Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [schroeder] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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?

I should have a say because they are often public universities getting public funds. And you act like without this society will fail. That is false. There are many educational opportunities that people with lower grades or test scores can attend. I didn't get great grades in HS, but still went and got 2 degrees and consider myself successful. And as for Athletes, they have a different competitive entry program. But of course they don't hold out a few spots for bad athletes to make sure everyone is represented.

And to address your final point. As far as I know there is not a requirement to be a minority or under achiever from the local neighborhood.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did you not saw the Supreme courts ruling was basically reverse discrimination?
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
Did you not saw the Supreme courts ruling was basically reverse discrimination?

Appears to be don't you think.....not just against whites but now also Asian Americans. Which is why it might finally be declared illegal after these 41 years. Which is why DJT had Bob Sessions do what he did. Which is another reason for the 'love' of Trumps base......per the title of this post.

www.urban.org/urban-wire/40-years-after-bakke-decision-whats-future-affirmative-action-college-admissions
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [velocomp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I should have a say because they are often public universities getting public funds.



They are private schools, like Harvard.

There are many educational opportunities that people with lower grades or test scores can attend.

Yes, like the one I described although their grades are not that low but they do come from school districts that are not very good so grades can be relative. But you seem to miss the point of the program and that is to provide selected students with a stellar education so that they'll give back to their community and that benefits the colleges as well. It works.

And as for Athletes, they have a different competitive entry program. But of course they don't hold out a few spots for bad athletes to make sure everyone is represented.
Right, athletes do exactly what you were complaining about. They have different academic requirements and steal spots from more qualify students just because they are athletes.

And to address your final point. As far as I know there is not a requirement to be a minority or under achiever from the local neighborhood.

I agree. I didn't say they were all minorities.

Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [schroeder] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Just curious what you mean by 'underpriveleged'. Are you referring to all underprivileged or just blacks and hispanics? And how does that improve their community?
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [schroeder] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Last edited by: gphin305: Mar 9, 19 21:34
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I feel there has been more than 'equal opportunity" for "everyone""



I'm just trying to wrap my head around how something can be "more than equal."

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Traditional American values = making things more than equal for whites.

It’s pretty straight forward.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
Traditional American values = making things more than equal for whites.

It’s pretty straight forward.

Attitudes like that will just get DJT elected once again. Prepare to keep unhinged. Wait......another thread.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gphin305 wrote:
patentattorney wrote:
Traditional American values = making things more than equal for whites.

It’s pretty straight forward.

Attitudes like that will just get DJT elected once again. Prepare to keep unhinged. Wait......another thread.

Unhinged? I guess you missed the Op ed piece by Laura Ingraham last August when she lamented the demographic changes to America, in part caused by LEGAL immigration. She said this while brown farm workers were shown in a video clip over her shoulder. Even Anthony Scaramucci slammed the comments at the time. But it's that kind of signaling that fires up the nationalism and xenophobia within Trump's base.

So unhinged you say? I would say that kind of rhetoric is a little unhinged, yes. As are you.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gphin305 wrote:
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

I agree with you that there has been an effort by companies to hire minorities. However, the graph in the link I posted shows the combined data from a meta study of 21 experiments. You need to look at the individual studies to see the methodologies. This was an article in HBR, not the actual paper. How is the graph wrong? Sorry, but your response is a very typical ST response - smart people at highly regarded universities are all biased liars.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
gphin305 wrote:
patentattorney wrote:
Traditional American values = making things more than equal for whites.

It’s pretty straight forward.


Attitudes like that will just get DJT elected once again. Prepare to keep unhinged. Wait......another thread.


Unhinged? I guess you missed the Op ed piece by Laura Ingraham last August when she lamented the demographic changes to America, in part caused by LEGAL immigration. She said this while brown farm workers were shown in a video clip over her shoulder. Even Anthony Scaramucci slammed the comments at the time. But it's that kind of signaling that fires up the nationalism and xenophobia within Trump's base.

So unhinged you say? I would say that kind of rhetoric is a little unhinged, yes. As are you.

Also trump himself quoted on twitter an article by Pat Buchanan that explicitly stated that immigration (even legal) must be stopped, in order to keep white men in power.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [schroeder] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
schroeder wrote:
gphin305 wrote:
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


I agree with you that there has been an effort by companies to hire minorities. However, the graph in the link I posted shows the combined data from a meta study of 21 experiments. You need to look at the individual studies to see the methodologies. This was an article in HBR, not the actual paper. How is the graph wrong? Sorry, but your response is a very typical ST response - smart people at highly regarded universities are all biased liars.
Not saying that at all. Am saying that oftentimes people who have never had real work life experience outside of academia really don't have a good sense of how things are actually working. I attached three real world articles that talk about how things are for minority employment candidates. If you prefer to believe some "meta data of 21 experiments" instead, go right ahead. In the real world qualified minority candidates have "equal opportunity".....and oftentimes more.
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [gphin305] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ifbyou Think studies now show that minorties have equal opportunities, why would you want laws that create that impact to be changed?
Quote Reply
Re: The power of love: How Trump connects with his base [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
ifbyou Think studies now show that minorties have equal opportunities, why would you want laws that create that impact to be changed?
sorry, don't know what you are referring to.....what laws are those?
Quote Reply

Prev Next