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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody said that. But a 21-year-old with four babies, and four different fathers, who her first one at 15, IS a slut. Sorry.

OTOH, a person who points out that it is unfair for LaTwanda with the 'so-so' grades to get bumped up ahead of Billy with all A's, is not a slut. Maybe she's a virgin, waiting for marriage, even! I don't see what her sex practices have to do with pointing out that black people contribute to negative attitudes toward themselves by their bad behavior.

White people also contribute to negative attitudes towards whites with their bad behavior and your post is the proof. Insisting that a black student with so-so grades replaces a white student with excellent grades is false. You are lying. Or ignorant. Or both. Don't be surprised when POC treat you differently because they are sick of the crap you perpetuate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody said that. But a 21-year-old with four babies, and four different fathers, who her first one at 15, IS a slut. Sorry.

OTOH, a person who points out that it is unfair for LaTwanda with the 'so-so' grades to get bumped up ahead of Billy with all A's, is not a slut. Maybe she's a virgin, waiting for marriage, even! I don't see what her sex practices have to do with pointing out that black people contribute to negative attitudes toward themselves by their bad behavior.

White people also contribute to negative attitudes towards whites with their bad behavior and your post is the proof. Insisting that a black student with so-so grades replaces a white student with excellent grades is false. You are lying. Or ignorant. Or both. Don't be surprised when POC treat you differently because they are sick of the crap you perpetuate.

This is so unbelievable. You INSIST you want affirmative action policies to be based on racial preferences so that more blacks can get accepted to competitive programs, and then you deny the negative impact that has on deserving whites! You can't have it both ways. Schools are lowering their standards for blacks specifically to get more blacks in, while maintaining the higher standards for whites (and Jews and Asians). That's because if the standards were equal, the number of blacks accepted would drop, and the whites/Jews/Asians would go up. So try to convince yourself otherwise if you must, but the fact is that when you have lower standards for one group and higher standards for the other, the "lower standard" group will be displacing some of the "higher standard" group.

I'd just prefer you say "thank you" and move on. But you can't even do that, can you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

Well if it's much ado about nothing, why the uproar about coming up with an income-based AA policy?

And I at least am not talking about the "bubble" areas of admission. I'd be the first to say that if there is one remaining spot at a highly desirable university, and the choice comes down to a black student from inner-Baltimore with a 3.5 and a white student with a 3.6 from Bethesda, and the former gets the nod. (But then again, that's the income-based AA factor kicking in.) What I am objecting to is when half of the black students with a 3.3 get into med school and the majority of white students with a 3.6 do NOT get in, the discrepancy is far too great. Bubble area, yes. A 3.2 black kid taken instead of a 3.6 white kid because they "needed" one more black kid to meet their goal? NO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

But don’t the wealthy white parents of all political stripes in the DC strive mightily to give their white sons every advantage known to humankind?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

But don’t the wealthy white parents of all political stripes in the DC strive mightily to give their white sons every advantage known to humankind?

^ area

[Anonymous]

The federal district judge seemingly faithfully applied extant S.Ct. law. Ultimately, the S.Ct. May have to weigh in on whether “strict scrutiny” has, in effect, been treated like “rational basis” review in this context. But opponents of affirmative action need to recognize that by the time a case gets to the Court there will be a 5-4 Dem majority.

[Anonymous]

OK, here's a question for those of you who think that broad-sweeping bias against blacks should entitle them to be advantaged over whites in college admissions. What would you do in the following case: A college has one more slot to fill, and it comes down to a black girl from a middle-income family (daddy is a GS-13 and mommy is a public relations coordinator for a private company) who has a 3.6, and a poor white kid with uneducated parents (daddy works in a factory and mommy is a ticket-taker at the movie theater) who, despite having to work part-time after school to bring in money, still managed a better GPA at 3.7, or even tied at 3.6. What if, despite his disadvantaged background, he had a 3.5? (Assume SAT scores are virtually identical.)

Shouldn't the disadvantaged kid get that last spot? The white one?

THAT is what income-based AA policy would look like.

- OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The federal district judge seemingly faithfully applied extant S.Ct. law. Ultimately, the S.Ct. May have to weigh in on whether “strict scrutiny” has, in effect, been treated like “rational basis” review in this context. But opponents of affirmative action need to recognize that by the time a case gets to the Court there will be a 5-4 Dem majority.

Why do you assume a liberal majority? RBG will not last another five years, sorry - and Trump will be appointing another conservative.

(If you assume he'll lose, I can assume he'll win.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

Now you're talking gender?? The majority of college students are already female.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

Nice straw man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The federal district judge seemingly faithfully applied extant S.Ct. law. Ultimately, the S.Ct. May have to weigh in on whether “strict scrutiny” has, in effect, been treated like “rational basis” review in this context. But opponents of affirmative action need to recognize that by the time a case gets to the Court there will be a 5-4 Dem majority.

Why do you assume a liberal majority? RBG will not last another five years, sorry - and Trump will be appointing another conservative.

(If you assume he'll lose, I can assume he'll win.)

Very few Republican politicians care about this issue anymore. In fact, very few white people care about it. The only ones who do are those whose ox was, in effect, gored. And by that I mean the parents of the marginal kid who was rejected by, say, UVA, and lash out in embarrassment and anger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody said that. But a 21-year-old with four babies, and four different fathers, who her first one at 15, IS a slut. Sorry.

OTOH, a person who points out that it is unfair for LaTwanda with the 'so-so' grades to get bumped up ahead of Billy with all A's, is not a slut. Maybe she's a virgin, waiting for marriage, even! I don't see what her sex practices have to do with pointing out that black people contribute to negative attitudes toward themselves by their bad behavior.

White people also contribute to negative attitudes towards whites with their bad behavior and your post is the proof. Insisting that a black student with so-so grades replaces a white student with excellent grades is false. You are lying. Or ignorant. Or both. Don't be surprised when POC treat you differently because they are sick of the crap you perpetuate.

This is so unbelievable. You INSIST you want affirmative action policies to be based on racial preferences so that more blacks can get accepted to competitive programs, and then you deny the negative impact that has on deserving whites! You can't have it both ways. Schools are lowering their standards for blacks specifically to get more blacks in, while maintaining the higher standards for whites (and Jews and Asians). That's because if the standards were equal, the number of blacks accepted would drop, and the whites/Jews/Asians would go up. So try to convince yourself otherwise if you must, but the fact is that when you have lower standards for one group and higher standards for the other, the "lower standard" group will be displacing some of the "higher standard" group.

I'd just prefer you say "thank you" and move on. But you can't even do that, can you?

Why are you assuming PP is a POC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

True. This is much ado about nothing. While in principle I don’t agree with built in bias, why not give give minorities some love in the “bubble” areas of admission into college? Something has to be a deciding factor. May as well be race and gender. Us white guys have had advantages for a loooonnnggg time.

Well if it's much ado about nothing, why the uproar about coming up with an income-based AA policy?

And I at least am not talking about the "bubble" areas of admission. I'd be the first to say that if there is one remaining spot at a highly desirable university, and the choice comes down to a black student from inner-Baltimore with a 3.5 and a white student with a 3.6 from Bethesda, and the former gets the nod. (But then again, that's the income-based AA factor kicking in.) What I am objecting to is when half of the black students with a 3.3 get into med school and the majority of white students with a 3.6 do NOT get in, the discrepancy is far too great. Bubble area, yes. A 3.2 black kid taken instead of a 3.6 white kid because they "needed" one more black kid to meet their goal? NO.

Evidence that this scenario ever even happens?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the point of this discussion, any racism against black people would only enter into it if Admissions Committees were looking at a black kid with a 3.8 and a white kid with a 3.3, and because of racism, they give the nod to the so-so white kid and show the high-achieving black kid the door. But as it stands now, Admissions Committees are doing the opposite: favoring "so-so" black kids over high-achieving whites.

Let's just take race out of it. Kids with higher scores and grades, complemented by impressive extracurricular activities such as Student Body President or editor of the high school newspaper, get in over less-qualified kids. Race should not be a factor.

No college is taking a kid that would struggle academically unless that kid has the money to pay out of pocket.

Race only becomes a factor when you have 5000 applicants who are approximately equal in terms of motivation and academic ability and someone says, "Well we can't just pick the white ones." It is really absurd to insist that academically superior white students are being forced to go to community college because sub-par black students are taking their spots at university. Anyone saying that this is the outcome of Affirmative Action is lying.

Nice straw man.

Way to refute it with evidence.