i'm sorry about your situation,mayb everyone will have some trouble in life,but we will still strike it and live well afer it.Wish you good luck and live happily.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/02/AR2010090204235.html

pardon: Equivalent

Also.....contacts you make.

After university study is over and we enter the workplace.  Having friends/acquaintances in various parts of the world in your area of expertise proves to be an invaluable asset. 

Sometimes it is as simple as having them show you where to go and where to eat if you are in town on a business trip.

Sometimes it is a few polite phrases that you learn that help endear you to your business hosts.

Sometimes you are able to learn something about the customary way in which to negotiate from someone who is born into the culture.

Sometimes you are dealing with your friend in business.

Its a smaller world than it used to be.

Well.....you are right in that we should recruit "the best" regardless of place of origin; however, this view is a little narrow because there are factors that go beyond this.

First, too often we want to judge by some kind of standardized test who is "the best".  So when SAT scores are calculated, not surprisingly, the persons not from this country score a little lower (but not as much as you think).

Grades (A, B, C, D and F)from other countries are often not equivolent in other countries.

So from this metric it is difficult to determine the "best." 

Also, you miss out on where American kids WANT to go to school.  And that diversity in enrollment is a major factor in where our brightest want to go.  Our brightest want to interact with persons with different perspectives.

I remember sharing a class with a Pakistani and an Indian when the discussion shifted to Kashmir.  The level of discourse was as an incredibly high level because of it - - tense, but very informative.  This same benefit consistently showed up when it came to issues such like China's development, the Asian economic crises, civil unrest in Indonesia, Eastern block transitions, etc.

My own education was enhanced because of the diversity in the classroom.  International economic topics take on a different light when you talk to someone in which family/community concerns far outweigh American individualism.  And when we try to place our successful template on a culture that is not set up for it to work.  

dole - that is it....things do change.  But to recruit foreign for the sake of recruiting foreign is just nuts. 

 Recruit the BEST, whether here or foreign.  And from what I hear, it is VERY expensive for a company to bring foreign workers here under a visa.  The author of the article is promoting recruiting foreign for the sake of diversity, NOT to get the best.................

I think that last post was pretty solid from start to finish.   Now, I think that there might be some potential in corporate and/or payroll tax cuts.  However, I haven't done any research in that area.

I know many on the right are bemoaning the dwindling manufacturing base in this country....(suddenly echoing the complaints of liberals for the past few decades........funny to hear conservatives bring up Michael Moore-like quotes that could come straight out of Roger and Me.

Perhaps there could be some bipartisan agreement to help our manufacturing base [Though there would be instant retaliation from Japan, Korea and Europe].

Well, if the bill, would only be critical infrastructure (defunct roads, bridges, electrical grids, dams, levees, etc), and protection from emp, effiency upgrades to the gird. Then I think it could be passed. It just isn't likely the democrats would write a bill like that and keep global warming out of it, and even if they did, Republicans wouldn't side with the Dems anyways.

Are more tax cuts really going to benefit us in the future at this point, or just add to the debt. I don't see how tax cuts at this point are going to anything except maybe lower unemployment, and raise the debt. Or am I off on that?

A couple of other factors that go beyond Wolf.

First, we do not (and maybe cannot) differentiate between the stimulus and the health care bill.  So while the former may have worked on its own.  The second undermined its potential by driving the focus on the deficit and debt.

Consumers/taxpayers were consistently looking backwards.  They kept focusing on the the money spent and not the money in action.  Very little is said about what the stimulus did do.  Any talk of stimulus, within 2 minutes, becomes a discussion about the money spent.

And this is a failure of the adminstration's communications team. The narrative has been completely dominated by the right.  But, it was almost fait accompli once the health care debate raged and ultimately passed.

For 1/ 2 a year (more?) all that was discussed (rightfully) was the cost, the cost, the cost of health care. To which the stimulus stood shoulder-to-shoulder with in conversation.

- - -

Second, and very much related.  How could consumer confidence ever have gotten off the ground with the rhetoric of the last 1 1/2 years?  It has been non-stop doom-and-gloom.  And attempts by the administration to (necessarily) paint an optimistic picture ("summer of recovery") backfire and make the administration look "out of touch." 

When you go to the taxpayer and ask for $800 Billion. You have to give a rosy picture or else you undercut the potential benefits. However, when it doesn't work like you said (though it did do plenty), you face a November you will not want to remember.