you - I think we're on the same page with this.
     
  15. Pashtun

    Pashtun Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    435

    Mar 8, 2017

    I also think we have a responsibility to analyze how our influence, meddling, aiding...etc impacts who and why certain groups of people come to this country. I think if we are going to inadvertently create a pipeline to this country we need to carefully consider how we shut off that pipeline.

    We need to be conscious that when we create a Bracero program with Mexico, we have created a pipeline, a war with North Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, pipeline, pipeline, pipeline. We sometimes have to take the good with the bad so to speak.

    When we have an economy that "openly" employs undocumented workers, it is difficult to just say those people need to leave and are not welcome anymore.These are humans, they are not a product to be used and then disposed of when they are no longer needed.
     
    ms.irene likes this.

Share This Page

Members Online Now

  1. mrsf70,
  2. bella84,
  3. Missy
Total: 335 (members: 3, guests: 304, robots: 28)
test