There has been a lot of discussion since Athens about foreign swimmers training in the United States. Most of them attend U.S. Universities, receive athletic scholarships, and compete at NCAA's. Some notable examples include Duje Draganja (Cal), Fred Bousquet and Kirsty Coventry (Auburn), Markus Rogan (Stanford), and the South African sprinters (Arizona). Some train in the U.S., but don't compete for a university (Inge de Bruijn). All of these athletes benefit from U.S. coaching, from training with U.S. swimmers, and in some cases, from financial support provided by U.S. entities (athletic scholarships). They all turn around and then win medals for other countries.
A couple questions: 1) What do you think about this arrangement generally? 2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here? 3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?
I'm sure there are other issues, but these come directly to mind.
Parents
Former Member
Totally agree with Aquageek on this particular issue. My country, China, used to restrict people from moving around the country freely or across different provisions or cities and rural areas(actually it is still more or less the case nowadays). As a result, the general living conditions of the whole population was very low then. Why? because the majority of the population cannot make full use of their talents to benefit the country and the people as well as themselves. Just imagine, what universities you can go, what place you can work, what social benefits and health care you can get, were determined by what place or families you were born into despite the fact that you were talented, you were working extremely hard, all of which could easily become nothing compared to the odds that your birthplace was.
But with the economic reform as well as other reforms since 1979, Chinese people, to some extend, can move around the country freely, can make their own choice freely, can compete against the so called locals in every aspects. the result is obvious. the general living condition has been significantly improved. Of course some previleges that used to be only enjoyed by city people are now gone and spread to the rural areas. But to these city people, it is a fact that they are also better off in terms of general living condition.
To me, the same principle can be applied to the swim scholarship offered to internationl swimmers. On the one hand, Americans are denied even though they pay the tax. On the other hand, international swimmers get the scholarship. But I think the benefits would outweigh the loss in the long term. Because international swimmers bring new techniques, new minds, new training methods, which clashes with the American way and improve the swim standard in general. This, in my view, is the major return of recruiting international swimmers, just like the academic field.
For the tax payer issue, let's take another approach. Let's look ahead 10 years, 20 years, or more. Your son or your friend cannot get the scholarship. But it is possible that your grandson could do it. It is also possible that your grandson's outstanding performance might benefit largely or decisively from international swimmers. If we push it to extreme, that, your grandson might become champion only under an overseas training system that does not exist in America. Which one should you choose? the one that offer the scholarship based on nationality, in which case your grandson might never have the chance to become a swimmer because the training system that suits him is denied by America just because of the nationality issue. or another one that offer scholarship based on performance. Your grandson can be trained and attain a higher level.
To me, the tax paid today will return someday in the future. It is this kind of accumulation of generations that make our world better and better. It might not reward you or your son. But it will reward your grandson.
Please forgive me if there is any inapproporiate words. English is my second language. And I live in Beijing, rarely having the chance to practise it.
Finally thanks this forum. I learn a lot of techniques.
Good day!
It's both economically and physically impossible to close the border. Communist Europe and China tried it and look at them now, moving to the free market economy. There are really about a handful of nations these days that still hang onto the belief that closed borders benefit the economy, Cuba and N. Korea are two notable examples, and fine examples they are. So, move on from that notion. And, I seriously doubt many of the illegal aliens you are so concerned about bankrupting our southern border states are taking up swimming scholarships.
Totally agree with Aquageek on this particular issue. My country, China, used to restrict people from moving around the country freely or across different provisions or cities and rural areas(actually it is still more or less the case nowadays). As a result, the general living conditions of the whole population was very low then. Why? because the majority of the population cannot make full use of their talents to benefit the country and the people as well as themselves. Just imagine, what universities you can go, what place you can work, what social benefits and health care you can get, were determined by what place or families you were born into despite the fact that you were talented, you were working extremely hard, all of which could easily become nothing compared to the odds that your birthplace was.
But with the economic reform as well as other reforms since 1979, Chinese people, to some extend, can move around the country freely, can make their own choice freely, can compete against the so called locals in every aspects. the result is obvious. the general living condition has been significantly improved. Of course some previleges that used to be only enjoyed by city people are now gone and spread to the rural areas. But to these city people, it is a fact that they are also better off in terms of general living condition.
To me, the same principle can be applied to the swim scholarship offered to internationl swimmers. On the one hand, Americans are denied even though they pay the tax. On the other hand, international swimmers get the scholarship. But I think the benefits would outweigh the loss in the long term. Because international swimmers bring new techniques, new minds, new training methods, which clashes with the American way and improve the swim standard in general. This, in my view, is the major return of recruiting international swimmers, just like the academic field.
For the tax payer issue, let's take another approach. Let's look ahead 10 years, 20 years, or more. Your son or your friend cannot get the scholarship. But it is possible that your grandson could do it. It is also possible that your grandson's outstanding performance might benefit largely or decisively from international swimmers. If we push it to extreme, that, your grandson might become champion only under an overseas training system that does not exist in America. Which one should you choose? the one that offer the scholarship based on nationality, in which case your grandson might never have the chance to become a swimmer because the training system that suits him is denied by America just because of the nationality issue. or another one that offer scholarship based on performance. Your grandson can be trained and attain a higher level.
To me, the tax paid today will return someday in the future. It is this kind of accumulation of generations that make our world better and better. It might not reward you or your son. But it will reward your grandson.
Please forgive me if there is any inapproporiate words. English is my second language. And I live in Beijing, rarely having the chance to practise it.
Finally thanks this forum. I learn a lot of techniques.
Good day!
It's both economically and physically impossible to close the border. Communist Europe and China tried it and look at them now, moving to the free market economy. There are really about a handful of nations these days that still hang onto the belief that closed borders benefit the economy, Cuba and N. Korea are two notable examples, and fine examples they are. So, move on from that notion. And, I seriously doubt many of the illegal aliens you are so concerned about bankrupting our southern border states are taking up swimming scholarships.
