SCOTUS upholds college Affirmative Action

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White people are very, very afraid of Asian people.

Well, obviously, white guys aren't afraid of Asian women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative Action = Food Stamp of Education

- some need it
- some get it and want more
- some don't, and don't want it
- most of who get it, can't get out of poverty anyway

The troglodyte who wrote this nonsense is trying way to hard to be clever. Give it up because you do not possess the intelligence nor the talent to pull it off.

At least I worked for what I have... No help from AActions, no Govt hand-outs. Everything I have, I worked for and earned it. Can you say that about yourself? I paid for your foot stamps. Don't forget that.

OK Donald Trump! He started from nothing too. White privilege which is always heavily subsidized by free labor. bankruptcy, students loan, government job...whatever

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White people are very, very afraid of Asian people.

Well, obviously, white guys aren't afraid of Asian women.

Well, obviously, white guys aren't afraid of ugly Asian women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For top national universities such as Berkeley and UCLA, national demographics should be used not regional. Nationally, blacks make up about 12% of the population. Incoming black student population for Berkeley was 2.8% for 2015 and the total black student population for UCLA is 4.0% which are very small compared to 10 to 12 percent for other top schools. This is with unofficial Institutional Affirmative Action at UCs despite the ban in place.

NP-No, you should use state demographics to compare state school enrollment. State schools give state residents preference in admissions; Cal and UCLA are no exception. The prior PP is correct, California's two flagship universities' Black population is aligned with the state's Black population.

Berkeley's 2015 incoming black students: 2.8%
Stanford's 2015 incoming black students: 7.8%

Both schools are located in California and both use holistic admissions program so what makes Stanford's black student number significantly higher (almost 3 times) than Berkeley number even though both are in California and Stanford is supposedly more selective school (the most selective in the country)? Berkeley is even cheaper for black students who are California residents. Shouldn't Berkeley's numbers be higher for blacks?

You guessed it. Affirmative Action program at Stanford where race preference is significant.

UC Berkeley in-state cost is 36k, stanford's is $62k. Like the Ivys on the east coast, Stanford is expects nada, zero, nilch in financial support for families earning less than 125k. Anybody who can get into Stanford can get into UCB. The money is at Stanford. Berkeley doesn't pass out that kind of financial assistance.

Nope. You have to pay about $17,000.00 for approximately $125,000.00 HHI. The financial aid doesn't do you any good if you are not accepted first. Your post still doesn't explain why significantly higher percentage of blacks are admitted to Stanford than Berkeley except for the racial preference difference.

Your numbers aren't admits. They are enrolled numbers. Big difference. And 17k is still significantly less than 36k. Moreover, all things being equal, Stanford all the way.

Most in-state students at Berkeley pay 0 to 30% of the total expected cost. Typically between $7,000 to $16,000 so you can't make the cost argument.

That's not true. They end up paying for it later in the school loans.

Not really:

"Did You Know?

Sixty-one percent of Berkeley undergraduate students who graduated between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014 graduated without loan debt (Federal Direct Subsidized/Unsubsidized Loans, Federal Perkins Loans, private loans). The average cumulative loan debt for graduating seniors was $17,584. "

http://financialaid.berkeley.edu/tags/student-loans

17,584/4= 4.396 per year for 39% of the graduates. Not bad. That also works out to average of about $1,800 per year in student loan for all students! Not bad. Still making the cost argument?

Hm, 77% of Stanford grads graduate with absolutely zero, none, nada debt. Yeah, I'm still making the cost argument. No student loans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For top national universities such as Berkeley and UCLA, national demographics should be used not regional. Nationally, blacks make up about 12% of the population. Incoming black student population for Berkeley was 2.8% for 2015 and the total black student population for UCLA is 4.0% which are very small compared to 10 to 12 percent for other top schools. This is with unofficial Institutional Affirmative Action at UCs despite the ban in place.

NP-No, you should use state demographics to compare state school enrollment. State schools give state residents preference in admissions; Cal and UCLA are no exception. The prior PP is correct, California's two flagship universities' Black population is aligned with the state's Black population.

Berkeley's 2015 incoming black students: 2.8%
Stanford's 2015 incoming black students: 7.8%

Both schools are located in California and both use holistic admissions program so what makes Stanford's black student number significantly higher (almost 3 times) than Berkeley number even though both are in California and Stanford is supposedly more selective school (the most selective in the country)? Berkeley is even cheaper for black students who are California residents. Shouldn't Berkeley's numbers be higher for blacks?

You guessed it. Affirmative Action program at Stanford where race preference is significant.

UC Berkeley in-state cost is 36k, stanford's is $62k. Like the Ivys on the east coast, Stanford is expects nada, zero, nilch in financial support for families earning less than 125k. Anybody who can get into Stanford can get into UCB. The money is at Stanford. Berkeley doesn't pass out that kind of financial assistance.

Nope. You have to pay about $17,000.00 for approximately $125,000.00 HHI. The financial aid doesn't do you any good if you are not accepted first. Your post still doesn't explain why significantly higher percentage of blacks are admitted to Stanford than Berkeley except for the racial preference difference.

Your numbers aren't admits. They are enrolled numbers. Big difference. And 17k is still significantly less than 36k. Moreover, all things being equal, Stanford all the way.

Most in-state students at Berkeley pay 0 to 30% of the total expected cost. Typically between $7,000 to $16,000 so you can't make the cost argument.

That's not true. They end up paying for it later in the school loans.

Not really:

"Did You Know?

Sixty-one percent of Berkeley undergraduate students who graduated between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014 graduated without loan debt (Federal Direct Subsidized/Unsubsidized Loans, Federal Perkins Loans, private loans). The average cumulative loan debt for graduating seniors was $17,584. "

http://financialaid.berkeley.edu/tags/student-loans

17,584/4= 4.396 per year for 39% of the graduates. Not bad. That also works out to average of about $1,800 per year in student loan for all students! Not bad. Still making the cost argument?

Hm, 77% of Stanford grads graduate with absolutely zero, none, nada debt. Yeah, I'm still making the cost argument. No student loans.

You forgot about the average student debt for Stanford graduate for 2015:

The average per student cumulative undergraduate indebtedness for students earning undergraduate degrees between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015 and receiving financial aid: $21,238
Percent of graduates with debt: 22% Of course more students at Berkeley will take out loans since more poor students attend Berkeley. For example, a student might borrow $4,000.00 in student loan for a given academic year even if that was the total EFC for the year. Berkeley has one of the highest Pell Grant recipient percentage in the country so yeah more of them will borrow. But they borrow less amount than Stanford students on average.

You conveniently left that piece of information out. Still making the cost argument?

[Anonymous]

The arguments in this forum are reflective of why affirmative action is still necessary.

This cartoon sums up the current debate nicely:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Glitters143/status/746101369136783360/photo/1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the black lady beating up on white posters. What is sad is that Asian Americans who are most affected by this ruling is forgotten and ignored once again.

Forget Becky with bad grades, Asian Americans with excellent grades, scores, awards, ECs, leadership skills, sport etc. are getting denied admission to top schools due to soft quotas in place at the top universities for Asian Americans . Asian Americans have accomplished academic and non-academic accomplishments despite many of them (or their parents) being immigrants who had to overcome language and cultural obstacles in addition to the same racial discrimination. Blacks are not the only group experiencing discrimination. Asians have been forced into slave labor, sent to internment camps, had property confiscated, lynched, subject to Chinese Exclusion Act etc.

Hopefully, the legal actions against Harvard and UNC by Asian Americans can proceed now the SCOTUS case is over.

Don't forget, wherever Holistic admission system" is used without considering "race", blacks make up extremely small number which is very telling.

For example, TJ uses "Holistic Admission System" and places heavy emphasis on short essays (SIS) and longer essay (some would say to give preference to non-Asians) and the admission's office bends backwards to recruit and admit blacks and Hispanics but their numbers are typically around 1% and 3% respectively and not much better for Berkeley and UCLA for blacks (2-3%) while Hispanics do better (20-25%).

What the fuck is your point with this? So tired of hearing. Damn, you fight with the 1 - 3% of black students getting in and we really took your Asian snowflakes slot away really? We didn't take your slot, white kids did. If the black kids weren't performing, then I would say, maybe it's a problem. If they are, that means that there are more important things to evaluate and proves intelligence then just grades.

2015 UCLA Fall demographics are 23% Hispanic, 30% white, 37% Asian, and 5% Black.. California demographics on the other hand is 57% white, 13% Asian, 37% Hispanic, and 6% Black. It seems that the Black population is aligned with the state population. The Hispanic enrollment will catch up to the state demographics eventually. The problem is that the white population is well below the state demographics. As a result of the Asians taking UCLA seats from the whites, the whites are bitching about the few seats Blacks and Hispanics earn. It's not 1970, whites are not entitled to every seat in the classroom.

For top national universities such as Berkeley and UCLA, national demographics should be used not regional. Nationally, blacks make up about 12% of the population. Incoming black student population for Berkeley was 2.8% for 2015 and the total black student population for UCLA is 4.0% which are very small compared to 10 to 12 percent for other top schools. This is with unofficial Institutional Affirmative Action at UCs despite the ban in place.

NP-No, you should use state demographics to compare state school enrollment. State schools give state residents preference in admissions; Cal and UCLA are no exception. The prior PP is correct, California's two flagship universities' Black population is aligned with the state's Black population.

Berkeley's 2015 incoming black students: 2.8%
Stanford's 2015 incoming black students: 7.8%

Both schools are located in California and both use holistic admissions program so what makes Stanford's black student number significantly higher (almost 3 times) than Berkeley number even though both are in California and Stanford is supposedly more selective school (the most selective in the country)? Berkeley is even cheaper for black students who are California residents. Shouldn't Berkeley's numbers be higher for blacks?

You guessed it. Affirmative Action program at Stanford where race preference is significant.

No dummy. You didn't say how many were accepted. If I am a top black student, why would I go to Berkeley over Stanford? With Stanford's financial aid, the price would be the same or cheaper.

You dummy if that (yield rate) is the only thing at play than we should expect the same for Asian Americans; higher % at Stanford (more prestige, supposedly more aid etc.) so let's see what the Asian student populations are:


Stanford: about 20%
Berkeley about 40%

Hmm... why are there substantially more Asians at Berkeley than Stanford if Stanford is more prestigious and supposedly gives more aid (even if it is significantly more expensive)? Wonder what is going on here? Whay are Asian numbers reversed compared to Blacks?

I don't know why Asian students prefer Berkeley, but that's Asian students. I can guarantee the black students would choose Stanford. Stanford is going to give a huge amount of money. What is wrong with you? You have 40% at Berkeley. Are you mad it isn't 100%? What is your beef?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For top national universities such as Berkeley and UCLA, national demographics should be used not regional. Nationally, blacks make up about 12% of the population. Incoming black student population for Berkeley was 2.8% for 2015 and the total black student population for UCLA is 4.0% which are very small compared to 10 to 12 percent for other top schools. This is with unofficial Institutional Affirmative Action at UCs despite the ban in place.

NP-No, you should use state demographics to compare state school enrollment. State schools give state residents preference in admissions; Cal and UCLA are no exception. The prior PP is correct, California's two flagship universities' Black population is aligned with the state's Black population.

Berkeley's 2015 incoming black students: 2.8%
Stanford's 2015 incoming black students: 7.8%

Both schools are located in California and both use holistic admissions program so what makes Stanford's black student number significantly higher (almost 3 times) than Berkeley number even though both are in California and Stanford is supposedly more selective school (the most selective in the country)? Berkeley is even cheaper for black students who are California residents. Shouldn't Berkeley's numbers be higher for blacks?

You guessed it. Affirmative Action program at Stanford where race preference is significant.

UC Berkeley in-state cost is 36k, stanford's is $62k. Like the Ivys on the east coast, Stanford is expects nada, zero, nilch in financial support for families earning less than 125k. Anybody who can get into Stanford can get into UCB. The money is at Stanford. Berkeley doesn't pass out that kind of financial assistance.

Nope. You have to pay about $17,000.00 for approximately $125,000.00 HHI. The financial aid doesn't do you any good if you are not accepted first. Your post still doesn't explain why significantly higher percentage of blacks are admitted to Stanford than Berkeley except for the racial preference difference.

Actually, who cares except you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The arguments in this forum are reflective of why affirmative action is still necessary.

This cartoon sums up the current debate nicely:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Glitters143/status/746101369136783360/photo/1

That's a good one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative Action = Food Stamp of Education

- some need it
- some get it and want more
- some don't, and don't want it
- most of who get it, can't get out of poverty anyway

The troglodyte who wrote this nonsense is trying way to hard to be clever. Give it up because you do not possess the intelligence nor the talent to pull it off.

At least I worked for what I have... No help from AActions, no Govt hand-outs. Everything I have, I worked for and earned it. Can you say that about yourself? I paid for your foot stamps. Don't forget that.

You sound as if you were foaming at the mouth as you wrote this unhinged rant. AA? Government handouts? Food stamps? You have no idea what you're talking about. However, it's clear that you're both racist and mentally ill.

[Anonymous]

I have something that rich white parents would sell their souls to have in order to give their kids an edge. Choctaw ancestry. No amount of Kumonor organic food can touch that, suckers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the black lady beating up on white posters. What is sad is that Asian Americans who are most affected by this ruling is forgotten and ignored once again.

Forget Becky with bad grades, Asian Americans with excellent grades, scores, awards, ECs, leadership skills, sport etc. are getting denied admission to top schools due to soft quotas in place at the top universities for Asian Americans . Asian Americans have accomplished academic and non-academic accomplishments despite many of them (or their parents) being immigrants who had to overcome language and cultural obstacles in addition to the same racial discrimination. Blacks are not the only group experiencing discrimination. Asians have been forced into slave labor, sent to internment camps, had property confiscated, lynched, subject to Chinese Exclusion Act etc.

Hopefully, the legal actions against Harvard and UNC by Asian Americans can proceed now the SCOTUS case is over.

Don't forget, wherever Holistic admission system" is used without considering "race", blacks make up extremely small number which is very telling.

For example, TJ uses "Holistic Admission System" and places heavy emphasis on short essays (SIS) and longer essay (some would say to give preference to non-Asians) and the admission's office bends backwards to recruit and admit blacks and Hispanics but their numbers are typically around 1% and 3% respectively and not much better for Berkeley and UCLA for blacks (2-3%) while Hispanics do better (20-25%).

Oh please, yes. Even if we reached the point that the makeup of the student body at one of these colleges was 100% Asian, there would still be some on here complaining that they had higher scores and should have gotten in. Holistic is holistic and can't be reduced to just numbers (even when those numbers include ECs with the appropriate number of awards and level of leadership).

And look at what has happened to TJ. As the make-up of the student body has changed, the school has become more of a stress factory, causing many students not to want to apply and some teachers to leave. Colleges each have their cultures and administrators often want to preserve those.

Many students not want to apply = whites scared to compete with Asian Americans or racist;
Teachers leave = teachers are retiring after 20-30 years of service.
Whites can run from competetion but they cannot hide forever.

It's not fear, it's not wanting that kind of pressured environment. I'd call that smart.
The teachers I know who have left have left because they didn't like how the culture was changing. They have not retired, but found jobs at schools with a healthier atmosphere and more balance.
Your third comment is so obviously misguided and/or racist, it doesn't warrant a response. It is worth noting, however, that instances of cheating at TJ are on the increase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the black lady beating up on white posters. What is sad is that Asian Americans who are most affected by this ruling is forgotten and ignored once again.

Forget Becky with bad grades, Asian Americans with excellent grades, scores, awards, ECs, leadership skills, sport etc. are getting denied admission to top schools due to soft quotas in place at the top universities for Asian Americans . Asian Americans have accomplished academic and non-academic accomplishments despite many of them (or their parents) being immigrants who had to overcome language and cultural obstacles in addition to the same racial discrimination. Blacks are not the only group experiencing discrimination. Asians have been forced into slave labor, sent to internment camps, had property confiscated, lynched, subject to Chinese Exclusion Act etc.

Hopefully, the legal actions against Harvard and UNC by Asian Americans can proceed now the SCOTUS case is over.

Don't forget, wherever Holistic admission system" is used without considering "race", blacks make up extremely small number which is very telling.

For example, TJ uses "Holistic Admission System" and places heavy emphasis on short essays (SIS) and longer essay (some would say to give preference to non-Asians) and the admission's office bends backwards to recruit and admit blacks and Hispanics but their numbers are typically around 1% and 3% respectively and not much better for Berkeley and UCLA for blacks (2-3%) while Hispanics do better (20-25%).

Oh please, yes. Even if we reached the point that the makeup of the student body at one of these colleges was 100% Asian, there would still be some on here complaining that they had higher scores and should have gotten in. Holistic is holistic and can't be reduced to just numbers (even when those numbers include ECs with the appropriate number of awards and level of leadership).

And look at what has happened to TJ. As the make-up of the student body has changed, the school has become more of a stress factory, causing many students not to want to apply and some teachers to leave. Colleges each have their cultures and administrators often want to preserve those.

Many students not want to apply = whites scared to compete with Asian Americans or racist;
Teachers leave = teachers are retiring after 20-30 years of service.
Whites can run from competetion but they cannot hide forever.

It's not fear, it's not wanting that kind of pressured environment. I'd call that smart.
The teachers I know who have left have left because they didn't like how the culture was changing. They have not retired, but found jobs at schools with a healthier atmosphere and more balance.
Your third comment is so obviously misguided and/or racist, it doesn't warrant a response. It is worth noting, however, that instances of cheating at TJ are on the increase.

Whites can try to oppress but Asians are smarter than whites. Can't oppress that forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The arguments in this forum are reflective of why affirmative action is still necessary.

This cartoon sums up the current debate nicely:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Glitters143/status/746101369136783360/photo/1

That's a good one.

I agree; remove all affirmative action, not just race based AA.

[Anonymous]

NP, I have worked at two top 20 schools and I have two friends that work in admissions at 2 Ivies. Black students are not taking Asian spots. They are not taking up top white student spots. Mediocre whites, yes. Asians are competing with white students for admission and as long as white people hold the power Asians will not get into top schools in high numbers. Top schools want the student body to be majority white because these institutions are historicallying white and have white boards and administration that lead the schools and donate money.