Elite colleges using quotas for AA's and Hispanics

We had a long thread about this topic earlier, I think we came to a consensus opinion that racial discrimination is awesome when the "right people" benefit from it.

 

You're confusing affirmative action goals with quotas. Quotas were made illegal by the Bakke decision many years ago.

There is nothing wrong with an affirmative action goal that seeks to balance the demographics of the student body with the population.

 

We've had this thread before and you could probably have updated an old one.

I'd just offer this as extra info, as opposed to offering any debate either way: colleges are moving increasingly to different criteria for young men and young women. Many more men, on average, are not going to college, versus their female counterparts. Many schools are getting rather desperate to have men on their campuses to attain something approaching gender balance.

More info, circa 2014: (and it's only accelerated since then, from what I can tell)
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/womens-college-enrollment-gains-leave-men-behind/

I believe my college is now slightly easier to get into if you're a white male versus a white female. Is that the right thing to do? Or is it weird to have a campus that is, say, 70% female after a few years if you have gender-blind admissions?

 

We are not a merit based society.

Why does Affirmative Action exist?

 

Shouldn't the answer to the question on affirmative action for race be aligned with the question on gender?

 

nothing wrong with using race and extra curricula activities as a part of performance metrics, the less privileged should receive extra credits for their productivity and efficiency,if you do more with less,it is often more impressive

 

Elite colleges use legacy in admissions decisions.

What do YOU think about that?

 

I would argue that's not the right thing to do, sexism when it comes to admission policy is as bad as racism. If based on merit the campus becomes 70% female, that's how it should be. IMO excellence should be rewarded, not skin color or genitalia.....but I guess I'm just old fashioned like that.

 

Their merit is being born to a Harvard grad. MERIT! Boom.

 

To answer the first question, we need equal opportunity immigration, not merit-based immigration.

If you country is a shithole then we can restrict the flow of your people immigrating to our country down to a trickle.

If it is on par with our country, offering a robust and strong economy with a non-religious court system and a democratically elected government, then we can have a more open-border like immigration system.

 

I'd be fine with eliminating those as well since they aren't merit based, but I'd imagine the numbers are pretty low

 

Like others have stated in numerous threads, colleges believe diversity benefits them and their students.

Just like family legacies benefit them. On Affirmative Action its not like totally unqualified students get in or there is a huge number of qualified students being rejected. I went to UT. It was 2% black and now its 4%. (I understand UT isn't"elite) I got into the business school with some AA help.

I think i brought something unique to some classes.

Colleges aren't just stepping stones, they are places to advance thought. How can you do that completely if all of society isn't represented.

 

this is the case for example (or close to it) in many veterinary colleges now.

https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/100215g.aspx

 

They're ignorant questions that omit a significant argument from the equation. Why does Affirmative Action exist?

Another problem is that you think we live in a merit based society and we obviously don't. You base your arguments on a fallacy.

Now I'll give YOU a link.

Extensive Data Shows Punishing Reach of Racism for Black Boys

Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.

White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay wealthy in their own adult households.

Most white boys raised in wealthy families will stay rich or upper middle class as adults, but black boys raised in similarly rich households will not.

Even when children grow up next to each other with parents who earn similar incomes, black boys fare worse than white boys in 99 percent of America. And the gaps only worsen in the kind of neighborhoods that promise low poverty and good schools.

According to the study, led by researchers at Stanford, Harvard and the Census Bureau, income inequality between blacks and whites is driven entirely by what is happening among these boysand the men they become. Though black girls and women face deep inequality on many measures, black and white girls from families with comparable earnings attain similar individual incomes as adults.

“You would have thought at some point you escape the poverty trap,” said Nathaniel Hendren, a Harvard economist and an author of the study.

Black boys — even rich black boys — can seemingly never assume that.

The study, based on anonymous earnings and demographic data for virtually all Americans now in their late 30s, debunks a number of other widely held hypotheses about income inequality. Gaps persisted even when black and white boys grew up in families with the same income, similar family structures, similar education levels and even similar levels of accumulated wealth.

The disparities that remain also can’t be explained by differences in cognitive ability, an argument made by people who cite racial gaps in test scores that appear for both black boys and girls. If such inherent differences existed by race, “you’ve got to explain to me why these putative ability differences aren’t handicapping women,” said David Grusky, a Stanford sociologist who has reviewed the research.

A more likely possibility, the authors suggest, is that test scores don’t accurately measure the abilities of black children in the first place.

If this inequality can’t be explained by individual or household traits, much of what matters probably lies outside the home — in surrounding neighborhoods, in the economy and in a society that views black boys differently from white boys, and even from black girls.

“One of the most popular liberal post-racial ideas is the idea that the fundamental problem is class and not race, and clearly this study explodes that idea,” said Ibram Kendi, a professor and director of the Antiracist Research and Policy Center at American University. “But for whatever reason, we’re unwilling to stare racism in the face.”

The authors, including the Stanford economist Raj Chetty and two census researchers, Maggie R. Jones and Sonya R. Porter, tried to identify neighborhoods where poor black boys do well, and as well as whites.

“The problem,” Mr. Chetty said, “is that there are essentially no such neighborhoods in America.”

The few neighborhoods that met this standard were in areas that showed less discrimination in surveys and tests of racial bias. They mostly had low poverty rates. And, intriguingly, these pockets — including parts of the Maryland suburbs of Washington, and corners of Queens and the Bronx — were the places where many lower-income black children had fathers at home. Poor black boys did well in such places, whether their own fathers were present or not.

“That is a pathbreaking finding,” said William Julius Wilson, a Harvard sociologist whose books have chronicled the economic struggles of black men. “They’re not talking about the direct effects of a boy’s own parents’ marital status. They’re talking about the presence of fathers in a given census tract.”

Other fathers in the community can provide boys with role models and mentors, researchers say, and their presence may indicate other neighborhood factors that benefit families, like lower incarceration rates and better job opportunities.

The research makes clear that there is something unique about the obstacles black males face. The gap between Hispanics and whites is narrower, and their incomes will converge within a couple of generations if mobility stays the same. Asian-Americans earn more than whites raised at the same income level, or about the same when first-generation immigrants are excluded. Only Native Americans have an income gap comparable to African-Americans. But the disparities are widest for black boys.

more at the link