> At well over $50K per year per student the university-as-a-business (rather than an altruistic entity) is concerned about a drop in revenue should immigration policy change. Let's not pretend this is all about good intentions, pink unicorns and ice cream.
> A school like MIT (don't mean to focus on them, pick any school) can charge exorbitant tuition to foreign-born students and make millions. And the students pay for it.
Most international students do not have the resources to pay for graduate school and are either funded via grants, teaching or research assistantships or personal-loans. In particular students from these 7 countries. They might have been doing well in their respective countries but the same money after conversion into dollars doesn't have as much purchasing power in the US.
> The other problem I have with all of these articles/arguments is this image being painted that the US would be dumb as a rock if it weren't for the influx of immigrants. I'm sorry, I don't buy that one bit. We already have great talent in this country.
Sure, all international students and faculty are evaluated at par with US citizens. Any bias here is counterproductive to competitiveness and research output of top schools who've signed the brief. So yes, great talent, enough to fill 60% capacity. That is not equivalent to dumb as a rock.
>This idea that we better let-in hordes of immigrants for fear of not having businesses launched or any innovation is, well, repulsive. That would mean we are a wasteland of a country, and need to be rescued by immigrants, which clearly isn't the case.
According to the article, "It cites one estimate that international students directly contributed $32.8 billion to the U.S. economy and supported or contributed to the creation of 400,000 American jobs in the 2015-2016 academic year.". So unless you mean that the total contribution to US economy was $32.8 billion and only 400,000 jobs in total were created in 2015-2016 academic year, the article isn't saying US is a wasteland of a country. Moreover students, post-docs and professors doesn't exactly mean hordes of immigrants.
> They should be honest and say "we are going to lose a ton of money because we make a killing with foreign students".
Again, most PhD students are funded via grants, which depend on good research output, which depend on a competitive admission process which selects the best talent.
>On the other hand, if MIT had no foreign students and charged a LOT less for tuition it would be full of wonderful, capable, creative and eager-to-contribute US residents.
If you say that MIT makes a ton of money by charging more from foreign students, I don't see how you can argue that by taking in none they can charge a lot less for tuition.
Bottom-line: I agree with the general idea of verifying what you read and reading between lines, but based on facts and not assumptions.