4 ms·

>clean the water he drank for 24 years, I mean, arguably neither did the Chinese, depending on where you are and how much they've let pollution occur in that a

>clean the water he drank for 24 years, I mean, arguably neither did the Chinese, depending on where you are and how much they've let pollution occur in that area. I think you are grossly overestimating both the value of these immigrants (it isn't hard to see how much garbage science gets published abroad and how useless a good chunk of international students are) and the entire mechanism for technological improvement and innovation (most of which is market, not PhD, driven). You also don't cite any sources for your claims; this information would be helpful to anybody seeking to agree or argue with you.

cyphar 9y ago
> it isn't hard to see how much garbage science and how useless a good chunk of international students are That statement is true of any group of students, international or local. On the other hand, there are good international students (and there are good local students). Is there any reason why you think the ratio isn't the same (in fact, you'd think that the ratio of good international students would be higher because they have to go through far more rigorous testing than the average local student). And while you might argue they're mostly useless, usually international students make up a large amount of the funding for universities since their fees are usually 5x or sometimes even 10x "local" student fees[1]. So if you like having well-funded universities throwing out international students is a good way to stop that from working. [1]: My data is from Australia (since that's where I am). In 2017, ~1.3 million students enrolled in higher education -- and ~350k were international students. Most universities have a multiplier of _at least_ 4x for international students taking the same courses as a local student. By simple arithmetic, international students make up more than half of the funding-through-fees of Australian universities.
- angersock 9y ago
  I agree that that statement is absolutely applicable to "native" students as well! And there are definitely some outstanding international students! The author I was replying though doesn't seem to differentiate though, for example, between graduate students coming here to do research and learn cutting-edge things and undergraduates who have wealthy families that export them abroad because of course that's what one does. You've also kind of nailed another issue on the head: it is more profitable, per student, for universities to bring in international students than to teach local ones. This in turn leads to an increase in pricing for everybody (though probably not as much as due to student loan availability, but that's a different thing) and weird campus behavior to accommodate valued country officials (local school of Rice University, for example, hiding Taiwanese flags during a visit by mainlanders).
- sjy 9y ago
  This is not entirely accurate because most Australian domestic university students have their fees heavily subsidised by the federal government, which is why they are called 'HECS-HELP contributions' and not fees. After taking into account government grants (including those made on account of domestic students' fees) and other sources of income international student fees make up less than 20% of university income on average – see slide 35 on this 'data snapshot': https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/169/Data%20snapshotv6%20webres.pdf.aspx https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/16...
  - cyphar 9y ago
    I think you may have misunderstood your source. "Government grants" (which are going to go away in the next few years if Turnbull has his way) have nothing to do with student fees. They are effectively research grants, and other forms of funding from the government (since our universities are partially publicly funded). And since everyone pays tax, effectively everyone is paying for those grants. As for HECS-HELP loans, this is quite different from a subsidy. It's a loan from the government that has a guaranteed return (pretty good deal for them). But even from your own source, international student fees are 18.8% and total "local" contributions (including HECS loans) are 19.9%. Which is effectively what my original point was -- approximately half of the funding directly from students is from international students even though much less than half of the students are international students (I never said that 50% of total university funding is from international students, please re-read my comment). If you are a local student and you don't use HECS you still only pay <25% what an international student would pay -- because they have a different per-course-unit fee structure that's far more expensive.
    - sjy 9y ago
      Most government grants are not research grants; they fund the component of domestic undergraduate tuition which is not repayable through HECS-HELP. 'The Australian Government subsidises a CSP [Commonwealth-supported place] by paying part of the fees for the place directly to the university. The subsidy amount is not a loan and students do not have to pay the subsidy amount back.' [1] This component of government grants is not broken down on the source I provided, but it is explained in the notes to universities' financial statements. See for example those of Australia's largest university, at p 66 [2]. $345 million was provided under the Commonwealth Grants Scheme, compared to $214 million under HECS-HELP and $58 million from the Australian Research Council (research grants are also provided by other bodies such as the NHMRC). The CGS is the means of funding CSPs, not a source of research grants [3]. Your original point, that 'international students make up more than half of the funding-through-fees,' might actually be correct even if you accept that payments under the CGS are on account of 'fees' (which is the language used in [1]). It is correct at Monash, where international student fees generated $653 million, compared to $1.03 billion from the Australian government including CGS, HECS-HELP and research grants. Monash is an outlier because almost half of its students are international or offshore [4], but it leaves me unsure as to the reliability of my original source. We can certainly agree that international student fees are a very substantial source of income, but I wanted to correct the common misconception that HECS-HELP loans are the sole source of domestic tuition funds. [1] http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/csps/pages/commonwealth-supported-places http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees... [2] http://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/844508/monash-university-2016-annual-report.pdf http://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/844508/mon... [3] https://www.education.gov.au/commonwealth-grant-scheme-cgs https://www.education.gov.au/commonwealth-grant-scheme-cgs [4] http://www.monash.edu/about/who/glance http://www.monash.edu/about/who/glance

cyphar 9y ago

> it isn't hard to see how much garbage science and how useless a good chunk of international students are That statement is true of any group of students, international or local. On the other hand, there are good international students (and there are good local students). Is there any reason why you think the ratio isn't the same (in fact, you'd think that the ratio of good international students would be higher because they have to go through far more rigorous testing than the average local student). And while you might argue they're mostly useless, usually international students make up a large amount of the funding for universities since their fees are usually 5x or sometimes even 10x "local" student fees[1]. So if you like having well-funded universities throwing out international students is a good way to stop that from working. [1]: My data is from Australia (since that's where I am). In 2017, ~1.3 million students enrolled in higher education -- and ~350k were international students. Most universities have a multiplier of _at least_ 4x for international students taking the same courses as a local student. By simple arithmetic, international students make up more than half of the funding-through-fees of Australian universities.

angersock 9y ago
I agree that that statement is absolutely applicable to "native" students as well! And there are definitely some outstanding international students! The author I was replying though doesn't seem to differentiate though, for example, between graduate students coming here to do research and learn cutting-edge things and undergraduates who have wealthy families that export them abroad because of course that's what one does. You've also kind of nailed another issue on the head: it is more profitable, per student, for universities to bring in international students than to teach local ones. This in turn leads to an increase in pricing for everybody (though probably not as much as due to student loan availability, but that's a different thing) and weird campus behavior to accommodate valued country officials (local school of Rice University, for example, hiding Taiwanese flags during a visit by mainlanders).
sjy 9y ago
This is not entirely accurate because most Australian domestic university students have their fees heavily subsidised by the federal government, which is why they are called 'HECS-HELP contributions' and not fees. After taking into account government grants (including those made on account of domestic students' fees) and other sources of income international student fees make up less than 20% of university income on average – see slide 35 on this 'data snapshot': https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/169/Data%20snapshotv6%20webres.pdf.aspx https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/16...
- cyphar 9y ago
  I think you may have misunderstood your source. "Government grants" (which are going to go away in the next few years if Turnbull has his way) have nothing to do with student fees. They are effectively research grants, and other forms of funding from the government (since our universities are partially publicly funded). And since everyone pays tax, effectively everyone is paying for those grants. As for HECS-HELP loans, this is quite different from a subsidy. It's a loan from the government that has a guaranteed return (pretty good deal for them). But even from your own source, international student fees are 18.8% and total "local" contributions (including HECS loans) are 19.9%. Which is effectively what my original point was -- approximately half of the funding directly from students is from international students even though much less than half of the students are international students (I never said that 50% of total university funding is from international students, please re-read my comment). If you are a local student and you don't use HECS you still only pay <25% what an international student would pay -- because they have a different per-course-unit fee structure that's far more expensive.
  - sjy 9y ago
    Most government grants are not research grants; they fund the component of domestic undergraduate tuition which is not repayable through HECS-HELP. 'The Australian Government subsidises a CSP [Commonwealth-supported place] by paying part of the fees for the place directly to the university. The subsidy amount is not a loan and students do not have to pay the subsidy amount back.' [1] This component of government grants is not broken down on the source I provided, but it is explained in the notes to universities' financial statements. See for example those of Australia's largest university, at p 66 [2]. $345 million was provided under the Commonwealth Grants Scheme, compared to $214 million under HECS-HELP and $58 million from the Australian Research Council (research grants are also provided by other bodies such as the NHMRC). The CGS is the means of funding CSPs, not a source of research grants [3]. Your original point, that 'international students make up more than half of the funding-through-fees,' might actually be correct even if you accept that payments under the CGS are on account of 'fees' (which is the language used in [1]). It is correct at Monash, where international student fees generated $653 million, compared to $1.03 billion from the Australian government including CGS, HECS-HELP and research grants. Monash is an outlier because almost half of its students are international or offshore [4], but it leaves me unsure as to the reliability of my original source. We can certainly agree that international student fees are a very substantial source of income, but I wanted to correct the common misconception that HECS-HELP loans are the sole source of domestic tuition funds. [1] http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/csps/pages/commonwealth-supported-places http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees... [2] http://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/844508/monash-university-2016-annual-report.pdf http://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/844508/mon... [3] https://www.education.gov.au/commonwealth-grant-scheme-cgs https://www.education.gov.au/commonwealth-grant-scheme-cgs [4] http://www.monash.edu/about/who/glance http://www.monash.edu/about/who/glance