Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you graduated with a 1.67 GPA - whoever is your parent/guardian should be in jail.
That is the biggest problem in Detroit. Absentee parents who abdicate responsibility for teaching (or lack thereof) of their offspring to someone else. There should have been mandatory homework sessions from 4pm-6pm or not going to bed until the homework is done. Unless we fix the root issues under the roof - not a dime more should be spent on schools.
Do you not follow the news? The more money spent on schools will just trickle to the admin, the principals and the "consultants" tasked with implementing leading ideas. There will be no benefit to the children. The sooner we realize that - we skip the notion of throwing more money at problems.
Not back in the 70's when a C was actually considered a decent grade. It's not like today with all the grade inflation and dummying down of education. My education was not dummied down and my grades were not inflated. Today I would have had a C+/B- average easily. I graduated with a below average GPA for my time. Theoretically, half the class will. Interestingly I was at the top of my class for my associates, bachelors and one masters degree (I only had a 3.6 GPA for my masters in engineering so I was middle of the pack but I was competing with full time students when I had a full time job as an engineer.).
I do follow the news. What I've suggested is what I would do if I had the money. I never said the admins would implement it. Reality is the real solutions would cost a lot of money. NOT throwing money at the problem isn't helping either. The issue is spending the money where it will do the most good which can only happen if you have the money in the first place.
I agree that parenting makes or breaks a school. While I like to think that my school is rated highly because of teachers I know the biggest influence here is parenting. However that is not to say there are not things schools can to do improve the school environment. You'd be surprised at the impact a teacher can have if they have the time to work with students who are starved for adult attention. The problem is when you have a class size of 28 you can't give anyone individual attention. It becomes about managing the class instead of teaching individuals. Give me classes of 18 and I can make a bigger impact. However, as things are that will not happen. Our thinking about teachers needs to change. Now we pack classrooms and convince ourselves this has no negative impact on education IF the teacher is good. While it is true I can still teach my content with large classes IF they are there to learn, I can't when I'm dealing with kids who have bigger things on their minds. They will not care what I know and can teach them until they know that I care about them as individuals. That's hard to do when you have 150 students to teach.
One thing I miss about the charter school was admins who supported me as a teacher. For example, my chemistry lab was small and I only had enough glassware for one class at a time. Kids being kids just left things dirty and blamed other kids so I requested that kids serving after school detention from my class come in and wash dishes. While I did this to free up my own time it had an interesting effect. It only took two or three session in my class working with me in small groups for these kids to stop being trouble makers in my class. I got to know them. They got to know me. End of conflict. End of dishwashers too, lol.
I've asked that my current school do this but that request was denied because that is seen as having the kids do my job. Other teachers offer extra credit for coming in to wash dishes but you get a different group of kids when it's extra credit. You get the good kids who care about their grades.
I stand by my suggestions. Yes they cost money. No I don't know how to get a district to actually spend the money where it's needed. I never claimed to.
Affirmative action did what it was supposed to do by allowing minorities to move up faster than they could have otherwise for two generations and yes I think that's enough for those who would take advantage of it to have done so. I can't help the ones who didn't because just like poor ill educated white people they didn't. The children of the first people to gain under affirmative action would have their parents advantage and a second generation of people benefitting from affirmative action would pass that advantage on to their children. There's no hundreds of years to be concerned with here because the vast majority of people are not from a long line of successful (rich) ancestors. Most of us work our way up. (120 years ago my ancestors were servants. What does that have to do with me today? I come from a long line of poor white people.)
I do not agree with that. For most people, your life chances are determined from age 0 to 18. Most affirmative action policies, that I am aware of, did not kick in until a person became an adult. Hence, affirmative action was like supplying cologne....but not soap and water....to treat BO. Society needed to address the damage done to blacks, from centuries of racism, by reverse engineering the damage done culturally, psychologically, socially and economically.
Quote:
Affirmative action impacted the people who took advantage of it and now their children and grandchildren (we really only need to be concerned with the living generations) now have the advantage they were born with because of affirmative action. That's what affirmative action was supposed to do. Create a situation where parents can pass an advantage on to their children. I cannot help people who didn't take advantage of it just as I cannot help poor ill educated whites who don't take advantage of what is there. You either go for the brass ring or you don't. No matter what we do there will always be children born into disadvantaged situations be they black, white or purple with green polka dots. I'm white but I was born to a poor uneducated family and I attended school during affirmative action which put ME at a disadvantage because I'm white. I had my natural disadvantage AND the one created by affirmative action to fight. I'm living proof it can be done without an advantage being handed to you. No I didn't get into U of M or Michigan State but I could go to HFCC so I did. I worked my butt off and got grades good enough to win me a full scholarship to U of D. All without parents who went to college paving the way and paying my bills. I'm not the person to have this argument with. I know the score. Yes it bugged me that due to affirmative action black students with lower GPA's than mine go to go to U of M but I didn't let that stop me. I never did get to Ann Arbor but I did ok but because of what I did my dd's have more choices than I did for college. Just like the kids of those minority students who went to U of M back in the 70's have.
Affirmative Action was not something that black people took advantage of. Black people applied for jobs and applied for colleges, just like white people did. Black people did not apply for affirmative action. In other words, its not as if black people failed apply for guaranteed affirmative action positions, when you suggest that some blacks took advantage of it (implications being that others did not). It was meant to offset the propensity of discrimination against blacks. It simply meant that many blacks would might have not got the job because of their black names.....now got the job. However, black unemployment rates have never dropped below being twice the rate of whites. I guess that is because black people were too lazy to take advantage of guaranteed Affirmative Action jobs.
Quote:
Affirmative action allowed more minorities in two generations to move up faster than they should have at the expense of whites in those two generations. Yes, I think that's enough especially considering the educational opportunities that exist for poor minorities. Do you realize how much financial aid is out there for poor minority students to attend college or get career training? Either they take advantage of that or they don't. That is up to them.
What whites? White women were the biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action, first off. Secondly, the implication of your reasoning is that statistically black unemployment should have been 3 times the rate of whites and black poverty 4 times the rate of whites, if the free market for labor and merit was allowed? In other words, I am trying to see the statistical evidence of harm to whites, in light of the egregious gaps in poverty and unemployment rates between blacks and whites. So what you are saying is that the socioeconomic gaps should be EVEN GREATER?
Quote:
As I said, money is available for job training and education. All these uneducated black males who need to make $60k need to do is go for it. No one is stopping them. Affirmative action won't help them if they won't help themselves. Affirmative action said that if candidates are equal in qualifications the minority candidate gets the job (and gave them preferential entry into colleges). First you have to be equal in qualifications. (And do you have any idea how insulting you are to women to insinuate they need a man to take care of them? I was the primary bread winner in my household for many years (I'm a teacher now and my pay is very low so I'm not anymore but I was for more than half of the years I've been married....and my dh never made $60k except for the last two years he worked before he retired...yet we're married.)
Yes...there is an unlimited supply of opportunity. The only limit is ones will and work ethic to get it. That is why the definition of an economic recession is two consecutive quarters of negative personal responsibility growth (laziness). Recession and depressions are thus the resultant of people not wanting to work. There were over 800,000 jobs lost in Michigan during the last economic downturn. In other words, 800,000 decided to not be personally responsible and quit their jobs. Yep, its all about personal responsibility....because opportunity grows on trees and its always summer in America.
Quote:
Reality is affirmative action isn't going to help inner city youths. Those who would be helped by it already have been in that their parents took advantage of it and moved up an out of the city. I see successful black families all over in the suburbs. Whether that success is linked to affirmative action or not is irrelevant to their children who reap the benefits of their parents labors/good fortune whatever the case may be (if your parents went to college it's easier to get into college, if your parents are gainfully employed they often have contacts that can help you find employment, etc, etc, etc...). THAT is what affirmative action did. It compensated for the fact many minorities didn't have their parents to pull them up but as those minorities became parents their children did. They have them. You are focusing on the ones that affirmative action left behind but they were left behind because they chose not to participate.
No one is arguing a point that Affirmative Action is going to help inner city youth. I am not even aware that there has been, ever, an affirmative action program for inner city youth.
Quote:
I'm sorry but just as whites with poor ill educated parents don't get a leg up, neither do minorities. Like it or not there will always be a segment of the population simply born into a lousy situation. Some will work their way out and give their children the advantage they didn't have but many more won't. I think it's time to just not discriminate at all.
They do get a leg up....In Europe. They would get a leg up here too....if this country did not have so many non white people who would get it too. The problem here is that they can not give it to you and not give it to us. Call that the result of "friendly fire".
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 12-31-2015 at 09:28 AM..
Affirmative action wasn't something you applied for. It was a granted advantage in getting jobs and getting into colleges at the expense of others. It was an attempt to correct the fact that minority children...because their parents had been discriminated against....didn't have the advantage that comes with having parents who are successful in some way. Colleges look at things like whether or not your parents went to college when deciding who to admit. By giving preference to minorities for the years affirmative action was in place this barrier (if you will as I don't know what to call it) is removed. Now you get preferential admittance because you're a minority. The idea is that your children will have the advantage of college educated parents. The purpose was to increase the number of educated future parents among minorities. Affirmative action is not something that ever was intended to stay in place more than a couple of generations. It simply made up for the fact that so many minorities grew up without parents who could help them. It was a leg up so that the children of minorities could have the same kind of advantage that the children of whites have. Theoretically, after two generations of preferential hiring and admittance to colleges there should be a lot more minority families where the parents are educated or have decent jobs and can help their kids. Given that I see successful black families in the suburbs I would say that it was somewhat successful. However, there are people who didn't go to college and didn't apply for jobs or job training they would have gotten because of affirmative action...just like there are uneducated and untrained whites who don't take advantage of what is available to them. I can't help that in either case. Affirmative action did what it was supposed to do. It increased the number of educated and trained minorities who can now pass the advantage they have on to their children. Now is the time to simply not discriminate against anyone. It's time to consider people people...Period. There are poor and uneducated people among all races. That is just reality and no amount of preferential treatment will change that.
Like it or not we inherit a lot from our parents. Things like work ethic or valuing education. If you have parents who are willing to work to get ahead you're likely to be someone who will work to get ahead. If you have parents who value education you're likely to value education. If they don't, you're likely not to. Affirmative action cannot change this. The minorities who wanted to work to get ahead so they and their children could have a better life had an advantage for two generations. Given that this was at the expense of people who did nothing to deserve to be pushed aside (like me... my 3.98 GPA in CC was not enough to get into U of M but I knew black students with far lower GPA's who did get into U of M). It is telling that I had a private university offering me a free ride when I couldn't even get into U of M. (I'm ok with it though as I would have taken the free ride over U of M any day of the week) My generation and the next had to pay a price because of what the generations before us did but in doing that the situation could be corrected. I cannot help that some chose not to take advantage of what was handed to them but it's time to stop discriminating against anyone and just be people. The time for affirmative action has passed. For two generations a disproportionate number of minorities got the job and got into the college. What more do you want? What more do you think can be accomplished? How would continuing affirmative action help Detroit? Even with affirmative action you have to be willing to do the work. Acorns usually don't fall far from the tree. That is the real reason why the poor stay poor when they have had the opportunity to move up.
And yes I am saying that the socio economic gap would have been greater without affirmative action. I do believe it was as successful as it could be. Unfortunately, no program changes family beliefs. Watching the kids next door call the educated couple across the street "Oreos" for "being black only on the outside" is telling. Affirmative action isn't going to help them. It did help that young couple...who moved to the suburbs to get away from kids calling them names for being educated.
You and I can disagree all you want but affirmative action is done and I don't see it coming back any time soon. I think we're past needing it. Seriously all you have to do is get a lawyer and file a suit if you think a company or college has discriminated against you because of your race these days and you're set for life.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 12-31-2015 at 11:06 AM..
Affirmative action wasn't something you applied for. It was a granted advantage in getting jobs and getting into colleges at the expense of others. It was an attempt to correct the fact that minority children...because their parents had been discriminated against....didn't have the advantage that comes with having parents who are successful in some way. Colleges look at things like whether or not your parents went to college when deciding who to admit. By giving preference to minorities for the years affirmative action was in place this barrier (if you will as I don't know what to call it) is removed. Now you get preferential admittance because you're a minority. The idea is that your children will have the advantage of college educated parents. The purpose was to increase the number of educated future parents among minorities. Affirmative action is not something that ever was intended to stay in place more than a couple of generations. It simply made up for the fact that so many minorities grew up without parents who could help them. It was a leg up so that the children of minorities could have the same kind of advantage that the children of whites have. Theoretically, after two generations of preferential hiring and admittance to colleges there should be a lot more minority families where the parents are educated or have decent jobs and can help their kids. Given that I see successful black families in the suburbs I would say that it was somewhat successful. However, there are people who didn't go to college and didn't apply for jobs or job training they would have gotten because of affirmative action...just like there are uneducated and untrained whites who don't take advantage of what is available to them. I can't help that in either case. Affirmative action did what it was supposed to do. It increased the number of educated and trained minorities who can now pass the advantage they have on to their children. Now is the time to simply not discriminate against anyone. It's time to consider people people...Period. There are poor and uneducated people among all races. That is just reality and no amount of preferential treatment will change that.
Uhhh....no..... Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU's) were created to give blacks that opportunity that was denied them at "white institutions" of higher learning. Most successful blacks matriculated and graduated from HBCU institutions. They were NOT affirmative Action recipients at HBCU's!!!! Affirmative Action was an offset to discrimination taking place in REAL TIME....because blacks were not getting into white universities and not getting into corporate America, as well as certain neighborhoods (redlining by banks and real estate agents), because of racial discrimination. You are correct that it was not meant to be permanent....however. Anyway, I am not a fan of Affirmative Action.....because it was simply cologne for society and not soap and water to deal with the funk society created. Again....the biggest beneficiary of Affirmative Action policies were WHITE WOMEN!!! So much for the supposed damage it did to white people.
Quote:
Like it or not we inherit a lot from our parents. Things like work ethic or valuing education. If you have parents who are willing to work to get ahead you're likely to be someone who will work to get ahead. If you have parents who value education you're likely to value education. If they don't, you're likely not to. Affirmative action cannot change this. The minorities who wanted to work to get ahead so they and their children could have a better life had an advantage for two generations. Given that this was at the expense of people who did nothing to deserve to be pushed aside (like me... my 3.98 GPA in CC was not enough to get into U of M but I knew black students with far lower GPA's who did get into U of M). It is telling that I had a private university offering me a free ride when I couldn't even get into U of M. (I'm ok with it though as I would have taken the free ride over U of M any day of the week) My generation and the next had to pay a price because of what the generations before us did but in doing that the situation could be corrected. I cannot help that some chose not to take advantage of what was handed to them but it's time to stop discriminating against anyone and just be people. The time for affirmative action has passed. For two generations a disproportionate number of minorities got the job and got into the college. What more do you want? What more do you think can be accomplished? How would continuing affirmative action help Detroit? Even with affirmative action you have to be willing to do the work. Acorns usually don't fall far from the tree. That is the real reason why the poor stay poor when they have had the opportunity to move up.
I do not know what history you have read.....but black history in America is replete with blacks working to get ahead. That is why the used us for slave labor. However, here is the thing. It is commonly understood that if one wants to encourage a behavior you reward it....and if one want to discourage a behavior you punish it. Hence, what was the impact of generations of enslavement? Where was the reward for hard work? Where was the reward for trying hard and working harder and not getting equal pay for generations? You do not encourage hard work, by a society, by not paying people for their labor then not paying them equally until you force society by law to do so. Here you note how values and ethics are passed down. Cool....what was passed down by breaking the spirit of so many black people from generations of exploitation of their labor and not recognizing their education when they did get it? Education did not keep blacks safe from discrimination. Discrimination was not against your educational background, but your race. Thus, society did not reward education for blacks like it rewarded it for whites....for generations. So yeah....maybe society behavior discouraged valuing education or hard work via discrimination and now its just passed down as the legacy of the past. Keep in mind that EVERYTHING evolved into what it is today.
Quote:
And yes I am saying that the socio economic gap would have been greater without affirmative action. I do believe it was as successful as it could be. Unfortunately, no program changes family beliefs. Watching the kids next door call the educated couple across the street "Oreos" for "being black only on the outside" is telling. Affirmative action isn't going to help them. It did help that young couple...who moved to the suburbs to get away from kids calling them names for being educated.
Ohhhhhh......two fallacies there. The fallacy of using anecdotal evidence and the fallacy of composition.
Quote:
You and I can disagree all you want but affirmative action is done and I don't see it coming back any time soon. I think we're past needing it. Seriously all you have to do is get a lawyer and file a suit if you think a company or college has discriminated against you because of your race these days and you're set for life.
Dude....or whatever.....I NEVER forwarded an argument concerning the merits of Affirmative Action. You brought the whole thing up. It must be a pet peeve or something for you.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 12-31-2015 at 01:23 PM..
Uhhh....no..... Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU's) were created to give blacks that opportunity that was denied them at "white institutions" of higher learning. Most successful blacks matriculated and graduated from HBCU institutions. They were NOT affirmative Action recipients at HBCU's!!!! Affirmative Action was an offset to discrimination taking place in REAL TIME....because blacks were not getting into white universities and not getting into corporate America, as well as certain neighborhoods (redlining by banks and real estate agents), because of racial discrimination. You are correct that it was not meant to be permanent....however. Anyway, I am not a fan of Affirmative Action.....because it was simply cologne for society and not soap and water to deal with the funk society created. Again....the biggest beneficiary of Affirmative Action policies were WHITE WOMEN!!! So much for the supposed damage it did to white people.
I do not know what history you have read.....but black history in America is replete with blacks working to get ahead. That is why the used us for slave labor. However, here is the thing. It is commonly understood that if one wants to encourage a behavior you reward it....and if one want to discourage a behavior you punish it. Hence, what was the impact of generations of enslavement? Where was the reward for hard work? Where was the reward for trying hard and working harder and not getting equal pay for generations? You do not encourage hard work, by a society, by not paying people for their labor then not paying them equally until you force society by law to do so. Here you note how values and ethics are passed down. Cool....what was passed down by breaking the spirit of so many black people from generations of exploitation of their labor and not recognizing their education when they did get it? Education did not keep blacks safe from discrimination. Discrimination was not against your educational background, but your race. Thus, society did not reward education for blacks like it rewarded it for whites....for generations. So yeah....maybe society behavior discouraged valuing education or hard work via discrimination and now its just passed down as the legacy of the past. Keep in mind that EVERYTHING evolved into what it is today.
Ohhhhhh......two fallacies there. The fallacy of using anecdotal evidence and the fallacy of composition.
Dude....or whatever.....I NEVER forwarded an argument concerning the merits of Affirmative Action. You brought the whole thing up. It must be a pet peeve or something for you.
Not a pet peeve. You just don't understand what affirmative action was. I saw it in action. Both when I was applying for colleges and jobs. (Not a dude BTW.)
According to Wikipedia, under affirmative action U of M awarded 20 extra entry points to underrepresented minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger This has been ruled unconstitutional and discriminatory.
"In a major victory for U-M announced June 23, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the right of universities to consider race in admissions procedures in order to achieve a diverse student body."
Of course that was in 2003. Now this practice is considered discriminatory because it is. Reverse discrimination is still discrimination. However, I do see the need to temporarily reverse discriminate as we did under affirmative action for reasons I've already stated.
I'm not sure what you think affirmative action was supposed to do. It can't motivate the unmotivated any more than the white privilege that used to exist could motivate unmotivated whites. You can't just hand things to people because it changes nothing. ---Did you know that most lottery winners spend their winnings in 7 years no matter how much they won and end up worse off for the wear? Giving people something doesn't change anything. They have to work for it for it to matter to them. As they say: If you give a man a fish he eats for a day. If you teach a man to fish he eats for a lifetime.
There are lots of things that come into play when you start discussing poverty like single parent homes. Not making $60K/year hasn't stopped my relatives from getting married. In fact most of us married and struggled for years before finding our way. My dd just got married. Both of them were making minimum wage when they got married.
Teen parenting is a HUGE one. Once a girl becomes a teen mother it's pretty much over for her as the uphill climb is very steep so that's a valley it's hard to get out of. If it were up to me I'd sterilize every 12 year old and offer a free reversal procedure when they were 25. Of course they'd tell me I can't do that but it sure would cure a lot of what ills poor communities no matter their skin color.
Innate intelligence is another. Like it or not we do inherit our intelligence from our parents (mother for boys and both parents for girls I believe). You can be lucky or unlucky here. Sometimes your family is poor for a reason. If your parents weren't very smart chances are you aren't either (this is why universities look at whether or not your parents are educated during the admission process). We are not all the same. Innate ability and grit run the gamut. You have to have both to get ahead.
Affirmative action can't address the things that make people poor. What it addressed was the people who actually had the drive, desire and intelligence who were never given a chance because of discrimination. I would hope we're past this. If you're an employer today and you discriminate you deserve everything the court is going to throw at you when you are rightfully sued. We are past needing reverse discrimination. It served its purpose. From this point forward what's important is NOT discriminating at all. If the black/Indian/Hispanic/White candidate is the best candidate hire them. Where we need to see some reverse discrimination is age discrimination. None of the engineers I was downsized out of the auto industry with found work in engineering again. We're too young to retire but too old to get hired. With social security set to implode you'd think the government would take care of this problem. (I went into teaching as did several of my peers, others started their own businesses or retired if they were closer to retirement).
You'd have to explain to this white woman why we were the beneficiaries under affirmative action. I can tell you we weren't. If I was given such an advantage why couldn't I get into U of M Ann Arbor with a 3.98 GPA from HFCC when black students with lower GPA's and lower ACT scores did??? You know why? Because I didn't get the 20 admission points for being a minority because I'm not. Discussing how affirmative action hurt women and minorities is another thread (As a female engineer it was assumed that I got my job due to affirmative action and not my abilities. It was assumed I didn't earn my scholarship when I did. It was assumed I was not as competent as my male counterparts. I did not get my job because of affirmative action (the company I worked for had a separate affirmative action HR department and I hired in through the regular one) but that didn't stop people form thinking and treating me like I didn't deserve my job.). Have you actually lived with affirmative action and seen how it works? I'm 57 years old. I've seen it at all levels. The worst ones were the case where the person really didn't deserve the job. All they did was reinforce stereotypes due to their ineptitude. I agree with implementing affirmative action for a time to create more of a presence of minorities in colleges and the work force but once you've done that it's time to stand on merit. You and I can disagree on this. It doesn't matter. Affirmative action is done. It had its time whether you like it or not.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 12-31-2015 at 03:11 PM..
Not a pet peeve. You just don't understand what affirmative action was. I saw it in action. Both when I was applying for colleges and jobs. (Not a dude BTW.)
According to Wikipedia, under affirmative action U of M awarded 20 extra entry points to underrepresented minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger This has been ruled unconstitutional and discriminatory.
"In a major victory for U-M announced June 23, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the right of universities to consider race in admissions procedures in order to achieve a diverse student body."
Of course that was in 2003. Now this practice is considered discriminatory because it is. Reverse discrimination is still discrimination. However, I do see the need to temporarily reverse discriminate as we did under affirmative action for reasons I've already stated.
I'm not sure what you think affirmative action was supposed to do. It can't motivate the unmotivated any more than the white privilege that used to exist could motivate unmotivated whites. You can't just hand things to people because it changes nothing. ---Did you know that most lottery winners spend their winnings in 7 years no matter how much they won and end up worse off for the wear? Giving people something doesn't change anything. They have to work for it for it to matter to them. As they say: If you give a man a fish he eats for a day. If you teach a man to fish he eats for a lifetime.
There are lots of things that come into play when you start discussing poverty like single parent homes. Not making $60K/year hasn't stopped my relatives from getting married. In fact most of us married and struggled for years before finding our way. My dd just got married. Both of them were making minimum wage when they got married.
Teen parenting is a HUGE one. Once a girl becomes a teen mother it's pretty much over for her as the uphill climb is very steep so that's a valley it's hard to get out of. If it were up to me I'd sterilize every 12 year old and offer a free reversal procedure when they were 25. Of course they'd tell me I can't do that but it sure would cure a lot of what ills poor communities no matter their skin color.
Innate intelligence is another. Like it or not we do inherit our intelligence from our parents (mother for boys and both parents for girls I believe). You can be lucky or unlucky here. Sometimes your family is poor for a reason. If your parents weren't very smart chances are you aren't either (this is why universities look at whether or not your parents are educated during the admission process). We are not all the same. Innate ability and grit run the gamut. You have to have both to get ahead.
Affirmative action can't address the things that make people poor. What it addressed was the people who actually had the drive, desire and intelligence who were never given a chance because of discrimination. I would hope we're past this. If you're an employer today and you discriminate you deserve everything the court is going to throw at you when you are rightfully sued. We are past needing reverse discrimination. It served its purpose. From this point forward what's important is NOT discriminating at all. If the black/Indian/Hispanic/White candidate is the best candidate hire them. Where we need to see some reverse discrimination is age discrimination. None of the engineers I was downsized out of the auto industry with found work in engineering again. We're too young to retire but too old to get hired. With social security set to implode you'd think the government would take care of this problem. (I went into teaching as did several of my peers, others started their own businesses or retired if they were closer to retirement).
You'd have to explain to this white woman why we were the beneficiaries under affirmative action. I can tell you we weren't. If I was given such an advantage why couldn't I get into U of M Ann Arbor with a 3.98 GPA from HFCC when black students with lower GPA's and lower ACT scores did??? You know why? Because I didn't get the 20 admission points for being a minority because I'm not. Discussing how affirmative action hurt women and minorities is another thread (As a female engineer it was assumed that I got my job due to affirmative action and not my abilities. It was assumed I didn't earn my scholarship when I did. It was assumed I was not as competent as my male counterparts. I did not get my job because of affirmative action (the company I worked for had a separate affirmative action HR department and I hired in through the regular one) but that didn't stop people form thinking and treating me like I didn't deserve my job.). Have you actually lived with affirmative action and seen how it works? I'm 57 years old. I've seen it at all levels. The worst ones were the case where the person really didn't deserve the job. All they did was reinforce stereotypes due to their ineptitude. I agree with implementing affirmative action for a time to create more of a presence of minorities in colleges and the work force but once you've done that it's time to stand on merit. You and I can disagree on this. It doesn't matter. Affirmative action is done. It had its time whether you like it or not.
Lol....YOU introduced Affirmative Action into this argument.....not me. I have not once defended Affirmative Action in our conversation. You keep attacking something that I have never defended. In fact I stated twice that I saw it as an ineffective substitute for repair of the damage rendered over the centuries to blacks. I am not shedding any tears that affirmative action is ending.....but a lot of white women might be.
You have demonstrated a lot of intellectual masturbation.....on closer inspection.....its obvious you are only using anecdotal analysis....not logical reasoning. As a women.....you might have your job because of Affirmative Action....and not even realize it. People are not told that they are an Affirmative Action hire.....you might be biting the hand that fed you....lol.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 12-31-2015 at 04:14 PM..
Lol....YOU introduced Affirmative Action into this argument.....not me. I have not once defended Affirmative Action in our conversation. You keep attacking something that I have never defended. In fact I stated twice that I saw it as an ineffective substitute for repair of the damage rendered over the centuries to blacks. I am not shedding any tears that affirmative action is ending.....but a lot of white women might be.
You have demonstrated a lot of intellectual masturbation.....on closer inspection.....its obvious you are only using anecdotal analysis....not logical reasoning. As a women.....you might have your job because of Affirmative Action....and not even realize it. People are not told that they are an Affirmative Action hire.....you might be biting the hand that fed you....lol.
Well then. Everything is settled. We're in agreement.
I only brought up affirmative action to answer your charge about people being denied the chance to get ahead for generations and how that impacts now. THAT is what affirmative action addressed. Since you're not disagreeing, there's nothing to debate here.
Well then. Everything is settled. We're in agreement.
I only brought up affirmative action to answer your charge about people being denied the chance to get ahead for generations and how that impacts now. THAT is what affirmative action addressed. Since you're not disagreeing, there's nothing to debate here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled topic.
Affirmative action did not change that. If it did the statistics would show it. What statistics show is that white women benefited more than anyone else and you said that affirmative action came at the expense of whites.
Affirmative action did not change that. If it did the statistics would show it. What statistics show is that white women benefited more than anyone else and you said that affirmative action came at the expense of whites.
"These programs have brought or accompanied significant gains for women and minorities. In the past 25 years, black participation in the work force has increased 50 percent and the percentage of blacks holding managerial positions has jumped fivefold. In 1970, women comprised only 5 percent of lawyers compared to 20 percent today. Twenty-five years ago, the student population at University of California, Berkeley, was 80 percent white compared to 45 percent today.
Despite these strides, severe inequities remain. Nearly 97 percent of corporate senior executives in the United States are white. Only 5 percent of all professionals are black though blacks comprise 12.7 percent of the work force. Hispanics hold only 4 percent of white-collar jobs but make up 7.5 percent of the work force."
I would say doubling black participation in the work force is a significant impact regardless if you think some other group benefitted more (If white women did benefit more it was at the expense of white men so that's a racial wash out). No it was not perfect. Nothing is. It did what it could and it's time to move on. Affirmative action unfortunately only helps those willing to help themselves. Just like I can't do anything about uneducated poor whites (pretty much my family up to this generation) affirmative action does nothing for someone who doesn't go to college, doesn't go for job training and doesn't apply for the job. There is no program that will help them. They have to help themselves.
We disagree on the purpose of affirmative action but that is not the subject of this thread. I brought it up so show that attempts have been made to deal with the fact that minorities like blacks have been discriminated against in the past and there is a legacy to that that keeps them down. I have never claimed it was perfect or that blacks are the only beneficiaries. No I don't believe white females benefitted as much as you think from affirmative action. Correlation does not imply causation. There are many other factors that led to white women moving up during the time of affirmative action that had nothing to do with affirmative action. I believe this would have happened with or without affirmative action. Reliable birth control changed EVERYTHING for women. It gave us choices and changed how we were viewed as employees (before you jump on BC was invented in the 60's, changes in attitude take time. Usually a couple of generations but there was a major push for women in the 70's that helped change attitudes here.).
Being able to choose when you have children meant we could go for jobs that were previously not open to us. Changing economies resulted in middle class families needing two incomes. You are trying to say that affirmative action did it when many other things were going on at the same time that lead to white women making advances. Yes we made great strides during the time of affirmative action but that doesn't mean it was because of affirmative action. The group actually preferred under AA where I worked (Very large world wide company. Large enough to have a separate HR office for AA) was black females because companies could count them twice as a minority group. The next group was black males because we were still fighting the perception among older managers that women would just get pregnant and quit. They were quicker to hire them and slower to lay them off but believe what you want. You're going to anyway. Correlation does not equal causation. I don't think you would have seen the impact for white women we've seen without things like reliable birth control and the need for two incomes in a family. I believe those two things are responsible for most of the increase in white women in the work force. I can't prove it but you can't prove it was affirmative action alone either so we're deadlocked. All I can do is make a logical argument for why our time had come and it had nothing to do with affirmative action other than making it easier on some to get the job (it did not seem to help in getting an education as universities preferred minorities to whites regardless of gender during this time). Yes, I argue that it helped minorities more than whites because I believe white women would have made their presence known in the work force without affirmative action because of other factors. Our time had simply come. In the past an education was seen as wasted on a girl because she would just become a mother and opt out of the work force. BC changed this view as we could choose when to have kids and how many to have. Economics pushed even more women into the work force. I just don't believe AA was the big factor here. I think it was coincidence but the fact we did it is proof that any group that pushes to get ahead can.
However, this is not the debate of this thread. Let's get back on topic.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 01-01-2016 at 08:25 AM..
"These programs have brought or accompanied significant gains for women and minorities. In the past 25 years, black participation in the work force has increased 50 percent and the percentage of blacks holding managerial positions has jumped fivefold. In 1970, women comprised only 5 percent of lawyers compared to 20 percent today. Twenty-five years ago, the student population at University of California, Berkeley, was 80 percent white compared to 45 percent today.
Despite these strides, severe inequities remain. Nearly 97 percent of corporate senior executives in the United States are white. Only 5 percent of all professionals are black though blacks comprise 12.7 percent of the work force. Hispanics hold only 4 percent of white-collar jobs but make up 7.5 percent of the work force."
I would say doubling black participation in the work force is a significant impact regardless if you think some other group benefitted more (If white women did benefit more it was at the expense of white men so that's a racial wash out). No it was not perfect. Nothing is. It did what it could and it's time to move on. Affirmative action unfortunately only helps those willing to help themselves. Just like I can't do anything about uneducated poor whites (pretty much my family up to this generation) affirmative action does nothing for someone who doesn't go to college, doesn't go for job training and doesn't apply for the job. There is no program that will help them. They have to help themselves.
We disagree on the purpose of affirmative action but that is not the subject of this thread. I brought it up so show that attempts have been made to deal with the fact that minorities like blacks have been discriminated against in the past and there is a legacy to that that keeps them down. I have never claimed it was perfect or that blacks are the only beneficiaries. No I don't believe white females benefitted as much as you think from affirmative action. Correlation does not imply causation. There are many other factors that led to white women moving up during the time of affirmative action that had nothing to do with affirmative action. I believe this would have happened with or without affirmative action. Reliable birth control changed EVERYTHING for women. It gave us choices and changed how we were viewed as employees (before you jump on BC was invented in the 60's, changes in attitude take time. Usually a couple of generations but there was a major push for women in the 70's that helped change attitudes here.).
Being able to choose when you have children meant we could go for jobs that were previously not open to us. Changing economies resulted in middle class families needing two incomes. You are trying to say that affirmative action did it when many other things were going on at the same time that lead to white women making advances. Yes we made great strides during the time of affirmative action but that doesn't mean it was because of affirmative action. The group actually preferred under AA where I worked (Very large world wide company. Large enough to have a separate HR office for AA) was black females because companies could count them twice as a minority group. The next group was black males because we were still fighting the perception among older managers that women would just get pregnant and quit. They were quicker to hire them and slower to lay them off but believe what you want. You're going to anyway. Correlation does not equal causation. I don't think you would have seen the impact for white women we've seen without things like reliable birth control and the need for two incomes in a family. I believe those two things are responsible for most of the increase in white women in the work force. I can't prove it but you can't prove it was affirmative action alone either so we're deadlocked. All I can do is make a logical argument for why our time had come and it had nothing to do with affirmative action other than making it easier on some to get the job (it did not seem to help in getting an education as universities preferred minorities to whites regardless of gender during this time). Yes, I argue that it helped minorities more than whites because I believe white women would have made their presence known in the work force without affirmative action because of other factors. Our time had simply come. In the past an education was seen as wasted on a girl because she would just become a mother and opt out of the work force. BC changed this view as we could choose when to have kids and how many to have. Economics pushed even more women into the work force. I just don't believe AA was the big factor here. I think it was coincidence but the fact we did it is proof that any group that pushes to get ahead can.
However, this is not the debate of this thread. Let's get back on topic.
Indeed....correlation is NOT causation. Yet, you seek to argue that correlation IS causation for gains in black participation.....but you seek to argue that correlation IS NOT causation in terms of women participation.....but in neither case can you forward any proof. That is simply more conjecture and conjecture, without proof, simply shows ones prejudice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
