Affirmative Action should be income-based, not race-based

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an upper-middle class area, and the neighbors were all engineers, Ph.D.'s, accountants, and economists. Why should the black children in the neighborhood get a "leg-up" over high-achieving poor whites in Brooklyn (or wherever) when it comes to getting into a competitive college?

Affirmative action should be based on a combination of better-than-average-grades and family income. This could be accomplished by giving "special chance" points to the top 5% in every school who ALSO has a family income of less than $100,000. In the inner-city and poor rural areas, just about everyone is from a sub-$100,000 family, so the top 5% get the special-chance points. Thus, in a crappy DC public school with 400 graduating seniors, about 20 would get the AA points. In a wealthy Bethesda W school, perhaps only 1 or 2 would (because a high family income would disqualify the others).

In addition, kids qualifying for special-chance points would get the equivalent of tuition of the state's 4-year public university. End result is the exceptional kids from lower-middle-class (or poorer) families get the leg up in admission AND tuition support. Race would not be a factor (although since black families earn less than whites, on average, they would still benefit disproptionately).

Couldn't agree more.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an upper-middle class area, and the neighbors were all engineers, Ph.D.'s, accountants, and economists. Why should the black children in the neighborhood get a "leg-up" over high-achieving poor whites in Brooklyn (or wherever) when it comes to getting into a competitive college?

Affirmative action should be based on a combination of better-than-average-grades and family income. This could be accomplished by giving "special chance" points to the top 5% in every school who ALSO has a family income of less than $100,000. In the inner-city and poor rural areas, just about everyone is from a sub-$100,000 family, so the top 5% get the special-chance points. Thus, in a crappy DC public school with 400 graduating seniors, about 20 would get the AA points. In a wealthy Bethesda W school, perhaps only 1 or 2 would (because a high family income would disqualify the others).

In addition, kids qualifying for special-chance points would get the equivalent of tuition of the state's 4-year public university. End result is the exceptional kids from lower-middle-class (or poorer) families get the leg up in admission AND tuition support. Race would not be a factor (although since black families earn less than whites, on average, they would still benefit disproptionately).

Couldn't agree more.

+1000

OP here, and thank you.

(As you can imagine, though, liberals on this forum have called me a racist for daring to suggest a new approach that may help low-income whites as well as blacks.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an upper-middle class area, and the neighbors were all engineers, Ph.D.'s, accountants, and economists. Why should the black children in the neighborhood get a "leg-up" over high-achieving poor whites in Brooklyn (or wherever) when it comes to getting into a competitive college?

Affirmative action should be based on a combination of better-than-average-grades and family income. This could be accomplished by giving "special chance" points to the top 5% in every school who ALSO has a family income of less than $100,000. In the inner-city and poor rural areas, just about everyone is from a sub-$100,000 family, so the top 5% get the special-chance points. Thus, in a crappy DC public school with 400 graduating seniors, about 20 would get the AA points. In a wealthy Bethesda W school, perhaps only 1 or 2 would (because a high family income would disqualify the others).

In addition, kids qualifying for special-chance points would get the equivalent of tuition of the state's 4-year public university. End result is the exceptional kids from lower-middle-class (or poorer) families get the leg up in admission AND tuition support. Race would not be a factor (although since black families earn less than whites, on average, they would still benefit disproptionately).

Couldn't agree more.

+1000

OP here, and thank you.

(As you can imagine, though, liberals on this forum have called me a racist for daring to suggest a new approach that may help low-income whites as well as blacks.)

Yes. It has been quite enlightening to read how conservative and reactionary so many "progressives" truly are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an upper-middle class area, and the neighbors were all engineers, Ph.D.'s, accountants, and economists. Why should the black children in the neighborhood get a "leg-up" over high-achieving poor whites in Brooklyn (or wherever) when it comes to getting into a competitive college?

Affirmative action should be based on a combination of better-than-average-grades and family income. This could be accomplished by giving "special chance" points to the top 5% in every school who ALSO has a family income of less than $100,000. In the inner-city and poor rural areas, just about everyone is from a sub-$100,000 family, so the top 5% get the special-chance points. Thus, in a crappy DC public school with 400 graduating seniors, about 20 would get the AA points. In a wealthy Bethesda W school, perhaps only 1 or 2 would (because a high family income would disqualify the others).

In addition, kids qualifying for special-chance points would get the equivalent of tuition of the state's 4-year public university. End result is the exceptional kids from lower-middle-class (or poorer) families get the leg up in admission AND tuition support. Race would not be a factor (although since black families earn less than whites, on average, they would still benefit disproptionately).

Couldn't agree more.

+1000

OP here, and thank you.

(As you can imagine, though, liberals on this forum have called me a racist for daring to suggest a new approach that may help low-income whites as well as blacks.)

Yes. It has been quite enlightening to read how conservative and reactionary so many "progressives" truly are.

PP was called a racist because she was only focused on black kids taking spots. Not other URMs. Not athletes. Not legacy kids. Those are all simply unchangeable.

Is that what you think as well? It’s ok for Billy to lose his seat to a rich LAX bro or a rich legacy, but definitely not ok for that black kid to have it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NOt a single poster has said that blacks should stay in their place. What's being said is that blacks, same as whites, should get preferential treatment only IF they have been disadvantaged by a lower-income background. The posters objecting, all liberals I assume, want to make sure ONLY blacks should be given an advantage in admissions, and lower-income whites (even those with excellent grades in school) should be satisfied with community college. Sounds like posters are telling the "white trash" (a phrase used by some liberal here) to stay in their place.

As the child of a poor white who excelled academically and was therefore given admittance to a tuition-free college (they still exist), I am thankful that race was not a factor in the admission decision but rather the combination of financial neediness and outstanding scholastic ability. That is how it should be. A system that gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades should be abolished.

I have said countless times that it'd be good to open up AA to SES factors and not just race. But don't let that get in the way of your story.

And you are completely fabricating the demographics here: "gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades". Please give data to support this statement if you think otherwise. You can't because you are FULL.OF.SH1T.

Maybe your free school didn't teach you critical-thinking skills.

Still nothing to support your fabricated scenario, huh?

Thought so.

[Anonymous]

We're an Asian family so don't start about having to compete within your own racial or athletic cohort in order to get uni seat in a statistically diverse specially-curated class.

I've literally gotten Columbia MBA program to say I was waitlisted because I was Asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're an Asian family so don't start about having to compete within your own racial or athletic cohort in order to get uni seat in a statistically diverse specially-curated class.

I've literally gotten Columbia MBA program to say I was waitlisted because I was Asian.

I doubt that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NOt a single poster has said that blacks should stay in their place. What's being said is that blacks, same as whites, should get preferential treatment only IF they have been disadvantaged by a lower-income background. The posters objecting, all liberals I assume, want to make sure ONLY blacks should be given an advantage in admissions, and lower-income whites (even those with excellent grades in school) should be satisfied with community college. Sounds like posters are telling the "white trash" (a phrase used by some liberal here) to stay in their place.

As the child of a poor white who excelled academically and was therefore given admittance to a tuition-free college (they still exist), I am thankful that race was not a factor in the admission decision but rather the combination of financial neediness and outstanding scholastic ability. That is how it should be. A system that gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades should be abolished.

I have said countless times that it'd be good to open up AA to SES factors and not just race. But don't let that get in the way of your story.

And you are completely fabricating the demographics here: "gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades". Please give data to support this statement if you think otherwise. You can't because you are FULL.OF.SH1T.

Maybe your free school didn't teach you critical-thinking skills.

Still nothing to support your fabricated scenario, huh?

Thought so.

No, I've decided not to keep explaining it to you (especially with your "you're FOS" maturity level). It's like trying to teach a pig to sing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NOt a single poster has said that blacks should stay in their place. What's being said is that blacks, same as whites, should get preferential treatment only IF they have been disadvantaged by a lower-income background. The posters objecting, all liberals I assume, want to make sure ONLY blacks should be given an advantage in admissions, and lower-income whites (even those with excellent grades in school) should be satisfied with community college. Sounds like posters are telling the "white trash" (a phrase used by some liberal here) to stay in their place.

As the child of a poor white who excelled academically and was therefore given admittance to a tuition-free college (they still exist), I am thankful that race was not a factor in the admission decision but rather the combination of financial neediness and outstanding scholastic ability. That is how it should be. A system that gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades should be abolished.

I have said countless times that it'd be good to open up AA to SES factors and not just race. But don't let that get in the way of your story.

And you are completely fabricating the demographics here: "gives priority to middle-income blacks over lower-income whites with better grades". Please give data to support this statement if you think otherwise. You can't because you are FULL.OF.SH1T.

Maybe your free school didn't teach you critical-thinking skills.

Still nothing to support your fabricated scenario, huh?

Thought so.

No, I've decided not to keep explaining it to you (especially with your "you're FOS" maturity level). It's like trying to teach a pig to sing.

LOL. No. You have nothing to substantiate your fabricated scenario.

How many pages wasted on a obtuse racist? Such a waste of time.

[Anonymous]

The main assumption behind the whole thread is wrong about how college admissions work. Low income students of all races and ethnicities do get special consideration from elite colleges. They love kids who excel despite difficult circumstances and poor schools.

There are multiple factors that get special consideration in the admissions process. Underrepresented minority status is just one and is actually the most justifiable one because the underrepresentation is the direct result of discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The main assumption behind the whole thread is wrong about how college admissions work. Low income students of all races and ethnicities do get special consideration from elite colleges. They love kids who excel despite difficult circumstances and poor schools.

There are multiple factors that get special consideration in the admissions process. Underrepresented minority status is just one and is actually the most justifiable one because the underrepresentation is the direct result of discrimination.

BS.

Underrepresentation, assuming that's even a valid concept, is a direct result of lower personal academic merits.

Only (some) Asian Americans and white students suffer today from direct discrimination.

[Anonymous]

OP here, and apparently I am in the majority when it comes to believing that income, not race, should drive affirmative action. In the linked article, reference is made to a 2016 Gallop poll that shows 60% of Americans oppose race-based AA, but that 60% of Americans favor income-based AA. The article explains why providing a "leg up" to the disadvantaged of ALL races, and not just blacks, is the fairer approach.

https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/09/04/affirmative-action-should-be-based-on-class-not-race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main assumption behind the whole thread is wrong about how college admissions work. Low income students of all races and ethnicities do get special consideration from elite colleges. They love kids who excel despite difficult circumstances and poor schools.

There are multiple factors that get special consideration in the admissions process. Underrepresented minority status is just one and is actually the most justifiable one because the underrepresentation is the direct result of discrimination.

BS.

Underrepresentation, assuming that's even a valid concept, is a direct result of lower personal academic merits.

Only (some) Asian Americans and white students suffer today from direct discrimination.

True. Is that first PP claiming that colleges are discriminating against black students when they reject someone with a B average, who happens to be black, in favor of a someone with an A average, who happens to be white? What they are doing is discriminating as to the academic records of their applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're an Asian family so don't start about having to compete within your own racial or athletic cohort in order to get uni seat in a statistically diverse specially-curated class.

I've literally gotten Columbia MBA program to say I was waitlisted because I was Asian.

I doubt that.

I made an appointment, took the subway up during lunch time, asked them what happened, told them I’d prefer to go there than Stern , she giggled around and basically said I was applying versus other Asians and that is a tall order. She immediately shut up after stating that.

But that’s the system.

It’s even more of a crapshoot now that 10% of colleges have carveouts for “first gen college kids.” Carved out of what? Legacies, AA, int’l, valedictorians from Idaho... but in a way that doesn’t blow the endowment draw or budget.

[Anonymous]

Hence the Triple Threat!: First Gen to college + minority + Athlete

Private high schools gobble those kids up with free tuition like crazy.