Why do we pay for foreigners education?

[wacki]

TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[Matty]

foreigners are the only thing that's going to keep our country's economy solvent over the next century due to shrinking birth rates. Japan and then Europe to a lesser extent are going to be in a real financial bind since they don't allow as much immigration. There was a Discovery channel special on it not too long ago I think.

[wacki]

A lot of these people go home when they are done.

[Matty]

Do you have statistics on how many do and how many don't? I'm sure it's +EV for us. We're the only first-world country whose population isn't expected to shrink and get very top-heavy age-wise over the next century, and high wager earners are invaluable.

[lehighguy]

A lot stay. Moreover, math and science departments at every major college wouldn't exist without foriegners. Without immigrants our lazy ignorant asses would be done for.

If you don't want them around convince Americans to learn math or study hard. Good luck.

[Matty]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot stay. Moreover, math and science departments at every major college wouldn't exist without foriegners. Without immigrants our lazy ignorant asses would be done for.

If you don't want them around convince Americans to learn math or study hard. Good luck.

[/ QUOTE ]I mentor some foreign students, and it never fails to amaze me how much harder they work and how much more dedicated they are to their education than any native students I've met- which is humbling and makes me work a little harder. I recommend everyone travel to other countries or intimately acquant themselves with some foreigners to help realize how amazingly lucky we all are to have won the birth lottery and been born in the greatest country.

[lehighguy]

The sad thing is we are a lot more creative and industrious. We wouldn't even have to work hard to beat them in the marketplace. Just do a minimum level of basic work that people seem incapable of doing.

[ACPlayer]

in science and engineering disciplines without foreign RAs', TA's etc the departments would have few Ph D candidates and would slowly whither away, specially for the second tier schools.

a dated but relevant statistic link (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/web/98042.asp)

[daveymck]

[ QUOTE ]
TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I currently work at Oxford uni and was chatting to the second in charge oft he whole place, he stated that their policy was to beocme a world university like the US Ivy league unis pulling in students from abroad, in particular the asian market, the reason being they could charge higher fees than the UK students, and I guess to a point to cherry pick the worlds best people to get more/better research done as well (research grants are a huge part of the uni income as well).

It seems to me these top universities are not there just to teach the brains of our own country but as profit making enterprises too, which to apoint saddened me as I thought they would be aiming to teach the best in britain.

[lehighguy]

They are aimed at teaching the best. I don't think they care what race the best is.

[ QUOTE ]
TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what your problem is with it, when you consider it in the scheme of things. We give loads of foreign aid to lots of countries. Some of this aid is used for education, particularly in the poorest countries. Whether we pay to have them educated in their country or in our country, what's the difference?

[SheetWise]

We pay for it partly as a form of foriegn aid (assuming some of them will return home) and partly because it raises the standards for all of the students. We're not bringing in dumb students.

On a related subject -

One thing to remember about Affirmative Action >>> it benefits white Americans. If Affirmative Action was gone, there are a lot of white Americans who would never see the inside of a math or science department.

And then there's the Interest -

A good friend runs the solar energy department at a major university -- teaching solar energy to architects and engineers -- hasn't seen an American student in 10 years.

[sam h]

This of course is only valid for state schools and not private universities. But I believe it makes sense for both the country and the individual schools. Departments want the best help/students they can get, and often that means people from abroad. I don't see anything wrong with that. As far as the national interest more generally, a high proportion of these students stay in the states and contribute immensely to the economy. With the American education system in shambles, the "brain drain" from other countries is key to bringing in new talent.

[mslif]

[ QUOTE ]
TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

To answer you question, because most of us earned it. We get grants and scholarships due to our academic skills. If schools are willing and offering financial perks to us, why shouldn't we take them?

[sirio11]

Well, at least in the case of the TA's. I think you're way off here. The money paid to a TA is worth much less than the job they're doing. I think it's a pretty good deal to the universities. I was a TA during my masters, and I have to grade a lot of papers, and in some cases to teach a class; and they were "paying" me about $1000 a month. And of course I still have to pay tuition.
For me really, your comments don't make sense at all.

[fluff]

For someone with advanced education, it puzzles me that this doesn't make sense to you.

Some reasons:

1) Americans don't want to do it, and certainly not for the amount of money a grad student makes.

2) They were the best available candidate for the job.

3) The ones that stay contribute to the advancement of science and technology here in the US. +EV.

4) Those that go home will often rise in rank quickly in their home country thanks to their advanced US degrees. Having a lot of US friendly business/government leaders around the world also +EV.

[[censored]]

This just doesn't bother me much. I don't know why, it just doesn't.

[wacki]

I'm just shocked that foreign students aren't required to work in this country for 4 years. You know, kind of like the military. "If we train you, you better work for us." That is all.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just shocked that foreign students aren't required to work in this country for 4 years. You know, kind of like the military. "If we train you, you better work for us." That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

We provide aid so these people can take their knowledge back to their countries and improve life there. This is our self-interest -- the big, long-term picture -- not having a relative handful of well-qualified foreigners serve as temporary employees in our economy, taking jobs away from others, and costing business money when they leave and have to be replaced. So why would we require that they work here for even a day?

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

As others have mentioned:

1.) We need those people to occupy a lot of our technical positions in our economy.

2.) I think it is a good thing that we expose these people to our culture. That is, people realize the US is a great country where most people get along. When an Arab student comes over here and studies, he realizes he is not treated poorly because he is an Arab, etc.. **These students should go back and tell their fellow country people what an excellent place the US is. Not about 1 or 2 mishaps they had while they were here .**

Problems I have:
1.) Some of these people are from countries that could be considered a potential enemy of the US. (China). I'm not crazy about educating a chemistry student that is going to go back and build a bomb to kill us. (I've made a lot of friends with Chinese grad students at my school.)

2.) If US graduate programs would fall apart, let them. We shouldn't have to bring in international students to support a program. Professors can be pretty selfish and will make decisions like this so they can teach a graduate course rather than Calc I to freshman.

** I'd also like to say that my graduate experience was 10 times better because of international students, and I wouldn't have met my wife if we didn't allow international students. **

[goofball]

[ QUOTE ]
TA's, RA's, research assistants, graduate assistantships, all of those are paid for with federal tax money. Why then, do Americans pay for so many foreigners education? If you see a foreigner in a graduate program, odds are we are paying for their education. It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called educating intelligent people so they can, you know, cure cancer and stuff.

Besides, they do work, usually they teach unintellgible quiz sections.

[Cyrus]

In disparaging the state of things in the matter of "educating foreigners", you are ignoring a number of factors :

1. The people who come to America to study are not your average "dumb student". They are usually above average -- and I'd speculate above average in both their countries and the USA. This, ostensibly, raises the brain power in the US educational system.

2. A significant number of those foreigners get to stay and work in the United States, adding to the brain power of the country. Some of them stay on to work as teachers. (I guess you are too young to remember the alarm calls in 1950s Europe about the famous "brain drain"!)

3. Those that do return back home to work and lead their lives have been in touch with the "American way of life", a term that includes American economic thinking, American culture (excuse my French) and, importantly, the American point of view in world politics. In essence, America enjoys the benefits of having a loose but powerful corps of "American alumni" around the globe. (Notice how American media, when giving a short CV of a foreign politico, will always underline the fact that he or she was "educated in America".)

4. Some of the people who return to their country and get into business will probably be more immediately familiar with the American way of doing business than anyone else's way, so they would be more comfortable and inclined to doing business with American businesses, if such an opportunity exists. (American multinational companies operating abroad also enjoy the benefit of having "local talent" that has already been properly groomed available to fill managerial positions in the multinational's local subsidiary.)

[Bubbagump]

[ QUOTE ]
The sad thing is we are a lot more creative and industrious. We wouldn't even have to work hard to beat them in the marketplace. Just do a minimum level of basic work that people seem incapable of doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Convincing to population to strive for mediocrity is not the answer. It's attitudes like this that have brought this country to where it is today.

[lehighguy]

I think your misinterpreting my post. Or perhaps you just don't have the background of previous discussions with me on this subject. In either event that isn't what I'm arguing for at all.