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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Affirmative Action should be income-based, not race-based"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Still OP.

Reflecting on my original proposal, I would make two adjustments, one based on the more recent impact of Jim Crow laws.

1) Southern states with Jim Crow laws up until the 1960's would be required to give "bonus" points to black kids. How this would work, I don't know....but since it would come at the expense of poor whites, there would have to be a time limit - say, 15 years or so.

2) In all states, we could extend the reach - instead of the top 5% getting AA "points," it could be the top 10%. But since money is finite, only the top 5% get the free schooling. So, two tiers.

The beauty of this is that students who enter under AA are not suspect - that they only got in because of their skin color. Now getting in would be a mark of achievement - it means they were such excellent stidents, relative to their peers, that they earned they way to the benefit.

Finally, in order to make this fully race-neutral, there's no need to call it affirmative action. We could call them "National Achievement Scholarships."[/quote]

THANK YOU. I'm the poster who has been challenging you for days on your original idea to completely eliminate the race aspect. While I don't agree on the specifics (short time limit) but I really appreciate you opening up to acknowledge that Jim Crow and other racism still has lingering effects today.

I would love to have a race-neutral system but I don't think we are there yet. Just look at this thread.

[/quote]
YOU'RE WELCOME.

I did reflect on it all and acknowledge that racism had more of an impact on those in Jim Crow states, and [b]given the relatively recent nature of it, has had lasting impact we still see today. [/b]It IS a compromise, though, because it order to make a special allowance based on race for those in Jim Crow states, white people would  be negatively impacted - and poor whites deserve a chance too. That is why I believe we need a time-limit.

But even that would have negative impact on those states. I, for example, would move my family (if I lived in the South, which I don't, and was in a sub-$100K HH) to a northern state, so that my kids would have a chance of winning one of the National Achievement Scholarships. If other whites followed, and I wouldn't blame them, there would be less diversification - as in all races - in the Jim Crow states. That's a negative.

Anyway, this is all an academic argument since I don't think a politician would take it on.[/quote]

Still feel this way? 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics