Well I can: it's a lot easier to get things done when everybody agrees on doing it. People with a shared culture are more likely to agree on things.

Here is an argument for your consideration:

Consider the concept of a business cluster, note that the city as a cluster is a reasonable idea [1].

Note that the population of Denmark does not break top 30 in a list of global cities [2].

Conclude that the country of Denmark, with its small geographic and demographic attributes, could specialise entirely in one high-margin economic area and further specialise their laws and social systems to that.

Basically, 5 million people can be sustained by the excess wealth of a strong local cluster. 50 million people cannot be sustained by one strong cluster, and the different clusters may have different needs.

I have no idea about Denmark, but if they /are/ clustered as a country around some high-tech industry, maybe the economically rational equilibrium to give out scholarships to support the local cluster? Maybe they are just nice people? A country with many clusters needs a one-size-fits-all legal and social system that works with all the clusters. The economic equilibriums may be different to a single cluster.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cluster#By_type_of_co... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities

Why should we pay for "these" people.

I've tried to ask this before. It's basically semi-conscious racism by people who are careful with their words. You'll not get a satisfactory response, because there is none.

You're begging the question. People are racist, that exactly what he's saying.

Not all of them but enough that it affects government at the highest levels. It definitely complicates any topic dealing with poverty becuase race usually gets tied to status in various nonsensical ways.

He's right. There's nothing wrong with being brutally honest.

If it was all delegated to them, it might work. But what you have instead is 50 secondary layers of bureaucracy, while the Federal govt holds firm control of the student loan market, and imposes control and regulation on colleges, using both carrot (R&D money) and stick (loans).