Slashdot Mirror
Government's Fake University Trap Results in 21 Visa Fraud Arrests
An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. government set up a fake college called the University of Northern New Jersey as a trap to find and arrest 21 people on charges of visa fraud, reports Newsweek. The arrested 21 individuals were brokers, employers, and recruiters who conspired with more than 1,000 foreign nationals to fraudulently obtain student and foreign worker visas through a "pay to stay" New Jersey college, Department of Justice was quoted as saying. Those overseas students now face being deported from the United States for buying visas, in an alleged immigration scam worth up to $1m. From the report, "During conversations with undercover agents, one of the recruiters, Alvin Yeun, said 'we've been doing this for years' and told an agent not to worry. The 21 people arrested are residents are New Jersey, New York, California, Illinois and Georgia; some were also involved in committing work visa fraud."
Should of also gone after loan abuse with schools as well.
Used to work in software dev for Lexmark and man, they couldn't bring 'em in fast enough. I swear the ink was still wet on some of those 'visas' while our teams were being escorted out the door.
"Shall we play a game?" -W.O.P.R.
That's not abuse, that's the system working as intended.
And hate real education so they constantly beat professors.
>Those overseas students now face being deported from the United States for buying visas,
And yet when I was in the green card process, it was made clear that one of the eligibility criteria was having $1,000,000 invested in the US companies (the others being marriage, work and things I may have forgotten). $1,000,000 buys you a visa and you can get your megabuck back afterwards. How 1% privilege is that?
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Those people hate education.
They aren't mutually exclusive actions, you know?
As if private schools are the only problem.
To the brokers that say they did it before. Squeal and testify against the people (and schools) that they did it with for half time off.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
So the government's intent in setting up the school was to arrest 21 people?
Quality of the summaries here is way down.
Damn, I was thinking of applying to the University of Northern New Jersey. I heard it's a good party school.
Maybe I'm just dumb, but I don't understand how the fake university played into this.
America desperately needs President Trump. He's the only candidate we've seen so far who has taken anything resembling a pro-American stance with respect to this issue. He has taken a strong stance against illegal immigration. He has taken a strong stance against unjust "free" trade with the third world. He has made it clear that he would put America and Americans first.
It's no wonder he's seeing such strong support from the legal immigration communities. They had to ensure a very arduous process in order to get into America legally. It's extremely harmful and disrespectful to these legal immigrants when illegals are allowed into the country, and it's even worse when these illegals are then given amnesty.
America needs President Trump more than ever. America needs President Trump's policies more than ever. America needs a defender like President Trump.
Like the one that taught you English?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You can't blame the schools for trying to make every buck they can. If such large loans weren't so readily available, the schools couldn't charge as much.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Do you believe the bull$h!t that comes out of your mouth?
Do you actually think you're clever?
Nobody who is for free enterprise is for this nonsense. You don't have to want to live in a free society but it would help if you would educate yourself. At the very least watch some Milton Friedman videos and, after watching a few, ask yourself if he would condone such nonsense.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
You can't blame the schools for trying to make every buck they can.
Yes, you can. While raking in the moo-la has become the primary purpose of institutes of higher learning, it didn't use to be that way.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Government policies are what allow the school loan "abuse" to continue.
If they simply audited free lunch records in the public elementary school system they would find double-percentage fraud and illegal aliens.
Setting aside the issue of large loans in general, there are some deceptive tactics of for-profit schools in trying to get that sweet, sweet GI bill money. I think that crap needs to get shut down.
:popcorn:
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
>one of the recruiters, Alvin Yeun, said 'we've been doing this for years' and told an agent not to worry.
LOL, the agent was not at all worried while gathering evidence against these idiots.
Like the one that taught you English?
By American Vernacular English, that's not wrong. People frequently substitute "should of" in place of "should've". The only other thing is loan and schools being different number cases, which is indeed technically incorrect.
However, I couldn't help but notice the use of an indirect reference ("the one") in your sentence. I'm not exactly sure on the specifics of context, but you specifically said "the one" when he clearly used a plural form, which results in a disagreement of number. If you try to tell me that context conveys the school he went to and not the one in this sentence, would it not also be in context to interpret for the most widely used language on this website?
In any case, it's Slashdot. We don't come here to learn English, we come here to read the news, and you've wasted a whole comment slot that could have been useful for something else - perhaps something that actually discusses the topic at hand.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
The Free Market relies on the fact that is a product is overpriced, consumers will pass it up.
Federal Loans (which are CRAZY easy to get) takes away that mechanism.
It isn't until later, when they have to start paying back the loans do people realize the product was way over priced.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I have thought of an excellent joke about DeVry[1] which this post is too small to contain.
[1] Substitute University of Phoenix or Texas A&M if you prefer.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
First and foremost you would be alienating democratic base. Secondly school system know which ones are illegal aliens, yet they are complacent with that knowledge. You can charge entire school apparatus with the fraud.
I think the University was essentially a honeypot.
They couldn't really do that with a "real" university lest the people they catch claim that they were in fact just trying to go the said real university. This way they set up a new university, sent out some brochures about how they 'love to work with our foreign friends' and let the people come to them. The fact that the university didn't exist before helps their case in that the people involved really weren't about helping people get an education.
sure we can. It's called "profiteering". It may have become SOP but we can still blame them for engaging in it.
Not the only candidate. Bernie Sanders has spoken out against free trade AND has a proven track record of voting against disastrous trade bills.
Bernie voted to increase H1B immigration at the last go-around, as did Rubio.
Cruz voted against, and (of course) Trump and Clinton weren't legislators.
I don't know how the GP post got modded as "funny", Trump's position has been "pro-Americans" from the beginning, and is the source of his popularity.
Big deal, 21 brokers and recruiter or student....compared to the overall H1-B abuse, that's nothing. It's not even a rounding error.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
By American Vernacular English, that's not wrong.
Ahh, no. It's wrong.
It's like people who say, "For all intensive purposes" when they what they really mean is, "For all intents and purposes".
"Vernacular" is not a synonym for "wrong".
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
People frequently think 1 is a prime number but - no matter how many of them do so - it isn't.
Ignorant fat cunt.
I think by vernacular GP meant the kind of writing mistake that only a native speaker could make, which is not what vernacular means to me at least. People who use things like "should of" strike me as illiterate on a fundamental level. They seem to only understand how to go from sounds to letters and vice-versa. They're probably also the same people who reply to my emails with just "call me."
And who are the guys who encouraged the Federal Government to guarantee the student loans. It was the PAC's made up of college administrators and banks.
School official: "we need to make more money by raising tuition. " But if we do that less students will be able to afford school so we have to keep prices reasonable"
School Secretary: "But if we do that less students will be able to afford school, and they will leave so we will end up making less money"
School Official: " I know we can pressure the government to grantee easy student loans. Since the money is not coming out of the students pocket, they will be more willing to pay our unreasonable tution fee increases"
Bank Official: " That is a great idea. I will have my politician write 'keep education affordable' law that will guarantee every student the right to a student loan from my bank. I order to assure the success of the program there should be no liability on the part of the bank if the loan for the crappy education defaults"
Politician: "Yes boss. That is a great idea. My constituents are so dumbed down by the liberal media that they think they are being given something and do not realize that its a scam to keep bank and school administrators rolling in dough"
Talk show Radio Host: "Look at theses gay ass students who refuse to pay back their student loans"
If you want to lower the cost of education, outlaw student loans. Back in the good old days you used to be able to pay for college tuition by working a part time job.
If you want to lower the cost of health care, outlaw all health insurance. Back in the good old days you used to be able to afford a couple nights stay in the hospital out of your own pocket. Insurance and the ACA keeps health care affordable and administrators rich.
Everything has a price. Anyone who tells you your are getting something for free is asking you to mortgage your future.
I know it is fashionable not to RTFA, but the Justice Department named this operation "Triple Lindy", the infamous dive Rodney Dangerfield's character performed in "Back to School". :)
If that bothers you, come to New Orleans and see how many times someone will try to "AX" you a question....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Please, don't confuse illiteracy with 'vernacular'.
"Should of" is NOT 'vernacular', it's making random meat noises to approximate language and failing to grasp something they taught you fairly early in school.
It is hearing sloppy speaking, turning that into a sloppy understanding of the words you're using, and then using that in a written form which demonstrates you think the incoherent mumbling you do in the real world corresponds to speaking the language.
"Should of" is so wrong it defies belief.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
One would think, the government's priorities would be to block the poor foreigners entering the country illegally and most immediately becoming a public burden. Only after we stop importing poverty, would the borders-enforcers turn on to people, who express their love for the United States without asking taxpayers for financial assistance.
Surely, both groups are breaking the law and ought to be prosecuted, but, if you must exercise prosecutorial discretion, wouldn't you start with those, who cause the most damage? The current Administration's priorities are exactly the opposite, for some reason...
Which is quite surprising, because prosecuting these immigrants — who had the advantage of geography in coming over here — would not require the elaborate entrapment schemes like setting up fake universities — the Administration already knows many of them, and even argues in court, it ought to be allowed to let them partake in Social Security and other "earned benefits" programs!
It is almost as if the plan is to allow them all to stay — despite going through the glacially slow motions of "deferred actions" — and, while staying, vote for the party in power, huh?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
If schools were about education, then half the people going to college wouldn't be eligible. BUT we have to be "inclusive" to the point of ridiculousness because somewhere along the line, we became elitist snobs who view people with a degree as being "better" than people without one.
It is a form of classism of the worst kind. On the otherhand, it is much easier to take someone with a piece of paper than it is to find someone who knows what he is doing, but without one.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
By American Vernacular English, that's not wrong.
Ahh, no. It's wrong.
It's like people who say, "For all intensive purposes" when they what they really mean is, "For all intents and purposes".
"Vernacular" is not a synonym for "wrong".
You're right, it's not. If you walked up to someone in the US and said, "Has I downs gones school walked", it's accepted as incorrect and undecipherable. If you walked up to someone in the US, and instead said that "all intensive purposes" phrase in a sentence, no one is going to correct you or have trouble understanding the meaning behind it. If no one has trouble understanding it and people widely use that phrase, how can it be wrong? If you really want to press the point, sure, I'll concede that it's technically grammatically incorrect - but then I'll refuse to recognize you as any better in this manner, because you used a contraction. Contractions started out as vernacular as well, and we only write proper English around here, eh?
Now we've wasted two slots on this.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
In that particular example yes, but many dialects of English "should of" would be considered correct. Consider the sentence "I'm a gonna ride that bike" which is valid for certain dialects of English, but wouldn't pass muster in your typical high school grammar class. If there weren't parts of different vernacular dialects that were considered wrong, they wouldn't be considered dialects at all.
The example you've used is more of a homophonic mistake than a matter of vernacular, unless someone is meaning to universally quantify only those purposes which are intensive.
Profit isn't a dirty word. People want more money, or else the CSU Professors wouldn't be going on strike next week. Nobody is immune from wanting more money (profit), quit acting like they are.
Trump university is out of business, because it didn't offer anything of value. Sucks if you bought that line of shit, same as if you went to a regular university and got your "Gender Studies*" masters and can't find a job. Except one is applauded, and the other isn't (and still offers such a degree)
I would MUCH prefer a system that had "Employment data" for each program they offer, and a "return on investment" timetabled based on actual salaries earned by people.
You see, how you view "Profiteering" is all based on your own biases. "Gender Studies" at a regular university is just as much "profiteering" as Trump University was, you just don't recognize it as such.
* "Gender Studies" is a fake degree, but represents real ones of little or no actual real world opportunities outside of government schools and grants. It represents degrees that nobody is really hiring outside of very specialized and limited areas.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Wrong. You can only have a disagreement of number when they refer to the same thing, like if you wrote "he are" or "they is".
A member of a set or group is totally not, logically or grammatically, the same thing as the set or group itself.
For example, if we're talking about women (plural), and I go on to ask about you mother (singular, pretty much by definition[1]) are you saying it should be "how are your mothers"?
I am. I'm sure I'm right and I'm sure you're wrong.
You're out of your depth, kiddo. I'd quit while you're not too far behind if I were you.
[1] Yeah. Adoption, mitochondrial dobnation, surrogacy. If that's what google gave you, shove it up your arse sideways. It's irrelevant.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Please, don't confuse illiteracy with 'vernacular'.
"Should of" is NOT 'vernacular', it's making random meat noises to approximate language and failing to grasp something they taught you fairly early in school.
It is hearing sloppy speaking, turning that into a sloppy understanding of the words you're using, and then using that in a written form which demonstrates you think the incoherent mumbling you do in the real world corresponds to speaking the language.
"Should of" is so wrong it defies belief.
Between the dangling definition of "they", the godawful run on sentence in the second portion of your comment, and the horrendous collision of your tenses, I'm going to interpret this as either an intentional troll or a sarcastic remark. I apologize if I seem hesitant to recognize that, but my sarcasm detector is temporarily out of order after pulling an all-nighter.
Amount of comment slots spent on this topic: three, and apparently counting.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
People frequently substitute "should of" in place of "should've".
People also frequently say things like "for all intensive purposes" and "this code has been depreciated." That these mistakes are oft repeated doesn't make them any less wrong. "Should of," "could of," "would of," are fundamentally erroneous, and people who type these phrases out should be corrected for their own benefit.
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
How is it BS? As an antedote the conservatives of my state just hired an university president who is fairly unqualified other than being a board member of university of Phoenix after talking about all the great things the school did with her. She was also the Bush appointee that pushed the terrible no child left behind on everyone, and helped start the destruction of the education system.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
While I hate to pull this angle, another consideration is the possibility of foreign nationals with interests other than pure immigration coming in on an educational visa. Now granted you could theoretically have them coming in to a legitimate institution with similar results, but at least a real University could track "hey, we have student X who came in and hasn't attended a single class" (resulting in the Visa being close and the student deported)
It's _always_ been like that; that's why the poor are denied higher
education for economic reasons - watch any olde movie from the
30's-40's etc.
Some places in the world consider the education of their people
beyond being grunts for some factory job an major part of their
country's infrastructure.
Indian's are killing the U.S.; they can _always_ return home.
CAP === 'brindle'
That is not exactly what happened. People with degrees shows that they know how to learn something. It is proof, evidence. It does not mean the person without the degree wont do better, but they dont have proof that they can succeed. If you owned a business who would you hire, the kid off the street, or the kid with a degree for the position, pay and everything else being the same. If you said the kid off the street then I dont think you are being honest.
And to be clear I did not get my degree until 34, for the field I was succeeding in since the age of 22.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
The etymology of "should of" is a slang derivative of "sort of" --
jeez! Don't you people knows anything!? Google it...
CAP === 'masonry'
First of all profit != profiteering. The latter means to make an excessive or unfair amount of profit. No one is attacking profit that I see.
As for CSU, it is not about profit there, it is about only getting a 1.4% raise and a 1.6% raise out of the last 9 years.
As for gender studies, while probably not a good degree, it is still vastly better than Trump U, it is an ok degree to go into social services work.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
I'm assuming you didn't take out one of those school loans, right?
If so, you education was waisted. The phrase is "should have," not "should of."
If you walked up to someone in the US, and instead said that "all intensive purposes" phrase in a sentence, no one is going to correct you or have trouble understanding the meaning behind it.
True, but that's mostly because I don't relish the opportunity to tell someone to their face, that they are spewing gibberish , unless they're fully indecipherable and I can't avoid it.
My thought train: "At least that isn't my - aw damn- you're talking about NC"
Sucky time to live here. NCs government is beyond horrible right now. Hopefully something will shake the country church-folk awake come November to flush em out. Probably not.
Well, if you really want to get into it, it's BS because a conservative backed government *in theory* wouldn't support government backed loans to go to school and would let the free market take care of it. And in a free market, ain't no way any bank is going to loan somebody 100K for a major in "*studies" if the student has the ability to file bankruptcy and get out of paying it back. But once it's government backed, and the person can't wipe it with bankruptcy then the schools are able to jack their prices up, up, up because the whole world is telling these kids you need to get a degree and it doesn't matter what in, just that you need one and those kids are naive enough to believe them. Remove the easy access to the money, and kids can't afford to go to school, and the schools lose demand and have to adjust their prices downward. Seriously, if you think universities need to charge as much as they do, go to a modern campus, they're architectural wonders and buildings are constantly being replaced. God forbid if a building hits 30 years old.
What does that have to do with being in favor of for-profit fake schools.
Taking your statement at face value it shows one more group of political elites who game the system. It's called patronage. The only political philosophy which opposes patronage as a matter of principal is laissez-faire capitalism. In fact laissez-faire rose up in opposition to mercantilism which was the 18th C word for corporatist.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
That these mistakes are oft repeated doesn't make them any less wrong.
Absolutely it does make them less wrong. Are you going to tell me that using phrases such as "to curry favor" and "moot point" are incorrect because a long time ago someone misheard someone else say "to curry Favel" and "mute point"? (see: http://blog.oxforddictionaries...)
Everyone should agree that languages evolve over time. For some reason, however, some people get really indignant when they observe the actual mechanisms by which languages evolve up-close.
If converting between sounds and letters doesn't work than your standardized spelling is poorly implemented and intelligent people should feel free to ignore it.
Strange, that's the second time that movie's come up in two days after years of nobody thinking of it. The movie "Back to School" was a plot point in last night's episode of "The Goldbergs".
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
In the late 90's I was working my way through college. I worked full time over the summer, part-time during school, paying cash for my credit-hours. My mom went to the same school I went to, and in the intervening two decades, she noticed, maybe, three or four new buildings on campus.
In the middle of my undergrad years, they opened up the federal loan program to anyone. It used to only be open to those pursuing six year degrees, usually doctors or lawyers. Now just about anyone could get a student loan.
Fast forward a decade and a half. Tuition at that school has increased 100-150% over inflation. Parking alone went from $1/day to $8/day. It has bought two entire city blocks, razed them, and built a dozen or so new buildings, apartments, athletics centers, libraries, a "welcome center," and doubled the size of it's hospital.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
If someone says "all intensive purposes" you're just as likely to mishear it as the phrase that makes sense (as opposed to seeing it in writing).
Forget whether it's grammatically correct. It's not literately correct. What's an intensive purpose? And if you only include the intensive ones, that's a different meaning.
A contraction is vernacular, but not wrong. "Should of" is a misspelling of should've without being literate enough to know better.
"Should of" is just people who don't know how "should've" is spelled. Illiteracy is not the same thing as a dialect. The spoken word is technically the same in that case.
Until it's right, it's wrong.
No matter what you think of illegal aliens, the kids should be fed. It's not their fault.
You might want to stop poking at the Republican bete noir and consider that it's not specifically the Republicans. What has Obama done in his *eight* years as president to put an end to the college racket? The non-dischargeable loans, the skyrocketing tuitions, the continued outsourcing and offshoring of jobs that reinforce the meme that a college degree is necessary for a middle class lifestyle, the ever-increasing number of obscenely-compensated administrative staff at colleges that do not seem to serve any useful function?
The new Democrats (they're called Clinton Democrats by some people) behave like stereotypical Republicans in the areas that really matter. They might say some superficial things to make them look different but the end result for most of the populace is the same.
The only political philosophy which opposes patronage as a matter of principal is laissez-faire capitalism.
The reason that conservatism, as a philosophy, favors smaller government, is because a large government has more opportunity to hand out patronage. (Unlike laissez-faire, conservatism recognizes the need for some regulation and a government to implement the regulation.)
Laissez-faire capitalists were not anarchists nor anarcho-capitalists. Conservatism, as you describe it, is fairly close to laissez-faire and I doubt there would be great disagreement between the different factions (again using an 18th C term).
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Nothing is ever the same. If one of them did finish college and the other one didn't then there will be other differences. Of course that doesn't help HR to dismiss resumes en masse but if I had to pick between candidates I'd be looking for the other differences rather than applying an approach that is mostly used to cut through 100s of resumes and less to actually find good candidates among 100s of resumes.
You really believe that horse shit!
"Good old days"
Congratulations, you're a faggot. Now kill yourself.
Seriously, google that shit you dumb fuckers. Real schools leave distinct footprints that fake ones just cannot match. Take that 3 minutes of time to figure out you're being scammed.
Also, good on the feds for going after these poor kids who just want to exist in the land of the "free" and not be shipped back to whatever shithole they managed to escape from. I'm sure Donald and Hillary would both approve.
Just get rid of those stupid republicans that allow this crap to happen. Hope you are voting D in NJ next time.
While that may be a noble goal you need to understand that, from the political POV, it would have given the Republicans ammunition to accuse him of being a muslim, a communist, and perhaps even a darkie from Bongo Bongo Land.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Wrong, I'm going to tell you you're wrong.
I unfortunately very often have to say "fewer" out loud when someone misuses "less" and "fewer".
Perhaps you could point out the run-on sentence he used, because I don't see anything that's even close.
I don't see a dangling definition of "they" either. He uses it in an impersonal form, similar to French on.
You aren't very good, are you?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
If you really want to press the point, sure, I'll concede that it's technically grammatically incorrect - but then I'll refuse to recognize you as any better in this manner, because you used a contraction. Contractions started out as vernacular as well, and we only write proper English around here, eh?
The difference is that contractions are taught in school and are recognized as proper English, but no teacher who has a clue about the language would ever teach that "should of" is correct. None, zero, zip, nada. In fact, contractions date back to Old English (450 AD – 1150 AD). They also appear in Early Modern English (1450 AD to 1750 AD). Nowhere, however, in the history of written language does "should of" appear as proper, but if it's considered acceptable in 500 years or so then I'll reconsider my position.
Or, maybe not. As someone else pointed out, "should of" is wrong because it's a mishearing of "should have", which is completely acceptable. Using "should of" means the person doesn't know what they're really supposed to be saying, just like saying "for all intensive purposes". It makes no sense in any literal or figurative form; instead it indicates that the person saying it doesn't really understand what's supposed to be coming out of their mouth.
It's similar to people who say, "It's a doggy-dog world", when the term they mean to use is, "it's a dog-eat-dog world." One makes sense, the other does not. "Should of" makes no sense and I wish people would stop trying to pretend that it does.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
With all the fraud around H1B it would be pretty easy to capture 1000's in such a sting.
True, but that's mostly because I don't relish the opportunity to tell someone to their face, that they are spewing gibberish , unless they're fully indecipherable and I can't avoid it.
Exactly. If I hear "for all intensive purposes", it immediately marks that person as a bit of a fool in my estimation. I probably won't say anything, but their image is forever tarnished in my mind.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
"Should of" is just people who don't know how "should've" is spelled. Illiteracy is not the same thing as a dialect.
Exactly Thank you for putting it so succinctly.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Ironic.
1) I see no run-on sentence in what he wrote, the sentence seems properly formed to me. Enlighten me, where is the run-on portion?
2) Also, his use of "they" seems quite clear to me, in that he's referring to the teacher or teachers who taught him grammar. What is supposedly wrong about his usage?
3) And finally, I don't see anything wrong with his use of tenses.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
If you walked up to someone in the US, and instead said that "all intensive purposes" phrase in a sentence, no one is going to correct you or have trouble understanding the meaning behind it. If no one has trouble understanding it and people widely use that phrase, how can it be wrong?
In speech, we rely primarily on context and the sounds of words to infer their meaning. You can get away with "should of" and "for all intensive purposes" in speech because you're substituting them for sound-alike phrases in the exact same context where the phrases they resemble would normally be used. In speech, the resemblance is so strong that a listener will generally infer the intended meaning without suffering any confusion. Communication would have succeeded, despite the fact that the words you used carry a different denotation.
Not so in writing, however, where we rely primarily on context, spelling, and punctuation to infer meaning. While "should of" may closely resemble "should've" in speech, in writing the two are easily distinguished, so the substitution of one for the other causes a great deal of confusion to any readers. You would not be successfully communicating the intended meaning to your readers.
Really, your argument is that homophones (different words that are pronounced the same) should bee interchangeable in writing because their interchangeable inn speech. Bye that same logic, however, homographs (different words that are spelled the same) should be interchangeable in speech because there interchangeable in righting. But if someone were to actually do so, you'd be confused when they referred two an archer's bow with the pronunciation typically used for the bow of a ship. And eye expect that this paragraph has served as a useful demonstration for how successful communication can be hindered by exchanging written words four their homophones.
It's possible that if the phrases continue to be misused in speech, they may eventually be widely accepted as carrying the same denotation as the sound-alike phrases for which you're substituting them, but until such time, suggesting we should be able to use sound-alike phrases interchangeably in writing makes no sense. You might as well suggest that cars be limited to pedal power only, since that's how bikes work.
Should of also gone after loan abuse with schools as well.
Or whatever school you graduated from which didn't teach you proper grammar.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Actually, no. All the paper proves is that the person knows how to get a piece of paper. They may or may not actually know anything.
Is a degree valuable *only* in terms of qualifying you for work?
Because for centuries, universities have offered degrees that had nothing to do with qualifying for work. "Classics" springs to mind. Or how many full-time jobs do you think there are for "historians"?
The idea that the purpose of a degree is to qualify you for a job is a fairly recent invention.
Seriously. If you have to facilitate ANY part of the crime, you are fucking complicit!
Eventually, given enough time 'should of' will become 'shouldof' and then probably eventually something like 'shudov' because when the constituent components of a phrase don't make any sense any more but the phrase itself has meaning it makes more sense to contract the phrase into a word, which does have meaning.
Don wori it wil al be in da NewSpeek dicshonry ov 2052.
We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
Please, don't confuse illiteracy with 'vernacular'.
Although illiteracy is not the same as vernacular or dialect, it is often a starting point...
We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
He has expertise in setting up fake universities after all.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
So somehow having a Liberal Arts degree in socio politics would be a bad thing for the typical voter. You know, or perhaps you don't, having a greater degree of understanding in the complexities of socio-economics and politics so that they can more effectively engage in democracy, is a good thing, you do understand that, don't you. Consider the idea, that your society considers that knowledge a luxury and those who seek assistance in gaining that knowledge, of being better more knowledgeable citizens, should be discouraged by having significant fiscal penalties applied. So free higher education means the majority have access at the very least on a part time basis, so classism is applying a fiscal penalty, elimination of the fiscal penalty reduces the impact of classism. Of course the other element of classism, genetics, well don't blame us, blame your parents. Sucks to be genetically disadvantaged when it comes to the ability to learn quickly and easily but that's just the way it is, however at least with free part time college tuition you can spend decades learning what takes other people years and some even months. You should not be disadvantaged and denied a greater understanding of the society of which you are a part, regardless of how long it takes you. Higher education should be considered a right, something of value to society and not a luxury and those who seek it should be penalised (much better to spend those resources on junk food, fancy clothes, jewellery, cosmetics, luxury holidays, mansions, yachts, sports cars and the list goes, all worth much more to society than a higher education for 'ALL', who the fuck wants smarter voters).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Reading a post with bad grammar is like chatting with someone who has bad breath. Maybe it really shouldn't matter, but ew...
Now go brush your teeth.
latter means to make an excessive or unfair amount of profit.
Define "excessive" and "unfair" please. I want very hard values not squishy feelings based jealousy.
And please let me know, how you came up with those numbers, who decided them and why. Anything less is just subjective rants of liberals and socialists.
As for CSU, it is not about profit there, it is about only getting a 1.4% raise and a 1.6% raise out of the last 9 years.
I said "more" not how much more. The teacher wants more money. everyone wants more money. 1.4% here, 6% there, 10% over there. See my first point in this post.
As for gender studies, while probably not a good degree, it is still vastly better than Trump U, it is an ok degree to go into social services work.
Your biases are showing they are equally worthless. And you made my point "no actual real world opportunities outside of government, schools and grants." Supporting the ideals of the SJW class is fine, but don't let it cloud your judgment. Just be aware that the ridiculousness of the SJW wars is being made manifest at places like Emory and their trauma over chalk. The poor precious snowflakes can't handle being adults.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Mortgage rates are the same. Home prices go higher when rates are lower.
No wonder bubbles occur when rent is more expensive than interest.
Is a Degree valuable "only" for work? No. If you want a masters in "Gender Studies" because it is your passion, by all means go for it.
But if you get your degree, in a subject that has no economic value (like Gender Studies) and you're taking government backed loans out to get it, you better be able to pay the damn loan back without complaining by working your $15 / hr Min wage jobs. Get your degree, pay back the loan. If you can't then the degree is worthless economically, and shouldn't be supported by government subsidies.
The idea that the purpose of a degree is to qualify you for a job is a fairly recent invention.
Not really. Even "classical" educations was about creating a person able to think clearly, in a variety of subjects so that he could rule more effectively. Employment is a relatively recent invention. 400 years ago, you did what your daddy did, and that all you had to look forward to. The wealthy sent their kids off to get classical education, which would ultimately help them manage their wealth.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Higher education should be considered a right,
I would disagree, on the grounds that the 13th Amendment forbids slavery. You cannot force others to secure an economic benefit for yourself.
Now, if you want to call it a privilege of our society, then by all means, go ahead. You can say you have a right to access education (which I would agree). But it is not a right, intrinsic to your own self.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Well considering that the typical "Liberal Arts degree in socio politics" degree at the typical U.S. university is actually a liberal progressive propaganda packed load of fantasy yes it is a bad thing to push millions of people into a life of debt servitude to receive one.
The U.S. should follow many other nations.
Only the top grade earners get a spot in college. Those that are in the top percentiles get free education. The rest can pay for it.
The downside? A great majority of U.S. institutions of higher learning would go out of business. Since they are not really adding to the common good that would only be a short term problem for all of those professors who would have to get a real job.
The Google reviews of this "school" are awesome.
Oh wait. Nvm. Hey look I bought pots and pans today. I don't remember going to the New York today. It's like 800 miles away.
But killing the Republicans won't fix it all, the Democrats are responsible for so much too, we must kill them all too, then we will be left with only the people who want what is best for everyone.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
As opposed to?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Amount of comment slots spent on this topic: three, and apparently counting.
So stop fucking commenting about it, if you have such a problem with whatever resource you think you're wasting by doing so. You have a choice of whether or not to continue this stupid conversation. So far, it is clear what you have chosen.
That's a joke, right?
It is a right by appropriate necessity to properly participate in democracy. In order to ensure a proper democracy it is a requirement to fully educate the electorate in the understanding of the socio-economics and politics of that society so that they can make sound decisions. Your claim is just empty nothing and is no different to claiming public roads should not be paid for by taxpayers dollars. In essence any claim to private property is theft, so once that theft is made all other claims become reasonable and all forms of private property are slavery.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
It proves that the person can commit to doing a task that will take several years to complete and following through with it. I've always thought that's one of the reasons a lot businesses are more willing to hire college graduates even if they don't really care what the degree is.
That can be argued at least.
Of course, if someone without a degree knows their stuff, it shows they can get the job done without needing to be ridden.
Where conservatives and Laissez-faire capitalists part ways is that conservatives believe that there should be some small amount of regulation of commercial products. Safety regulations and whatnot, but only those that are absolutely necessary.
The distinction is necessary because in the American education system, at least, Laissez-faire capitalism is usually portrayed as "Greed above all other concerns." Like so many other things, it's substantially more complicated than that.