Trump's America

Moiraine said:
Your argument is like making a $5 bet and profiting $95 from your bet, and then complaining to everyone that you lost $5.

The amount of $ the schools/communities are going to lose by not having them there is going to significantly outweigh the extra cost of supporting the students by letting them stay there. It's not even going to be close. Maybe we should listen to whether the schools think this is a good idea. You're replying to news that Harvard and MIT are suing over this. I think schools probably know better whether this is a good thing. Even ignoring any moral issues, this is going to lose schools a lot of $ and communities a lot of $.
Click to expand...


They would pay for their online coursework whether they stay on campus or not...so you are not looking at this from the correct angle.

If all "traditional" students are sent home and off campus, who will foot the additional costs to keep campus facilities/dorms/cafeterias/study areas open? Putting campus employees at risk. Putting these foreign students at risk. 

 
DevoHusker said:
They would pay for their online coursework whether they stay on campus or not...so you are not looking at this from the correct angle.

If all "traditional" students are sent home and off campus, who will foot the additional costs to keep campus facilities/dorms/cafeterias/study areas open? Putting campus employees at risk. Putting these foreign students at risk. 
Click to expand...


I don’t think I am. It’s not only about tuition and they are going to lose students due to this.

You are obsessing way too much on the added cost of taking care of fewer students in housing. I’m sure the cost will be higher per student but I’m also sure they will somewhat mitigate that by needing fewer staff. Also, I don’t think schools are required to house students but I could be wrong. But why not leave it up to the schools to decide on that instead of kicking students out of the country? It should be up to the schools to decide this. 

The key point I keep trying to make here is that schools and students think this is bad. You should be giving that a lot more weight than you are giving this housing detail. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
DevoHusker said:
They would pay for their online coursework whether they stay on campus or not...so you are not looking at this from the correct angle.
Click to expand...
When I went to UNL, I remember foreign students coming from countries where I would be surprised they have technology in some areas for these students to live and study on line.

 
Moiraine said:
I don’t think I am. It’s not only about tuition and they are going to lose students due to this.

You are obsessing way too much on the added cost of taking care of fewer students in housing. I’m sure the cost will be higher per student but I’m also sure they will somewhat mitigate that by needing fewer staff. Also, I don’t think schools are required to house students but I could be wrong. But why not leave it up to the schools to decide on that instead of kicking students out of the country? It should be up to the schools to decide this. 

The key point I keep trying to make here is that schools and students think this is bad. You should be giving that a lot more weight than you are giving this housing detail. 
Click to expand...


Thanks for your viewpoint Moiraine. I see some of where you are coming from, however, in another thread you say "well, kids should just stay home for a semester" when talking about what a burden part time school would be for parents of young ones. 

I disagree with letting the institutions have the call. These kids are here, in the US, on a visa for learning. Not for quarantining in their dorm facility, and taking classes online. If they can do that at home, because the Universities are shut down, then the schools do not (IMO) get to have the say so. 

 
DevoHusker said:
Thanks for your viewpoint Moiraine. I see some of where you are coming from, however, in another thread you say "well, kids should just stay home for a semester" when talking about what a burden part time school would be for parents of young ones. 

I disagree with letting the institutions have the call. These kids are here, in the US, on a visa for learning. Not for quarantining in their dorm facility, and taking classes online. If they can do that at home, because the Universities are shut down, then the schools do not (IMO) get to have the say so. 
Click to expand...


Your initial objection to this was that it would cost the schools too much in upkeep. Now you're objecting to their visa status. The latter objection seems to be the true sticking point if your view is also that the schools don't have a say.

 
knapplc said:
Your initial objection to this was that it would cost the schools too much in upkeep. Now you're objecting to their visa status. The latter objection seems to be the true sticking point if your view is also that the schools don't have a say.
Click to expand...


Nope, my objection is the cost would be subsidized by all the students that are forced to go home. The visa status is evidence to support my first position. But thanks for trying to turn this, like everything else anyone ever objects to, into something else. 

 
DevoHusker said:
Nope, my objection is the cost would be subsidized by all the students that are forced to go home. The visa status is evidence to support my first position. But thanks for trying to turn this, like everything else anyone ever objects to, into something else. 
Click to expand...


I'm literally using the words you used.   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 
DevoHusker said:
Uh oh, the shrugging emoji. I am definitely wrong then. 

Show me where I said I think the visa status is the actual topic for my views. 
Click to expand...


I said it seems to be. If that's not the case, then it's confusing that initially you objected to the schools costs, but then said the schools shouldn't have a say.

Those are your words. I'm asking in good faith why the juxtaposition. It's a legit question.

 
knapplc said:
I said it seems to be. If that's not the case, then it's confusing that initially you objected to the schools costs, but then said the schools shouldn't have a say.

Those are your words. I'm asking in good faith why the juxtaposition. It's a legit question.
Click to expand...


No juxtaposition. I am stating my opinion, which runs counter to Moiraine's, that I don't have any issue with these students going home until their campuses open again for the full campus and educational experience that I am happy they get to experience in the US. 

 
DevoHusker said:
No juxtaposition. I am stating my opinion, which runs counter to Moiraine's, that I don't have any issue with these students going home until their campuses open again for the full campus and educational experience that I am happy they get to experience in the US. 
Click to expand...


But if the schools want the kids to stay in the US and are willing to cover the costs, you have no objection to them staying, right?

 
knapplc said:
But if the schools want the kids to stay in the US and are willing to cover the costs, you have no objection to them staying, right?
Click to expand...


If the flap regarding the F1 visa status is cleared up, and they can cover the additional costs in staying on campus when no one else gets to so my kids don't have to...you betcha. 

 
DevoHusker said:
If the flap regarding the F1 visa status is cleared up, and they can cover the additional costs in staying on campus when no one else gets to so my kids don't have to...you betcha. 
Click to expand...


Since those kids are all here on scholarship your kids are covering the costs of those students no matter what happens.

 
Back
Top