- 5,258
- 11
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2003
it was much more of a big deal back then IMO
edit: Should Affirmative Action be reformed?
it was much more of a big deal back then IMO
- 5,258
- 11
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2003
Just because people aren't talking about it as much, doesn't mean its not that big of a deal.
thats exactly what it means dude. change happens when people complain/make it happen.
- 98
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2002
Ah yes, another thread where ignorant people think AA is way for "unqualified" blacks to get ahead. You probably only posted this because you wererejected from the school you wanted to go to, and AA is the convenient scapegoat. Funny how you clowns always associate affirmative action with minorities,while completely ignoring the fact that white women have benefited the most from AA. Go look up the student enrollment at any top school and tell me whatpercentage of the class happens to be black. Probably 5% or less, yet you clowns will say the "unqualified" black kid took your spot. NOTHING isnever said about the athletes or the kids who get in because of their connections. Why don't you post ACTUAL DATA showing top schools with high drop outrates for blacks due to them being unqualified, but admitted because of affirmative action. I doubt that you can. By your logic an inner city black kid with a1350 sat score should never be admitted to an ivy league school over a rich white kid who had a far superior education. (and before one of you clowns point outthe 1350, I'm talking about the old score scale, I don't care what the new scale is)
- 132
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
ha this dude hit the nail on the head. real talk
- 953
- 56
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
I really don't know how the system works (sans I don't live in USA) but I think scholarships are meant to be to people with lower income not dependingtheir race.
Now for entering a school I like the system over here 60% High School grades 40% admission exam and they just go completing the classes with the grades... imothe best way to enter school.
Now for entering a school I like the system over here 60% High School grades 40% admission exam and they just go completing the classes with the grades... imothe best way to enter school.
49ers650
Banned
- 826
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
Yes
- 3,200
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
^Anyone could get a scholorship from a number of places for just about any reason...that has little if anything to do with AA.
- 10,490
- 229
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
I'm Asian... and no way should it be abolished.
cb94
Banned
- 1,192
- 13
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
Nah. I'm black, but so far it hasn't affected my life at all... so I don't have any complaints. I ain't really tryna hear none either,honestly? It ain't even worth going there, is it?
- 2,715
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
Wrong. I am Japanese.
I didn't make this thread to showcase my knowledge about it, I just was thinking about it, and thought it wasn't right. Next time I'll send youguys a rough draft of this thread beforehand... I didn't mean to make the thread be about just black people; No, I knew ethnicities were under affirmativeaction, but I didn't know that women were also included, so thank you to whoever told me that.
To the people thinking that "white people have had their share". Okay, I really understand where you guys stand and where you guys are coming from,but from a neutral and equal standpoint, don't you guys feel that the system really isn't fair? If you have looked at how America works, it is alwayschanging so that things are equal, and I just don't feel like Affirmative Action isn't meant to keep the US equal; rather it is compensating for thepast offenses against minorities, which I just don't think is the right thing to do. We (minorities) are somehow getting into better colleges than a kidwho did better than us in GPA/SAT/ACT but wasn't a minority. I don't understand why.
To potus2028.... Thank you, that did make a bit more sense to me, but I don't know. The thing is, unless I'm wrong, which you should call me out for,but doesn't AA allow ALL people that are minorities get boosts? I understand that the lower class citizens should get it, but I know that there are a lotof minorities out there that do just FINE without them.
Wow... that totally cleared things up. Should we reform it though?
I didn't make this thread to showcase my knowledge about it, I just was thinking about it, and thought it wasn't right. Next time I'll send youguys a rough draft of this thread beforehand... I didn't mean to make the thread be about just black people; No, I knew ethnicities were under affirmativeaction, but I didn't know that women were also included, so thank you to whoever told me that.
To the people thinking that "white people have had their share". Okay, I really understand where you guys stand and where you guys are coming from,but from a neutral and equal standpoint, don't you guys feel that the system really isn't fair? If you have looked at how America works, it is alwayschanging so that things are equal, and I just don't feel like Affirmative Action isn't meant to keep the US equal; rather it is compensating for thepast offenses against minorities, which I just don't think is the right thing to do. We (minorities) are somehow getting into better colleges than a kidwho did better than us in GPA/SAT/ACT but wasn't a minority. I don't understand why.
To potus2028.... Thank you, that did make a bit more sense to me, but I don't know. The thing is, unless I'm wrong, which you should call me out for,but doesn't AA allow ALL people that are minorities get boosts? I understand that the lower class citizens should get it, but I know that there are a lotof minorities out there that do just FINE without them.
Wow... that totally cleared things up. Should we reform it though?
- 2,715
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
I'm a sophomore in high school, and a minority. Sorry if I made you mad.
As much of an idiot I look like right now, I'm actually glad you guys are posting; thanks.
- 2,779
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
*waits for ePHAN*
- 98
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2002
I'll flip this for you. Do you honestly believe that every white person that was admitted to a school, had "better" grades and scores than everywhite person that was rejected? Grades play a big part, but it's not the only factor in admissions.
- 2,715
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
I'm a bit confused, so sorry if this turns out bad. Do you mean every MINORITY person that was admitted to a school? In that case, no, because I thoughtbeing a minority had a part in that. If you mean what you posted, then actually yes, I did.
- 98
- 12
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2002
No, I meant white people the way I posted it. Again, do you think that every white person that is admitted to a school has better grades/scores than everywhite person that is rejected? You must think that since you're only focusing on minorities.
- 2,089
- 87
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
Lazy B, Did you even read your own article? It IS intelligence that is getting them into these colleges, an oversaturation along with a complex mix ofquasi-affirmative action is what keeps them out of the best of the best schools. Your reply had me thinking that Asians were getting into colleges for reasonsother than academics...when the article isn't even talking about that.
- 6,525
- 15,706
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
If you are interested in Affirmative Action, you should read Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study by Thomas Sowell. Dr. Sowell isright when he says that in the US, those for or against AA tend to argue for or against the theory of AA and rarely do people cite its results.
What he found is that AA can actually harm the group it is meant to help. The problem is that quotas and set asides and preferences tend to not address theunderlying problems that caused a group to be under represented in the University, Civil Service and in Government Contracts in the first place. It is usuallythe well off minority within the underrepresented group that has the means to take advantage of the Lion's share of the set asides.
Affirmative Action can also cause, resentment against an entire group. It is unfair but the perception on the part of everyopne, who does not get the job or anacceptance letter is that they were wronged. Thomas Sowell cites the example of how in India if they offered, say, 50 civil service jobs and three of them wereset aside for members of the untouchables class, the hundred of non untouchables, who did not get the job, think they did not get the job because ofuntouchables when only three people could really claim that they did not get the job because of quotas. In India and elsewhere, that can inflame ethnictensions can eventually lead to bloody riots and even civil war.
Affirmative Action can also cause talents and wealth to leave a country or jurisdiction. In Malaysia, which has large Chinese minority, Chinese-Malaysianswholly and completely out performed Malays on college entrance exams and once in the university, they dominated the hard majors like math, science andengineering. The Malays eventually imposed quotas, that demanded that admissions greatly favor Malays. What happened is that the Chinese immigrants left formore favorable countries and they took much of their wealth and expertise with them and it harmed the economy of Malaysia.
The empirical evidence is not very kind to AA. This is not to say that societies should simply tolerate injustices. It is just simply the case that AA actionhas only been effective in helping groups that have all of the means to succeed in higher education, professional careers and civil service jobs but they areheld back because of entrenched traditions and long standing policies of chauvinism. This is probably why Affirmative Action has worked well at helping middleclass and upper middle class women advance and why AA has failed at lifting ethnic groups out of poverty. The best government can do to help groups rise upfrom poverty is to first remove any policies that harm a certain group (such as the war on drugs), use a negative income tax to help those with low incomes andallow entrepreneurship to be accessible to poorer and less politically connected groups.
The reason for that last point is because entrepreneurship has historically been the way that groups rise out of poverty and after obtaining some measure ofwealth then the kids go to university and join the ranks of the professionals. This was the case among Chinese, Japanese and Jewish immigrants. Many assumethat those groups went from poverty to wealth due to their kids getting very good educations but in the case of all three of those groups, there was a periodwhere the generation before did other things, which got their families sufficiently above the status of laborer or other unskilled work.
Even in the case of American Blacks, who historically are less entrepreneurial then Jews and Chinese, there was transition period. In the case of AmericanBlacks, between 1930 and 1960, Blacks became twice as educated and went from an average of six years of formal schooling to 11.5 years and correspondinglyincome also doubled in that period. That generation produced a good deal of children who had the necessary secondary school to be completely qualified forhigher education but needed a push to deal with the very real institutional barriers at the time.
Some have called AA a complete failure. That is not the case. Again, it can help groups if their only barrier is institutional in nature and when institutionsare forced to take in someone, who is otherwise completely qualified, opinions can be changed on the part of many and can be changed very quickly. If the goalis to help entire groups, then AA has been very ineffective but if the goal is to get otherwise qualified people a chance, that they are currently being deniedbecause of bigotry, then it tends to work.
What he found is that AA can actually harm the group it is meant to help. The problem is that quotas and set asides and preferences tend to not address theunderlying problems that caused a group to be under represented in the University, Civil Service and in Government Contracts in the first place. It is usuallythe well off minority within the underrepresented group that has the means to take advantage of the Lion's share of the set asides.
Affirmative Action can also cause, resentment against an entire group. It is unfair but the perception on the part of everyopne, who does not get the job or anacceptance letter is that they were wronged. Thomas Sowell cites the example of how in India if they offered, say, 50 civil service jobs and three of them wereset aside for members of the untouchables class, the hundred of non untouchables, who did not get the job, think they did not get the job because ofuntouchables when only three people could really claim that they did not get the job because of quotas. In India and elsewhere, that can inflame ethnictensions can eventually lead to bloody riots and even civil war.
Affirmative Action can also cause talents and wealth to leave a country or jurisdiction. In Malaysia, which has large Chinese minority, Chinese-Malaysianswholly and completely out performed Malays on college entrance exams and once in the university, they dominated the hard majors like math, science andengineering. The Malays eventually imposed quotas, that demanded that admissions greatly favor Malays. What happened is that the Chinese immigrants left formore favorable countries and they took much of their wealth and expertise with them and it harmed the economy of Malaysia.
The empirical evidence is not very kind to AA. This is not to say that societies should simply tolerate injustices. It is just simply the case that AA actionhas only been effective in helping groups that have all of the means to succeed in higher education, professional careers and civil service jobs but they areheld back because of entrenched traditions and long standing policies of chauvinism. This is probably why Affirmative Action has worked well at helping middleclass and upper middle class women advance and why AA has failed at lifting ethnic groups out of poverty. The best government can do to help groups rise upfrom poverty is to first remove any policies that harm a certain group (such as the war on drugs), use a negative income tax to help those with low incomes andallow entrepreneurship to be accessible to poorer and less politically connected groups.
The reason for that last point is because entrepreneurship has historically been the way that groups rise out of poverty and after obtaining some measure ofwealth then the kids go to university and join the ranks of the professionals. This was the case among Chinese, Japanese and Jewish immigrants. Many assumethat those groups went from poverty to wealth due to their kids getting very good educations but in the case of all three of those groups, there was a periodwhere the generation before did other things, which got their families sufficiently above the status of laborer or other unskilled work.
Even in the case of American Blacks, who historically are less entrepreneurial then Jews and Chinese, there was transition period. In the case of AmericanBlacks, between 1930 and 1960, Blacks became twice as educated and went from an average of six years of formal schooling to 11.5 years and correspondinglyincome also doubled in that period. That generation produced a good deal of children who had the necessary secondary school to be completely qualified forhigher education but needed a push to deal with the very real institutional barriers at the time.
Some have called AA a complete failure. That is not the case. Again, it can help groups if their only barrier is institutional in nature and when institutionsare forced to take in someone, who is otherwise completely qualified, opinions can be changed on the part of many and can be changed very quickly. If the goalis to help entire groups, then AA has been very ineffective but if the goal is to get otherwise qualified people a chance, that they are currently being deniedbecause of bigotry, then it tends to work.
- 7,846
- 11
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2008
A point raised in the article is that white people feel that there should be some sort of AA for them because they arethe majority tax payers in the state. One reason I brought that up was because its funny how so many people are for AA when it can help them but they areagainst it when it helps another group. We discussed that point thoroughly in sociology last year.
moe200069
Supporter
- 23,662
- 40,183
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
The socioeconomic-based Affirmative Action argument is one that is tempting to subscribe to, especially for folks who are hesitant to allow the considerationof race to be a factor in college admissions. But I have to disagree. People who say that blacks/asians/chican@s/natives were accepted "over"whites because of their race are painting those non-European American (white) applicants by only their race; this is far from reality. When college admissionspanels review applications, they're not only looking at people of color based on their race, but also judging them based on the same criteria/standardsthey would for any other applicant. It's not like they completely disregard GPAs, personal statements, test scores, extra-curricular involvement, and soforth just because an applicant is a person of color. Moreover, SES-based Affirmative Action sounds great, but to use it would only to maintain the currentracial demographics of college campuses; I say this mainly because European Americans constitute a majority of America's socioeconomically disadvantaged,while low-income people of color are portrayed as the main beneficiaries of public assistance. Thus, if we're speaking proportionally, to consider SES asopposed to race in admissions, SES-Affirmative Action would likely benefit more low-income European Americans compared to any other racial group. Not sayingthat there's anything wrong with taking SES into consideration when applying to college, but if colleges want to diversify their campus from an economicstandpoint, why not diversify it racially as well?
shut the front door...over-generalizing statements FTMFL.
as an Asian American, im tired of this broad, stereotypical statement. Historically, the success of a handful of Asian/Asian-Americans has been used to pitcommunities of color against each other, and turned the Affirmative Action debate into an Asian versus Black/Chican@ fight. When Ward Connerly was pushing forProposition 209 throughout California, who did he point to as suffering from Affirmative Action? No, not whites/European Americans, but Asians. Connerly andmany of those like Mojo not only stereotype all Asians as "successful," they also neglect to recognize a population under the "Asian and PacificIslander American" label that is highly under-represented on college campuses across the nation; I'm speaking specifically about Southeast Asians(those from Cambodia, Laos, and Viet Nam) and Pacific Islanders (Samoans, Tongans, Chamorros, and so forth). Holla at leaders from those API groups and seehow they feel about Affirmative Action. Moreover, talk to Asian/Pacific Islander American leaders, politicians, and educators from all ethnicities, I'mwilling to bet that a majority of them support race-based Affirmative Action.
- 635
- 14
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2006
Originally Posted by moe200069
word. yall ever heard of legacy clauses at prestigious schools like the Ivy Leagues or Stanford? Can someone explain to me the fairness of accepting an applicant just because his/her great great great great grand uncle went to school there?
*BUZZER* wrong. We don't use legacy like that. It is the VERY last thing looked at, is used ONLY as a tie breaker, and there is a cap on how many times itcan be used. Many of the Ivy schools have similar systems, so you're off the mark there. Typical statement though
I saw someone earlier mentioned the percentage of african americans at top schools. Just fyi for that person, we're in the 10.6% region and the 4 yeargraduation rate for AA students is between 97 and 98%. There are plenty of highly qualified african american students out there that don't need AA to earna spot at a top institution and are perfectly capable of earning it on their own but the media doesn't like to talk about that
- 673
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
YES, IMO NAS VERSE WAS WEAKER THAN AZ.
- 36,536
- 11,263
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
the thing people always say about Affirmative Action is it puts less qualified people in the place of people who deserve it. That is not true. They don'tfind the dumbest black guy to fill the "Affirmative Action" spot, they find a person who did decent in class.
You have to look that even though there is affirmative action universities, corporations etc. still find loopholes around it whether it be ignoring it andfinding a legal measure to support it or keeping minorities at low level jobs.
I think it should be more about economic status, but as a white person affirmative action has never hurt nor helped me so I do not see a problem as is.
You have to look that even though there is affirmative action universities, corporations etc. still find loopholes around it whether it be ignoring it andfinding a legal measure to support it or keeping minorities at low level jobs.
I think it should be more about economic status, but as a white person affirmative action has never hurt nor helped me so I do not see a problem as is.
- 3,181
- 13
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2004
THERES NO JOKE
OFF YOURSELF
- 359
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2002
Someone explain to me how it does not put less qualified people into schools. Yes, I understand they look at the entire application and not just the race of aminority applicant. But, the main determinants for college/grad school are GPA/standardized test score. In each case, certain minority applicants do notrequire the same score thresholds that others do in order to be accepted. They can have lower numbers and still be accepted, where a non-minority would not beaccepted. You can argue the necessity of AA/etc. and that's fine...I myself am fairly neutral on the subject...but I don't see how some of you canargue less qualified students are not getting accepted due to their race.
- 18,737
- 1,626
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2005
^ how do you know that? that's its because of their race they got accepted?