I don't like the method, execution, or reasons, but I feel torn as this type of move will force these institutions to restructure for servicing the youth of the USA instead of primarily pricing out the nation in favor of the super wealthy elite from abroad. From that angle, this eventually creates slightly more upward mobility access for social classes that have long been de facto bared from these institutions due to financial competitiveness of a foreign elite. Maybe that perspective is naïve. I comment it to engage with other reasoning people, not dogma or the stupidity of tribalism.
Just a bit of advice: maybe use the Jehovah's Witnesses playbook of never act alone like some kind of prime directive. Seriously, this is effective and why you never see Witnesses knocking on people's doors or slinging literature solo. This applies both if approached or if you see someone being approached. The key is not to gang up on the other person. It only takes 2 people and should only be 2 people to avoid making the other person uncomfortable. The second person is there to mostly support and occasionally act like a moderator. The second person can pull back the conversation, tone down, or redirect in ways that the first is less in control of in the flow of conversation.
Witnesses encounter a lot of confrontational people. When I was one, I was chased, threatened, followed, and a number of other things. Witnesses are directed to always be friendly and amicable while walking away from all confrontational people.
I do this all the time too. The new standard for polite calling anyone is to initiate the conversation if the line goes live as far as I am concerned. Never say anything for an unknown caller, and expect to get dropped or hung up on even if you are legitimate. If you're unwilling to call me twice or thrice, you didn't need to call me in the first place.
I don't think so. As far as I know the primary constraint is the number of seats. That is an artificial constraint from the top to maintain exclusivity and brand value. In the trickle down effects of such a constraint those managing the school are incentivised to get the most money for each of those seats as this is largely what is funding their pay and research, like the kinds of lab equipment available. We are in the age when lots of equipment exists beyond the scope of what any school can afford, such as EUV for edge node silicon fab tech. How the school prepares elite students to lead in a field where the school cannot provide direct and relevant training is a bit dicey and is the basis for a lot of financial pressure. Overall, removing this elite class of funding will inevitably reduce the relevance of the institution because it will need to do more with less while filling the same number of seats via supply and demand adjusted prices.