I am not making your point for you. My point is most people are not motivated enough to excel. Most are satisfied with being in the norm. Your grandparents were not satisfied with that, so they did more to have a better chance (left their home for a new country even though they didn't know the language, etc). What about all the people who stayed in Mexico and were content enough not to do the same? Your parents are the exception. We have exceptions in this country as well (all the folks who started poor and made something of themselves). But the norm continues to stay in the same boat. In your post, you basically said "my grandparents worked hard..why can't everyone else". Some do, just like your grandparents. Most don't, just like all the folks that stayed. You are comparing apples to oranges..... Go visit some schools in different economic sectors and you will be amazed at how much the "norms" change.
I wasn't making up the stuff I posted about teachers, they are the facts of my own mother's teaching job. No, they don't start at 70 grand, but that is where she is now. Yes she works less than 8 hr days. No, she isn't working through her vacation days. She did have a good amount of post-graduate work, but that is not really relevent to anything that was being discussed. The point was, that teachers are pretty fairly compensated, especially if they stick with it for a whole career. That's nice, but I never mentioned Texas or average salary, only levels that can be reached. As I said to FB, I didn't make this stuff up, it comes from personal experience with a teacher of 25 years experience. I have no particular love for testing, especially at lower grade levels. I was merely pointing out that testing was put in place because people were calling for measurement and accountability in schools. With the testing in place and teachers jobs depending on the test results, it is tough to fault teachers for teaching to the test, in fact, that is exactly what one would predict the result to be. If you have all the people that go to college now, plus all of the people that have passed on college because of the cost, and they are all going for free, who is going to be paying for all of this? Unless you reduce the number of people going to college, I would imagine they are going to have problems with funding. I didn't say it was the best solution, just an easy one.
That's the problem, though. If you settle for the norm it's YOUR FAULT. It's not the fault of anyone else. Period. I never said everyone works hard. What I said was if you don't, you give up your right to complain about being "held back." Everyone CAN succeed. Achieving your goals takes work and being content with less doesn't entitle you to some sort of handout.
Everyone can succeed, but that doesn't mean everyone can succeed under the same circumstances. I don't expect some kid whose parent(s) are in complete poverty or one that doesn't have parents or a stable place to live to compete with someone who does. The first kid has to work harder to make it. I don't mind giving that kid help, especially if it's at a place like a state school, which exists to help everyone in the state. That's like me going to Somilia or Iraq and telling starving folks to get off their asses because they have a shot like everyone else, through hard work. I know that is an extreme example, but not as extreme if you visit some of these piss-poor urban schools where kids don't have supplies, you get beat up for being smart, it's not safe for you to go outside at night, you are forced to work to make ends meet and can't study as much, etc.... I think it also depends on what you qualify as hard work. Hard work may not be enough to get kids out of some of the situations mentioned above. Look at all the kids that don't have to go through stuff like that and still barely get into the college of their choice. They don't have to work so hard. Again, I am of the opinion that MOST people are in the norm, no matter what economic class you are in. I don't know too many overachievers.
hey icehouse. you seem like a decent human being. who has a heart and stuff. and who wants to see people succeed. and who is willing to give a kid who came up from a rough childhood a break. that sounds like the decent thing to do. but nah. lets lower cap gains tax. and eliminate the inheritance tax. and a lot of other ways so that the elite who aren't working for their money aren't taxed as much. whata hell happened to compassionate conservative?
This logic works just as well to support AA. AA sucks for white people, but if you just work harder, you can skill succeed. Stop complaining about unfair circumstances, right? Why is it unacceptable that white people might have to face more difficult challenges but just fine that black people might? After all, everyone can succeed.
I don't think being black should be a proxy. The spirit of AA is geared towards blacks that have suffered our history and the effort should reflect that. A recent black Kenyan immigrant is the same as a suburban white kid in that respect. There should definitely be a qualifying aspect to any funding. I am all for changes that provide a higher quality education for all kids but the startling problems in this country involve black kids far more so than white kids. It's also easier to target a much smaller demographic, poor black kids, that is still very segregated in the country with something like model schools and vouchers than it is to overhual an entire educational system. Hell I think all kids should get interest free loans to go to college but that's just me. Let's be honest though, this is a divisive issue and that is why it will not be dealt with in a serious manner any time soon. There is and probably always will be a lot of animosity in the black community to the types of comments that have been posted here about working hard, and this/that immigrant family, exceptions being the rule, and earning things. I don't understand how as a nation we can steal someone's past and then call retribution a handout. Entire generations have been denied the capacity to generate wealth, influence, and power. To read these infomercial type responses about the power of self proposed as solutions to the serious problems that have resulted from our abhorrent past is embarrasing.
One of the problems with that is these colleges (that want to boost AA numbers) only care if the kid is black. They don't care where he/she is from...as long as they can count as being black.
Because no one is legislating to make it harder for black people to succeed. Thoses days are LONG behind us. In America, everyone is supposed to be the same under the law.
LONG behind us? Really? Landmark civil rights legislation took effect 40 years ago. It's not like we have to go back to slavery or many generations back or anything like that. There was overt discrimination for black americans who are still in the workplace. That means their kids were and are directly in a more difficult situation. If those people shouldn't complain, why should white kids today who are in a "more difficult" situation due to the horrors of AA complain?
Yeah, 43 years is a long time ago. The majority of the people posting here were not even born at a time when blacks where held down by the law. Pretty much every person who would be affected by any kind of AA could not tell you from first hand experience what it was like before the CRA. This country is supposed to be about everyone being treated the same by the law (equal protection and whatnot).
how is 43 years a long time? not everyones 21. and 43 years isn't enough time to get people from utter despair to believing they can prosper when they still are segregated into ghettos.
Would you support leaving American troops in Iraq for 43 years, after all, it's not a long time right? Everything is relative. In the history of the United States of America, 43 years is quite a long time. There would only be 6 such periods from the founding to now. Oh yeah, the median age of a human being on earth is about 24 years, so for quite a majority of us, 43 years is more than a lifetime ago, not everyone is like you old man. First, black people are not segregated into ghettos, unless by choice. This isn't Nazi Germany, and black Americans are not receiving the treatment here that the Jews did there. There is no law in America that dictates where you live and who you live with. People tend to congregate with others like them, which is why you see large homogeneous population groups all over the place (that and white flight). Second, I have a hard time believing that there are no black people that believe prosperity is possible, or even that such a belief is in the majority. I guess I just have a lot more faith in black people than you do. Beyond that, I don't think all black people living in America before the passage of the Civil Rights Act were in a state of despair. Is 43 years enough time to go from being legally disadvantaged to having a decent chance at success? I think so. All that is pretty irrelevent to what I replied to Major though, which is that we got rid of laws that discriminated against people because of their skin color 43 years ago, and we shouldn't have brought them back, and we REALLY shouldn't keep having them around.
I see your point, but 43 years is not a long time when you consider the people in the main positions to hire and fire. In my field alone (accounting), all of the Big 4 firms have a limited amount of black partners, most of whom are 10-15 years younger than my parents (those black students that went came out of college in the late 70's to early 80's). Technically, I am only ONE generation removed from a group of blacks that grew up during segregation (this includes both of my parents). I can't tell you jack about segregation firsthand, but I can tell you about all the jobs my dad couldn't get in Texas in the 70's and 80's because he was black. And these aren't complex jobs like head engineer or accountant...these are jobs like postman, bus driver, etc. I'm just saying 43 years wasn't that long ago..........
People are not segregated by color, but by income level. A lot of people in the ghetto stay there because they can't afford to leave. You don't think they would rather stay somewhere nicer and safer? Some work extremely hard to get out, but most individuals stay in their current state or do slightly better than their folks did. That crosses all color lines, income levels, etc. Poverty usually begets poverty, and a few folks escape to a decent standard of living (i.e. overachieve). Most middle class folks stay middle class, and a few overachieve and become rich. If you are up to the challenge, I would be more than happy to take you to some schools in the Houston area (black, white, hispanic, whatever) and introduce you to a ton of kids that don't believe they have a chance in hell of making it. Of course, most of these kids would come from extremely poor backgrounds, probably never been outside of their hood, etc....but they definately do exist. If you truly don't believe that to be the case I don't mind opening your eyes at all. Just go to some local YMCA's in the hood, teach a JA class, go visit a homeless shelter, etc.
We don't live in the silly world you portray where the effects of laws are eradicated or are no longer relevant to society once they're changed.
Someone in a position to hire or fire, probably didn't even have a job 43 years ago. Those that were working were probably very low on the food chain. If you get a job at 22, in 43 years you are 65. A large majority of people that were working or looking for work before the CRA are now retired or dead. It will take time for people of color to be represented at the top levels. That a long time has passed allows there to be some black partners. As more time passes, black people will be better represented. Eventually, black partners will exist in proportion to the number of black accounting grads. There doesn't need to be discriminatory laws for this to occur. It was so long ago that you and I were not alive to see it. As I posted before, perspectives on time are relative. To a human being, 43 years is a long time. You wouldn't wait 43 years for a waiter to bring you a sandwhich. One would probably say they have been doing whatever job they are doing for a long time if they had 43 years of experience. It is more than half of the average person's life. On a geological scale, no it isn't that long, but on a human scale, most people would conceive of 43 years as a long time. This is kind of a rediculous argument, as the term long is not exact, it obviously could apply to 43 years even if one doesn't agree that it must, and thus Major saying it wasn't long ago that we got rid of laws that discriminate against black people is not a provable, factual statement, but at most a difference of opinion on the proper use of the indefinite word long. This is partially true. People do tend to congregate with others like them, which can be seen, even if we only look at poor people. There are poor communities that are largely black, there are "Chinatown" communities, there are communities that are mostly Mexican, etc. The point is, no one confines people to a ghetto in America. You may not have a lot of better options depending on your income, but insane man's segregated into ghettos comment was wrong, or at least misleading. If anything, people are trapped in low-income housing, but segregation by race (or other non-monetary factors like sexual orientation, which we see out here in Californa) is by the choice of the people. I'm sure that there are other low income areas that people of different colors live in that are approximately the same price, that are available to each poor person/family. That would be quite a trip for me to prove a point on an internet message board. I stand by my assertion that many if not a majority of black people in America feel there is a chance of success. Any and everyone else is welcome to disagree. I never said any such thing. Whatever get's you through the day pal.
43 years ago folks in a position to hire and fire now did not have jobs, but they were in school and some of them (like my parents) did not have the same equal opportunities as others. Those people (like my parents) are in the workforce now. Don't even get me started on the good ol boy networks that still exist today (see Bush for example). I don't see how anyone can say it wasn't that long ago when a good number of the baby-boomers grew up in a segregated society. If my memory serves me correct I believe my parents were in high school when everything became "equal". I also agree that discriminatory laws don't need to be put into place (including legacy policies), as long as you can ensure that everyone gets the same quality public (free) education. But we can't do that, and that's the main issue. Segregation ended 43 years ago but most public schools like UT or A&M (just using Texas schools as an example) still didn't have a lot of minority students until the 70's. When you are speaking on a scale of making social changes and correcting past wrongs, 43 years is not a long time. Do you think 43 years will reverse what 400 years of slavery put into place? It's not about proving a point. I just honestly find it hard to believe that someone would really think there aren't a bunch of kids out there with no hopes, goals, aspirations, etc. If you really think that then you need to get out more (said in a way of exploring more, not in a dissing you kind of way).
Seems like the Average Age of CEOs is 50 and up So, 43 yrs ago getting into the right schools and socializing with the right people DEFINATELY benefitted them. It does not say they did not work hard but it does say there was a significant portion of the population they did not have to compete fairly against I would look like Roger Federer if I eliminated enough of the potential competition Rocket River The less people you have to fairly compete against the easier your ascent to greatness
