If you've battled a US high school for three years, you deserve in state tuition.

I am writing in response to a blog by a class mate about illegal immigrants in California getting in-state tuition. 
My classmate believes that it is horrible that California is making it easier for illegal immigrants to take positions in California colleges and universities from citizens. I strongly disagree.
The catch is; these illegal immigrants are only being granted in-state tuition when they have attended for three years and subsequently graduated from a California high school. That is quite the stipulation. In addition, these illegal immigrants are not allowed any federal financial aid (which of course makes sense). Judging from the circumstances under which illegal immigrants usually come to the United States, the two criteria of having a solid and continuous school record complete with graduation and having money to pay for college make it difficult enough for these illegal immigrants to attend college. And lest we forget; these illegal immigrants are just kids. They are kids who most likely did not make the decision to come to the United States illegally, but followed their parents. They are kids who haven't known much else besides the public schools they have been attending in California since coming to the United States; and they are trying to make the best of their situation.
My classmate argues that this will cause illegal immigrants to take positions in California universities away from our own national children. However, universities are and always have been competitive. If these immigrants are smarter and more qualified to attend a university and that university chooses them above a US native; then so be it. Your US citizen teenager should have appreciated their opportunities more and studied a little harder. Then maybe they could have been chosen over the illegal immigrant.
In addition, I think it is important to point out that this doesn't mean a whole bunch of illegal immigrants are going to take over California schools because as I have already stated; Even though this law makes it easier for illegal immigrants to attend college, it is still really really hard for them. 

We would prefer to have those who serve us, lie to us.

In old news, a lower court has ruled 'don't ask, don't tell' unconstitutional and the whole thing is going through the appeals process now.
The Supreme Court has now ruled that the policy will not be suspended until the appeals process is completely done with.
I can't say that I disagree with the Supreme Court's ruling. I know a lot of people are frustrated because they wanted to see change immediately. However, with the appeals the issue is tricky. The repeal of the policy is not set in stone and if men and women begin outing themselves now and then the appeals process comes through in the favor of 'don't ask, don't tell,' their military lives and salaries and benefits are all in danger.
Which brings me to the point that 'don't ask, don't tell' is one of the most outdated ideas still supported in a military that has supposedly become very modern. It is a form of government sanctioned segregation in a world where we like to pretend like that doesn't exist anymore. The fact that we have to sit and wait out the bureaucratic mess until we can embrace the change of policy is unsettling. All of us would prefer to see overwhelming issues like this be taken care of in one swoop.
The unfortunate truth is that many people still believe that don't ask, don't tell is beneficial to the armed forces and is an issue of combat readiness. But those members of the service who are hiding their sexuality for fear of losing their job, benefits, and the pride of serving their country; are lying to their comrades every day. Silly lies, little lies, lies that lead to more and more lies, just to cover up who they are. Maybe it is just me, but I would prefer that someone who I need to trust 100% out in the field be completely open with me, rather than to get used to the idea of lying for survival. It's not their fault, it is what the system does to them.
You hear among male service members that they are fighting with their best friends, their brothers; the people they've been through everything through. But I can't imagine how you could consider someone your best friend or your brother without them knowing key aspects of you, and who you are.
I think being able to be open with other service members would increase camaraderie and brotherhood. The only people who it would rattle are those who are homophobic or closed minded; and I don't understand why until now the military has put favor on protecting those men and women from the truth over allowing decent and gay or bisexual men and women have their freedom.

This entire post has been inspired by an article on CNN.com discussing the photography of Jeff Sheng and his commentary on 'don't ask, don't tell."
article

Labor laws protect employees, ESPECIALLY unskilled workers

I am writing in response to one of my classmate's blogs; Kevin Kazcorowski. His blog post discusses labor laws and whether or not they benefit society. He believes that they negatively affect unemployment by costing businesses too much money. He is a self-proclaimed libertarian and typically believes the less government control, the better.

Besides disagreeing with his opinion, I believe that certain aspects of his arguments are weak and contradictory.

For one, he makes the argument that labor laws hurt the lower income and unskilled workers that they are in place to help because they encourage companies to dump their least valuable employees. I agree that companies in times of economic crisis tend to evaluate their staff and those that are not productive to the company tend to be laid off. However, I am offended that he would assume that unskilled laborers are the ones that aren't worth much to a company. In many cases, they are the backbone. A company that is struggling economically is not just going to dump all their stock people or janitors because they're unskilled. Companies NEED those employees or they never would have hired them in the first place. There is a huge demand for unskilled laborers in the United States because there are plenty of jobs that people with degrees and specialized training are not willing to do. As well, it is entirely possible for an employee with training and education to be deemed not as necessary to a company and let go. A few years ago when the unemployment rate shot up, the people that were laid off were office workers and white collar employees.
I argue that labor laws tend to help unskilled workers the most because they usually have positions that haven't traditionally come with benefits, and with wages that tend to stay close to minimum wage. I also think that Kevin misunderstands how minimum wage works. The reason minimum wage rises is because cost of living rises. Cost of living rises because prices rise. Not vice versa. Either way, they always stay proportional. If minimum wage were to rise to $1000/ hr, it wouldn't make businesses broke, because prices would be up proportionally, because that's what inflation does.
Kevin also makes the statement that unemployment is intuitively a choice. Those who choose to be unemployed are not factored into the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate is calculated based on people who are actively searching for jobs.
Finally, I am confused by Kevin's idea that we are not a capitalistic society because there is unemployment. Capitalist markets have unemployment because they are based on competition, which also applies to competition for jobs. It almost sounds more like he'd prefer a socialistic market where everyone got to keep their jobs and get paid at a set rate.

Labor laws are in place to protect ALL employees, regardless of skill level. Benefits and minimum wage are certainly not going to cause businesses to go broke, nor are they a breach of the rights of those businesses. Workers need to be protected and a standard needs to be set for how they should be treated. Otherwise it is open to interpretation and that could take us down a dangerous road.