|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Sending people out of the country for arbitrary reasons is awful no matter how you slice it imo
|
And if the country those students have to go back to doesn't allow non-essential travel from the US?
|
On July 07 2020 04:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 04:15 Gorsameth wrote:On July 07 2020 04:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2020 21:25 iamthedave wrote:On July 06 2020 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
Think there's an argument for Kanye to be the lesser of 3 evils. He's certainly been responsible for less harm than either Trump or Biden.
Most of what could make Kanye not the lesser evil is based on the idea he's inexperienced. He's probably the least likely to die in office, and the only Black candidate during a national uprising about race and policing. That said, it's most definitely a publicity stunt. Worth remembering Trump did this a few times before he finally actually ran. 2024 might be his run. He's also said that 'slavery was a choice'. If you think a black man with that mentality is going to do good work for African Americans I think you'd be in for a very rude awakening. Kanye's also nearly as problematic as Trump when it comes to dodgy behaviour. Genuinely surprised to see you post something like this, GH. At absolute best Kanye would be a political puppet. The guy's demonstrated that he's a first rate idiot multiple times. Kanye is a moron (his first albums were good) and a ruthless capitalist. He just hasn't done a fraction of the damage to Black people in the US or internationally that Trump or Biden has contributed to. Kanye would be a way worse puppet than Joe Biden (who I think we all know will be figurehead to his administration), and probably about as a bad a puppet (in the say what we tell you way) as Trump. I just meant in 2024 Democrats might still be thinking cops are the future of their party and it might be another Trump on the other side which might make Kanye a viable candidate in 2024 like Trump was in 2016 after teasing it for several cycles. A random literal nazi off the street has likely done a fraction of the damage to black people that Trump or Biden might have done. But that doesn't mean his potentially Presidency wouldn't be very damaging to black people. "Well he hasn't been in a position to fuck over millions before, so how bad could it be" is not an argument for chosen a President. Did I say his presidency wouldn't be damaging to Black people? Hell Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people and he was a model African American in the classical sense. I also am not suggesting a Kanye presidency couldn't be the worst yet (though genocide is tough to compete with). Just saying he's clearly the lesser evil of the three to me, not that I would vote for someone just for clearing that bar. Because as you point out, even a literal neonazi could clear that.
I can't fathom that rationale. How can someone with all of the downsides of one of the worst Presidents in history - and that isn't hyperbole - and even fewer of that President's potential upsides possibly be the lesser of 3 evils?
Kanye isn't smart. He's politically ignorant. He's a problematic person with a long history of dodgy behaviour that matches both candidates and in several areas is significantly worse. Literally his only skills are musical talents (which are prodigious), and self-promotion. These skills are excellent for where he is, but what is the thought process in your mind that says 'ah yes, this will likely be a better President than Joe Biden?'
It sounds like you're using the rationale that he hasn't yet been in power as de facto reasoning that he's better than Trump or Biden, which is... uh... not very rational.
|
On July 07 2020 05:54 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 05:43 IgnE wrote:On July 07 2020 05:28 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 05:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:43 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 04:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:15 Gorsameth wrote:On July 07 2020 04:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2020 21:25 iamthedave wrote:On July 06 2020 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
Think there's an argument for Kanye to be the lesser of 3 evils. He's certainly been responsible for less harm than either Trump or Biden.
Most of what could make Kanye not the lesser evil is based on the idea he's inexperienced. He's probably the least likely to die in office, and the only Black candidate during a national uprising about race and policing. That said, it's most definitely a publicity stunt. Worth remembering Trump did this a few times before he finally actually ran. 2024 might be his run. He's also said that 'slavery was a choice'. If you think a black man with that mentality is going to do good work for African Americans I think you'd be in for a very rude awakening. Kanye's also nearly as problematic as Trump when it comes to dodgy behaviour. Genuinely surprised to see you post something like this, GH. At absolute best Kanye would be a political puppet. The guy's demonstrated that he's a first rate idiot multiple times. Kanye is a moron (his first albums were good) and a ruthless capitalist. He just hasn't done a fraction of the damage to Black people in the US or internationally that Trump or Biden has contributed to. Kanye would be a way worse puppet than Joe Biden (who I think we all know will be figurehead to his administration), and probably about as a bad a puppet (in the say what we tell you way) as Trump. I just meant in 2024 Democrats might still be thinking cops are the future of their party and it might be another Trump on the other side which might make Kanye a viable candidate in 2024 like Trump was in 2016 after teasing it for several cycles. A random literal nazi off the street has likely done a fraction of the damage to black people that Trump or Biden might have done. But that doesn't mean his potentially Presidency wouldn't be very damaging to black people. "Well he hasn't been in a position to fuck over millions before, so how bad could it be" is not an argument for chosen a President. Did I say his presidency wouldn't be damaging to Black people? Hell Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people and he was a model African American in the classical sense. I also am not suggesting a Kanye presidency couldn't be the worst yet (though genocide is tough to compete with). Just saying he's clearly the lesser evil of the three to me, not that I would vote for someone just for clearing that bar. Because as you point out, even a literal neonazi could clear that. Bolded part caught my eye, can you elaborate? I presume you mean the part about how Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people (not exclusively). That his presidency was damaging to Black people isn't really in dispute afaik, Democrats just blame it all on Republicans. From my perspective we either are anti-capitalist or we're harming Black people. Note "anti-capitalist" doesn't mean "lives in bubble outside of society/capitalism" His presidency was explicitly not anti-capitalist. Correct, I was referring to your statement about his presidency being damaging to the black community. I'm not current on the debate as to whether it was or wasn't so I don't exactly have a strong opinion here, but I was curious if you had a specific piece of legislature or something to that effect to support the argument? Personally I don't look back on his administration as being damaging to the black community but I've got an open ear on your perspective He answered your question. If a President ushered in an era where every black person was given $100k a year as reparations, two votes, and a new car this would still qualify as “bad for black people” because it wouldn’t be anti-capitalistic. If this strains ordinary language so be it. I think you and I both know that's not true. What does this post serve? You've jumped in with an egregious over generalization that is sure to do nothing except cause a dumb argument about posting in good faith, using "strawmans", etc. I'm sure I'll see you in website feedback before too long
He's right, I did answer and I think capitalism is damaging to basically everyone, even the people it pays off. So bribing Black people with more spoils doesn't resolve the underlying abuse that perpetuates the system. Incidentally this is almost surely funded by the continued exploitation of Africa.
There's a more complex analysis that comes out of Angela Davis and others study that demonstrates the rationale for police and the carceral state is replicated from our foreign policy. So rehabilitating a war criminal like George Bush is not only in bad taste, but functionally serves to embolden the worst aspects of our society (where BIPoC find themselves frequently the worst impacted).
|
On July 07 2020 06:58 farvacola wrote:
Sending people out of the country for arbitrary reasons is awful no matter how you slice it imo
yeah I don't really have a good idea of what it is like to get approval to come over here as a student, but students are a big net positive for the US, as I understand it. Spend a bunch of money and maybe stick around as a skilled worker? That's a slam dunk, right?
|
On July 07 2020 08:30 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 06:58 farvacola wrote:
Sending people out of the country for arbitrary reasons is awful no matter how you slice it imo yeah I don't really have a good idea of what it is like to get approval to come over here as a student, but students are a big net positive for the US, as I understand it. Spend a bunch of money and maybe stick around as a skilled worker? That's a slam dunk, right?
Didn't you just recently argue in favor of Trump's cutting of H1-B visas? That's how they stick around.
|
On July 07 2020 00:42 JimmiC wrote:
Canada is always looking for educated well meaning people, and a much shorter flight =-)
Doesn't Canada require you to at least have $400k or so in assets before immigrating? As well as fluency in either French or English?
|
On July 07 2020 08:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 05:54 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 05:43 IgnE wrote:On July 07 2020 05:28 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 05:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:43 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 04:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:15 Gorsameth wrote:On July 07 2020 04:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2020 21:25 iamthedave wrote:
[quote]
He's also said that 'slavery was a choice'.
If you think a black man with that mentality is going to do good work for African Americans I think you'd be in for a very rude awakening. Kanye's also nearly as problematic as Trump when it comes to dodgy behaviour.
Genuinely surprised to see you post something like this, GH. At absolute best Kanye would be a political puppet. The guy's demonstrated that he's a first rate idiot multiple times. Kanye is a moron (his first albums were good) and a ruthless capitalist. He just hasn't done a fraction of the damage to Black people in the US or internationally that Trump or Biden has contributed to. Kanye would be a way worse puppet than Joe Biden (who I think we all know will be figurehead to his administration), and probably about as a bad a puppet (in the say what we tell you way) as Trump. I just meant in 2024 Democrats might still be thinking cops are the future of their party and it might be another Trump on the other side which might make Kanye a viable candidate in 2024 like Trump was in 2016 after teasing it for several cycles. A random literal nazi off the street has likely done a fraction of the damage to black people that Trump or Biden might have done. But that doesn't mean his potentially Presidency wouldn't be very damaging to black people. "Well he hasn't been in a position to fuck over millions before, so how bad could it be" is not an argument for chosen a President. Did I say his presidency wouldn't be damaging to Black people? Hell Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people and he was a model African American in the classical sense. I also am not suggesting a Kanye presidency couldn't be the worst yet (though genocide is tough to compete with). Just saying he's clearly the lesser evil of the three to me, not that I would vote for someone just for clearing that bar. Because as you point out, even a literal neonazi could clear that. Bolded part caught my eye, can you elaborate? I presume you mean the part about how Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people (not exclusively). That his presidency was damaging to Black people isn't really in dispute afaik, Democrats just blame it all on Republicans. From my perspective we either are anti-capitalist or we're harming Black people. Note "anti-capitalist" doesn't mean "lives in bubble outside of society/capitalism" His presidency was explicitly not anti-capitalist. Correct, I was referring to your statement about his presidency being damaging to the black community. I'm not current on the debate as to whether it was or wasn't so I don't exactly have a strong opinion here, but I was curious if you had a specific piece of legislature or something to that effect to support the argument? Personally I don't look back on his administration as being damaging to the black community but I've got an open ear on your perspective He answered your question. If a President ushered in an era where every black person was given $100k a year as reparations, two votes, and a new car this would still qualify as “bad for black people” because it wouldn’t be anti-capitalistic. If this strains ordinary language so be it. I think you and I both know that's not true. What does this post serve? You've jumped in with an egregious over generalization that is sure to do nothing except cause a dumb argument about posting in good faith, using "strawmans", etc. I'm sure I'll see you in website feedback before too long He's right, I did answer and I think capitalism is damaging to basically everyone, even the people it pays off. So bribing Black people with more spoils doesn't resolve the underlying abuse that perpetuates the system. Incidentally this is almost surely funded by the continued exploitation of Africa. There's a more complex analysis that comes out of Angela Davis and others study that demonstrates the rationale for police and the carceral state is replicated from our foreign policy. So rehabilitating a war criminal like George Bush is not only in bad taste, but functionally serves to embolden the worst aspects of our society (where BIPoC find themselves frequently the worst impacted).
Yes, I agree that rehabilitating George Bush is bad and that Obama conducted a foreign policy that killed, maimed, and exploited lots of people. Where I diverge is that I recognize Obama inherited a massive, inertial institutional apparatus. I am not privy to all the information that he had and I recognize that he undoubtedly faced many true moral dilemmas with what appeared to him to be no good options. If we are going to think systemically we should also think systemically about a position of state authority that swallows up those who occupy it. Is it his fault that we aren’t communist?
You can draw a line between the ethical challenges that confronted Obama and the ethical challenges that confront local governments mulling over police funding. Police abolition only makes sense if a whole host of other organizations and networks spring up to take the place of the police. What exactly is preventing people from working on those right now, thereby putting the police out of a job? Can we specify what is needed? Funding? Legal authority? It’s much easier to call for the dismantlement of something than it is to build something new. I’d be much happier with the discourse around police abolition if the focus was on specific calls for targeted action to build new organizations and structures. You can actually do that whether the propertied homeowners in a local municipality vote to disband the police or not.
|
|
|
On July 07 2020 08:55 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 08:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 05:54 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 05:43 IgnE wrote:On July 07 2020 05:28 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 05:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:43 Aveng3r wrote:On July 07 2020 04:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 04:15 Gorsameth wrote:On July 07 2020 04:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Kanye is a moron (his first albums were good) and a ruthless capitalist. He just hasn't done a fraction of the damage to Black people in the US or internationally that Trump or Biden has contributed to.
Kanye would be a way worse puppet than Joe Biden (who I think we all know will be figurehead to his administration), and probably about as a bad a puppet (in the say what we tell you way) as Trump.
I just meant in 2024 Democrats might still be thinking cops are the future of their party and it might be another Trump on the other side which might make Kanye a viable candidate in 2024 like Trump was in 2016 after teasing it for several cycles. A random literal nazi off the street has likely done a fraction of the damage to black people that Trump or Biden might have done. But that doesn't mean his potentially Presidency wouldn't be very damaging to black people. "Well he hasn't been in a position to fuck over millions before, so how bad could it be" is not an argument for chosen a President. Did I say his presidency wouldn't be damaging to Black people? Hell Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people and he was a model African American in the classical sense. I also am not suggesting a Kanye presidency couldn't be the worst yet (though genocide is tough to compete with). Just saying he's clearly the lesser evil of the three to me, not that I would vote for someone just for clearing that bar. Because as you point out, even a literal neonazi could clear that. Bolded part caught my eye, can you elaborate? I presume you mean the part about how Obama's presidency was damaging to Black people (not exclusively). That his presidency was damaging to Black people isn't really in dispute afaik, Democrats just blame it all on Republicans. From my perspective we either are anti-capitalist or we're harming Black people. Note "anti-capitalist" doesn't mean "lives in bubble outside of society/capitalism" His presidency was explicitly not anti-capitalist. Correct, I was referring to your statement about his presidency being damaging to the black community. I'm not current on the debate as to whether it was or wasn't so I don't exactly have a strong opinion here, but I was curious if you had a specific piece of legislature or something to that effect to support the argument? Personally I don't look back on his administration as being damaging to the black community but I've got an open ear on your perspective He answered your question. If a President ushered in an era where every black person was given $100k a year as reparations, two votes, and a new car this would still qualify as “bad for black people” because it wouldn’t be anti-capitalistic. If this strains ordinary language so be it. I think you and I both know that's not true. What does this post serve? You've jumped in with an egregious over generalization that is sure to do nothing except cause a dumb argument about posting in good faith, using "strawmans", etc. I'm sure I'll see you in website feedback before too long He's right, I did answer and I think capitalism is damaging to basically everyone, even the people it pays off. So bribing Black people with more spoils doesn't resolve the underlying abuse that perpetuates the system. Incidentally this is almost surely funded by the continued exploitation of Africa. There's a more complex analysis that comes out of Angela Davis and others study that demonstrates the rationale for police and the carceral state is replicated from our foreign policy. So rehabilitating a war criminal like George Bush is not only in bad taste, but functionally serves to embolden the worst aspects of our society (where BIPoC find themselves frequently the worst impacted). Yes, I agree that rehabilitating George Bush is bad and that Obama conducted a foreign policy that killed, maimed, and exploited lots of people. Where I diverge is that I recognize Obama inherited a massive, inertial institutional apparatus. I am not privy to all the information that he had and I recognize that he undoubtedly faced many true moral dilemmas with what appeared to him to be no good options. If we are going to think systemically we should also think systemically about a position of state authority that swallows up those who occupy it. Is it his fault that we aren’t communist? You can draw a line between the ethical challenges that confronted Obama and the ethical challenges that confront local governments mulling over police funding. Police abolition only makes sense if a whole host of other organizations and networks spring up to take the place of the police. What exactly is preventing people from working on those right now, thereby putting the police out of a job? Can we specify what is needed? Funding? Legal authority? It’s much easier to call for the dismantlement of something than it is to build something new. I’d be much happier with the discourse around police abolition if the focus was on specific calls for targeted action to build new organizations and structures. You can actually do that whether the propertied homeowners in a local municipality vote to disband the police or not.
I get the institutional inertia part. It's part of why I have little or no hope for anyone that rises up through the two party system.
I think the second part demonstrates the connection between the rationale that sees the US as a necessary world police and the carceral state as necessary to maintain social order.
I'd be much happier if discourse around abolition wasn't necessary. If people just looked at the horrific nature of the institution since inception and concluded they couldn't continue to support something like that. The basic battleground is to take money out of policing and put it into alternatives until the police no longer exist. Not trying to fix and maintain police departments.
|
Whatever most people think about the necessity of police, I think it is clear that if you just stopped paying them and did nothing else then there would be disorder. Most people, at least based on national media and social media accounts, are looking around and saying “ok, what should we do instead,” and it’s quite difficult to find a coherent response to that. Part of the reason is that any solution will have to depend on local context. Part of the reason is because there don’t appear to be a lot of really existing alternatives in practice. Part of the reason is because people like the social esteem that comes with a fierce critique but don’t like actually changing their own life to fix it.
|
On July 07 2020 09:33 IgnE wrote:
Whatever most people think about the necessity of police, I think it is clear that if you just stopped paying them and did nothing else then there would be disorder. Most people, at least based on national media and social accounts, are looking around and saying “ok, what should we do instead” and it’s quite difficult to find a coherent response to that. Part of the reason is that any solution will have to depend on local context. Part of the reason is because there don’t appear to be a lot of really existing alternatives in practice. Part of the reason is because people like the social esteem that comes with a fierce critique but don’t like actually changing their own life to fix it.
Is the parallel to socialist endeavors internationally and the Black Panthers locally not jumping out at you, like it is to me?
|
On July 07 2020 09:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 09:33 IgnE wrote:
Whatever most people think about the necessity of police, I think it is clear that if you just stopped paying them and did nothing else then there would be disorder. Most people, at least based on national media and social accounts, are looking around and saying “ok, what should we do instead” and it’s quite difficult to find a coherent response to that. Part of the reason is that any solution will have to depend on local context. Part of the reason is because there don’t appear to be a lot of really existing alternatives in practice. Part of the reason is because people like the social esteem that comes with a fierce critique but don’t like actually changing their own life to fix it. Is the parallel to socialist endeavors internationally and the Black Panthers locally not jumping out at you, like it is to me?
Most people aren’t socialists or black panthers. If they were, and were actually spending a significant amount of their own free time organizing and building communities, I’d be much more in favor of getting rid of a police force that would be all but superfluous. In fact that’s my argument here, police abolitionists can work towards making the police superfluous regardless. Disbanding the police is, in that sense, neither a significant means nor an end to liberation.
Which is not to say that I don’t think there are plenty of obvious reforms to the police and carceral system. I’ve mentioned things before: demilitarization, decriminalization of nonviolent acts, getting rid of qualified immunity, etc.
|
On July 07 2020 09:39 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 09:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 07 2020 09:33 IgnE wrote:
Whatever most people think about the necessity of police, I think it is clear that if you just stopped paying them and did nothing else then there would be disorder. Most people, at least based on national media and social accounts, are looking around and saying “ok, what should we do instead” and it’s quite difficult to find a coherent response to that. Part of the reason is that any solution will have to depend on local context. Part of the reason is because there don’t appear to be a lot of really existing alternatives in practice. Part of the reason is because people like the social esteem that comes with a fierce critique but don’t like actually changing their own life to fix it. Is the parallel to socialist endeavors internationally and the Black Panthers locally not jumping out at you, like it is to me? Most people aren’t socialists or black panthers. If they were, and were actually spending a significant amount of their own free time organizing and building communities, I’d be much more in favor of getting rid of a police force that would be all but superfluous. In fact that’s my argument here, police abolitionists can work towards making the police superfluous regardless. Disbanding the police is, in that sense, neither a significant means nor an end to liberation.
That's why I said it is important to understand why The Black Panther party didn't supplant the Democratic party for Black people. Because Democrats teamed up with Republicans to brand them terrorists and have them harassed, imprisoned, and assassinated.
There's more, but recognizing the bipartisan support to kill such an organization by any means necessary is important to understand why the organizations that exist outside of the communities you're familiar with aren't more popular in the communities you are.
|
I expect you’ll say something like fuck the propertied class and anyone who isn’t in to building a socialist world. But at that point “police abolition” is really just communist revolution and all these woke liberals have really misunderstood something. The whole movement would go down in flames. That’s part of what I am trying to draw out here: the police abolition movement is deeply conflicted. It is drawing support from liberals (black and white and brown) who are parroting people that have detailed a political history of the police but only gestured towards a world without police. Their idea of a world without police looks an awful lot like a socialist world, and a socialist world we have never seen before. Show me a really existing socialist nation that had a less fascist police institution than ours. How will we bridge the gap?
|
On July 07 2020 08:36 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 08:30 Mohdoo wrote:On July 07 2020 06:58 farvacola wrote:
Sending people out of the country for arbitrary reasons is awful no matter how you slice it imo yeah I don't really have a good idea of what it is like to get approval to come over here as a student, but students are a big net positive for the US, as I understand it. Spend a bunch of money and maybe stick around as a skilled worker? That's a slam dunk, right? Didn't you just recently argue in favor of Trump's cutting of H1-B visas? That's how they stick around.
I am in favor of Trump getting rid of H1-B visas for people we don't need.
What I said before was: If a job needs a 5/10, and we have a local 6/10 candidate, I am against using an H1-B visa to hire a 8/10 foreign worker. It causes qualification inflation and has really stupid effects in industry. I have seen a PhD hired to do a job a shitty BS could do.
|
On July 07 2020 09:51 IgnE wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I expect you’ll say something like fuck the propertied class and anyone who isn’t in to building a socialist world. But at that point “police abolition” is really just communist revolution and all these woke liberals have really misunderstood something. The whole movement would go down in flames. That’s part of what I am trying to draw out here: the police abolition movement is deeply conflicted. It is drawing support from liberals (black and white and brown) who are parroting people that have detailed a political history of the police but only gestured towards a world without police. Their idea of a world without police looks an awful lot like a socialist world, and a socialist world we have never seen before. Show me a really existing socialist nation that had a less fascist police institution than ours. How will we bridge the gap?
We probably won't. More realistically any real transition to socialism will be a lot like the transition away from feudalism, except cut short by catastrophic ecological collapse.
|
|
|
Ghislaine Maxwell (Alleged madam for Epstein) Is currently jailed at the metropolitan detention center in Brooklyn.
...run by the same federal bureau of prisons overseeing MCC, where Epstein was said to be under 24-hour video surveillance with frequent guard checks. Until the cameras didn’t work and prison employees falsified checkup records. Hopefully the warden does a better job with staff discipline!
|
On July 07 2020 08:36 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2020 08:30 Mohdoo wrote:On July 07 2020 06:58 farvacola wrote:
Sending people out of the country for arbitrary reasons is awful no matter how you slice it imo yeah I don't really have a good idea of what it is like to get approval to come over here as a student, but students are a big net positive for the US, as I understand it. Spend a bunch of money and maybe stick around as a skilled worker? That's a slam dunk, right? Didn't you just recently argue in favor of Trump's cutting of H1-B visas? That's how they stick around.
Not really, most students use OPT or L1 visa, H1B is for people who went to college in their respective countries almost 100% of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
