[ktizo]

I don't understand this...

Well it is lucky I came prepared then. Here, I brought this map along. Have a look, this bit is a continent called "America". The bit at the bottom is what was first referred to as America by colonists from Europe, although the name was eventually used for the whole connected landmass, and the bit at the top is generally referred to as "North America", in which we have Mexico, the USA and Canada. But everyone in the continent are Americans, as they are all from America.

But if you're an American,

No, I am not an American. Which is why I said I am not an American. I can understand your confusion however, as earlier I think I may have slipped into a trance and started channeling the soul of Henry Kissinger. Sorry about that, it happens sometimes.

[tatsuke95]

>"But everyone in the continent are Americans, as they are all from America."

You're just itching to have a ridiculous argument, aren't you? Take your pseudo-intellectual nerd-rage elsewhere.

There are genuine problems with the immigration rules in the US. Some are described in this very thread. The author's case is marginal.

[ktizo]

Ok, sorry for my somewhat colourful expression of annoyance. It is completely true that I shouldn't get so wound up by bobbins on the internet.

However, I got annoyed because I thought you were being extremely closed minded by seeming to find it somehow dishonest or greedy for someone who spent the first part of their childhood in one country and then the second part in another, to go to university in the country they were born in without paying money that they were not asked for or required to pay, and to then try and look for a job in the country in which they went to high school and in which their mother still lives.

I found that to be such an outrageously bleak, ridiculous and restrictive view of the obligations of migrants, that I decided to ridicule it.

[tatsuke95]

>"However, I got annoyed because I thought you were being extremely closed minded by seeming to find it somehow dishonest or greedy"

I do find it somewhat dishonest and greedy. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it as a Canadian who is personally affected by such things. You know we're running huge deficits here, right? I don't think my tax dollars should subsidize the education of someone who has not or does not plan on contributing to the tax base of this country. That's an unsustainable policy. Next thing you know, people are angry and we have immigration policies similar to the US.

It's as simple as that, even though you tried your hardest to turn it into some Lou Dobbs-type xenophobic argument. But you're more than welcome to come here and get educated. I'd even love for you to stay after you graduate, unlike the US.

And yes, it looks to me like the author did his best to take advantage of "the best of both worlds" and found out the hard way that things don't really work that way. Immigration is no joke; ask people who are taking it seriously. He tried to slip one past the decision makers (I'm not a programmer, I'm an analyst!) and they shut it down and told him to follow the proper channels. He did, and now all is well. Sad story?

>"I found that to be such an outrageously bleak, ridiculous and restrictive view of the obligations of migrants, that I decided to ridicule it."

That I expect people who don't live here to not receive tuition subsidies? Yeah, ludicrous. If you think that is so outrageous, the world must be a dark, dark place in your eyes. Not that I couldn't tell by your anger.

[ktizo]

I do find it somewhat dishonest and greedy. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it as a Canadian who is personally affected by such things.

And I'm entitled as a random person on the internet, to point out that I find your stated opinion to be completely and utterly insane on several different levels. It is almost fractally wrong.

And if you really have a problem with this case on economic grounds, let me reassure you, there is no mass imbalance of people from Canada who moved to the US when they were kids, then moved back to Canada to go to university, then left to work in the US, when compared to kids from the US who move to Canada, leave to go to university in the US and then come back to work in Canada. Issues like this are just noise in the system, monetarily speaking they tend to cancel out.

Also, this guy is only trying to get a work visa and temporary migrants regularly move back to their country of origin after a while. Which is likely to be better for the Canadian tax office in the long run, depriving him of education and therefore a job and therefore making sure he will probably never pay much tax and possibly even end up on welfare, or on the other hand educate him, despite that he has not managed to pay much tax yet, mainly for reasons of being a kid at the time, then let him work at Microsoft in the US, with a reasonable probability of him at some point moving back to Canada with a first class resume and tons of money to spend?

And if the argument about tax is that his mother didn't pay tax in Canada while he was a child being educated in the US while living with her, or that he should somehow be stopped from emigrating for an offer of employment at Microsoft until he has worked off his university bill, then I think the appropriate response is ridicule. As that is nothing but pure economic calvinism of the meanest and small minded sort.