Graduate Students in the Engineering Fields

The NY Times has a piece on the increasing percent of engineering graduate students who are foreign. They state:

At the undergraduate level, 80 percent are United States residents. At the graduate level, the number is reversed: About 80 percent hail from India, China, Korea, Turkey and other foreign countries.

True fact, but why? And who is paying?

Having spent an almost sixty year career in and out of Academia I can make the following observations.

1. In the late 1950s the US Government made a major push to create more engineers. There were scholarships and institutions were incentivized to follow through. There were scholarships and fellowships. My personal out of pocket fees were often low. If I recall, MIT annual tuition, both semesters, in 1960 was less than $1,000. Grad school was free since you had some form of fellowship. Today there is no such advantage for Americans.

2. Most of the grad students were first generation types. Lots of fellow New Yorkers, most had little "family money" and many were even married with families. No longer the case.

3. Jobs were available, especially for Graduate students with good degrees. Programmers were not in demand, solid state engineers, RF engineers, and the like. People who built things not social media types.

4. Silicon Valley was cheap. Lots of housing and at reasonable prices. Start ups made stuff, not software. Millionaires came from oil and the like, not Wall Street and software.

Now in today's world there are major observations:

1. Almost ll high tech grad students are funded by the Government. Yes, those 80% of the foreign students are funded by the taxpayers. Those Chinese, Iranian, Syrian, grad students are funded by US tax dollars. They finish on our dime and return home. In the case of the Chinese students they often bring this expertise back to Chinese companies and then directly compete with the US. That is true in both for commercial and military entities. One should always remember Yamamoto and Harvard and Pearl Harbor!

2. US undergrads are often broke when the finish undergrad and thus are pressured to work and pay back the loans as well as taxes. As a side note the new Trump Tax makes the student loan no longer deductible. The taxes will then go to support the 80% of the grad students who are foreign. This is the way Washington works.

So what can be done? Simple, look back to the 50s. Eisenhower may very well turn out to be our greatest President. Fund undergrad tech students. We really do not need more fine arts types. Political Science may be good but it just leads to more lawyers! Don't we have enough. Then make it a level playing field for US citizen students, if the taxpayer is footing the bill, the taxpayer should have preference. Put a finger on the scale for US students.

So Let's Look at a Typical Middle Class In Westchester County

Take a simple example:

Husband and wife Income: $120,000

Old Deductions:

State and NYC Taxes (12%) $14,000
Real Estate on $700,000 Home $20,000
Health Care Insurance $15,000
Medical Expenses Dental $20,000
No Alimony
Charitable Deductions $2000

Under old rules you go to deduct $59000

Under Trump Tax you lose:

State and Local Tax $4000
Real Estate $10000
Medical $23000

or you lose $37000!

If tax rate is say 15% you pay $5500 MORE! If it is higher you pay even more!

This is back of the envelope but if you hated Obama Care you will truly despise this one! Of course if you are at Goldman and you donate in a nice tax plan a new medical facility you get a pyramid paid for by the schlubs above!

Yes Mr. President, the Middle Class will really thank you!

First Obama Care and Now Trump Tax! The Poor Middle Class.

If one reads the new Tax Bill the following will be terrifying. Take the poor family facing massive healthcare costs from Obama Care and then a health crisis. Take a child with leukemia. Now not only are your insurance premiums exploding but you can no longer deduct the cost of trying to keep your child alive. This is about as evil as one can get. First they increase your healthcare then they tax you for it! This is Goldman Sachs at work! What middle class tax cut? This is a Bill which loads the middle class with the burden while allowing the 1% to get even more! This is H.R. 1 and good old Brady! Let's all kick the poor folks when they are down! Where is Robespierre!

4 SEC. 1308. REPEAL OF MEDICAL EXPENSE DEDUCTION.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part VII of subchapter B is
6 amended by striking by striking section 213 (and by strik7
ing the item relating to such section in the table of section
8 for such subpart).
9 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
10 (1)(A) Section 105(f) is amended to read as fol11
lows:
12 ‘‘(f) MEDICAL CARE.—For purposes of this section—
13 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘medical care’
14 means amounts paid—
15 ‘‘(A) for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation,
16 treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the
17 purpose of affecting any structure or function
18 of the body,
19 ‘‘(B) for transportation primarily for and
20 essential to medical care referred to in subpara21
graph (A),
22 ‘‘(C) for qualified long-term care services
23 (as defined in section 7702B(c)), or
24 ‘‘(D) for insurance (including amounts
25 paid as premiums under part B of title XVIII
1 of the Social Security Act, relating to supple2
mentary medical insurance for the aged) cov3
ering medical care referred to in subparagraphs
4 (A) and (B) or for any qualified long-term care
5 insurance contract (as defined in section
6 7702B(b)).
7 In the case of a qualified long-term care insurance
8 contract (as defined in section 7702B(b)), only eligi9
ble long-term care premiums (as defined in para10
graph (7)) shall be taken into account under sub11
paragraph (D).
12 ‘‘(2) AMOUNTS PAID FOR CERTAIN LODGING
13 AWAY FROM HOME TREATED AS PAID FOR MEDICAL
14 CARE.—Amounts paid for lodging (not lavish or ex15
travagant under the circumstances) while away from
16 home primarily for and essential to medical care re17
ferred to in paragraph (1)(A) shall be treated as
18 amounts paid for medical care if—
19 ‘‘(A) the medical care referred to in para20
graph (1)(A) is provided by a physician in a li21
censed hospital (or in a medical care facility
22 which is related to, or the equivalent of, a li23
censed hospital), and
1 ‘‘(B) there is no significant element of per2
sonal pleasure, recreation, or vacation in the
3 travel away from home.
4 The amount taken into account under the preceding
5 sentence shall not exceed $50 for each night for each
6 individual.
7 ‘‘(3) PHYSICIAN.—The term ‘physician’ has the
8 meaning given to such term by section 1861(r) of
9 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(r))....


And if you like this one you will like the next!

19 SEC. 1309. REPEAL OF DEDUCTION FOR ALIMONY PAY20
MENTS.
21 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part VII of subchapter B is
22 amended by striking by striking section 215 (and by strik23
ing the item relating to such section in the table of section
24 for such subpart).

Perhaps the President did not see this part.

So what is worse. Forcing you to buy something you do not want or taxing you for the thing you had to buy that you did not want!

A Letter on Tax Proposals

Senator Cory Booker

359 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Booker,

Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen

2306 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515-3011

Dear Congressman Frelinghuysen,

As a constituent I would like to give my opinion regarding the proposed Tax Plan. Specifically as relates to deductions.

Local Taxes and Real Estate Taxes are by Personal Choice

Despite the high tax burden in New Jersey for both income and real estate taxes, I and many people have made that choice. That is especially so for those in high income brackets for whom this tax is discretionary. If I do not like it I can move. Lower income people do not benefit from this deduction, especially given the proposed increase in the standard deduction. Thus, any elimination of this would not benefit the wealthier but the contrary.

Charitable Deductions Benefit the Wealthy. They are by choice and all too often are Government subsidized ego trips.

Charitable deductions are also discretionary. The new tax proposal allows them. They benefit the wealth. The allow for the pyramids built in the names of donors and via complex tax benefits allow near in write offs while sheltering significant incomes. Now I make substantial donations primarily to cancer research. However I do so anonymously and would continue to do so no matter what the tax situation is. Many however want their names in lights as well and benefitting from this deduction. Thus, charitable deductions benefit the wealthy much more than anyone else. The benefits are both financial and ego building. Ego gratification should not be subsidized by the tax payer. Especially the poorer ones who cannot even afford healthcare.

Medical Expense Deductions Dramatically Burden the Poorer and are Highly Regressive. They are not by choice but are true calamities.

As a result of the ACA I have seen healthcare costs explode for the middle class. Ballooning insurance and exploding deductions. Then along comes a medical crisis and the costs truly explode because none of the plans provide truly catastrophic coverage. People and families suffering a health crises now face a financial crisis. I have seen many family and patients die of this disease and have seen the financial burden that they have had to bear. 

Yes it happens that the new tax proposal will take this away from these poor people while allowing the rich to maintain massive healthcare plans paid for with tax deductible dollars at the corporate level and getting massive deductions for their "charitable" yet ego building deductions. Here the poor are truly underwriting the rich! Frankly this is grossly immoral and reflects in my opinion the total disconnection between the current administrations financial analysts and the real world. Goldman Sachs has not clue how a truck driver lives. A child gets Hodgkin's disease or leukemia and they are driven to bankruptcy. I have seen this again and again. While this is happening the rich and their "donations" go to fine dinners and tell each other how wonderful they are.

Entrepreneurial Capital Gains and Hedge Funds do not Equate

I have spent several decades in venture capital. I have personally started and developed near a dozen companies and have invested in and overseen a total of thirty-five. In all cases I not only took the financial risk but conceived of the idea, structured the company, raised capital, operated the entity and monetized the result. Hedge funds are merely financial intermediaries. The entrepreneur is wedded to their concept and creation, twenty four hours a day. The hedge fund operator may at best attend a board meeting and collect a check. As such the tax code should incent the entrepreneur and tax the hedge fund operator as normal income.

Not only do we have the above problems in the Administration's proposal, but the wealthy would  get the benefit of eliminating the Estate Tax. The poor would see no benefit there, nor would the middle class. The middle class clearly bear the burden of this proposal and those 1% folks get a massive tax cut, paid for by the Middle Class. I feel this to be grossly immoral.

I am asking that you consider my concerns as not just those of a single constituent but reflective of the many who cannot voice what they face. Medical Expense should be inviolate. It is the least that we as a society can do for those in need. The others are by choice. If you keep one, just one, keep the Medical Expense for the millions who will benefit during times of need.