schroeder wrote:
gphin305 wrote:
schroeder wrote:
velocomp wrote:
schroeder wrote:
velocomp wrote:
schroeder wrote:
gphin305 wrote:
patentattorney wrote:
to be fair, it is a pretty traditional American value to try to hold down minorities in the name of equality.I disagree, depending on how far back you want to go. Sure, prior to the 1960s, absolutely. But since Affirmative Action, which you might be able to consider an 'american tradition" for the past almost 50 years, I feel there has been more than 'equal opportunity" for "everyone".....and it's actually going past the point now of the original objective.
Are you saying that everyone had equal opportunities beginning in the '64 with the civil rights act? Hopefully not. For example, redlining didn't end until the 90's. There have been numerous studies comparing equal resumes of black versus white or male versus female job candidates and the white male has a greater advantage. Diversity did not become a common buzzword on college campuses until the mid 90's but, don't worry, because believe it or not there are still plenty of white conservative males attending college. When was the last time you walked on a college campus? Can you honestly say that you'd have a better or equal chance as a minority job candidate, than a white candidate?
https://hbr.org/...declined-in-25-years
Can you honestly say that you think that if someone is a better candidate that they should be discriminated against because they are not a minority?
Take this for instance. My wife works with many HS kids on SAT/ACT testing. We recently learned that a student on GreenCard from the UK (been here for 3 years, going on 4 for high school), has to pay international rates to go to college in Colorado, while an illegal alien gets in-state tuition. In other words, following the rules hurts you. What about was it Harvard that was sued by some Asian student who were denied entry because they said the already had enough Asians. It's not just a white thing. In many cases it should be the best candidate period.
You are right that Universities have a desire to be more diverse and this has influenced who they select as students. My response to gphin was about job place discrimination and his implication that everything has been fair since the 60's. But if you look at the link I posted, a white job applicant has a 50% greater chance to receive a call back than a black applicant and this has been constant for 25 years. Is this the way it should be? Would having more diverse campuses help change it?
A couple of the highly rated colleges ($$$) around me also accept and give a few scholarships to underprivileged students from the local area. Is this also wrong when they are likely bumping students from better school districts with better SAT's?
Yes, it is wrong. If you are going to base entry into your school on a competitive criteria, you don't say, "these people that won don't get their medal. Instead we'll give their medal that they worked for to someone who we think probably hasn't ever gotten a medal so they can feel better and we can feel better". If I'm a student that meets the criteria but then gets shafted for someone who doesn't meet the criteria, I'd be resentful and pissed off.
Why should you have any say in their process? It's literally none of your business. Some of the spots are not based on the same competitive criteria. They are giving scholarships to underprivileged students in their area because they want to help improve their own community which in turn will benefit the colleges. It's called being a part of society and it's their decision to lose money because of this charity. You want control over how they support their local community? Should they have control over your charity? How do you feel about athletes getting preferential treatment?
Because if its a state school receiving a portion of your tax dollars.......you have every right to ensure they are not being discriminatory in their selection process.
They are private schools.
Did you take the time to read the article you referred to? Or take the time to read their study? Do you know the background of these four individuals who did this "study"? They are four career students/professors.....from liberal havens of Harvard and Northwestern.....and one is from Oslo, Norway.....apparently never held jobs in the real world......and have spent their entire careers doing studies on "social justice/discrimination issues. You can tell something by how they worded the title......no change in 25 years....implying discrimination was going on then and still is......clever...."no change".......when in real life its generally not. I mean, why would they include in their opening a reference to DJT being supported by white nationalists.......gives you an idea of their motive/slant. Their study doesnt identify any of the metrics/procedures they used and what type of jobs these candidates applied to. You can't be serious if you think major corporations and companies today, for the past 20-25 years actually discriminate against minorities in their hiring. They have been going overboard to find minority candidates. How about state and federal government jobs......think they discriminate too? I didn't state everything has been fair since the 60's but thats when things started to change. But you are way off base if you think for the past 20-30 years minorities are still being discriminated against for job openings. Read below and get educated.
http://govcentral.monster.com/...out-minority-workers
http://edition.cnn.com/...4/fortune.minorities
www.forbes.com/sites/vickyvalet/2019/01/15/americas-best-employers-for-diversity-2019/#6919e17f2bda