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.
EddieB.Good makes things up because the big government policies he loves are complete failures. That someone actually thinks conservatives love freebies and government involving themselves in our day to day lives much less that they love socialism is absolutely absurd.
There is no alt-right movement to speak of. That's just something EddieB.Good made up in order to deflect from the fact that he promotes failure.
It's no surprise that EddieB.Good makes things up and plays identity politics since he cannot discuss policy since the policies he backs are known failures.
*listens for the outage over $28B paid to farmers for tariff bailout* ... *Crickets*
Harvard actually did a study several years ago, seeking to understand why the US was so different from Europe in regards to social policies. When you think about it....the US is truly the oddity in the developed world in that respect.
The study concluded that ONE of the major reasons for a much less robust social safety net and policies had to do with racism. It concluded that many Americans would be for it IF they thought that the people who would benefit from it looked like them. In other words, Americans are mostly against it because they see people who do not look like them getting the most from such government spending and taxes.
I think its that MANY conservatives are for giveaways and freebies.....if they are getting them and not people who don't look like them.
That's exactly it. We would've been had universal hc if this country was 99% White.
BTW, there is research showing that many "conservatives" and even "authoritarians" may actually support affirmative action so it may be a bad issue for the right as a whole.
"authoritarians will support programs intended to increase opportunities for minority groups, such as affirmative action, if they believe such programs will lead to greater societal uniformity"
Not in a real sense. If it were this wouldnt be an issue.
Quote:
a lawsuit brought by Asian-American applicants alleging that Harvard discriminated against them based on race during the admissions process.
an entirely private school could admit or disallow on any criteria it deemed in its best interest. Same as you do in your own home.
Could someone sue you because you refused them entry into your home based on skin color?
I am a white male but if whites can't compete with Asians, then no special treatment. A study finds 43% of white students at Harvard were not admitted on merit but because of athletics, related to donors or children of faculty.
If daddy was a donor or you can play squash or water Polo, you are set.
Nepotism is hardly exclusive to Harvard, in fact, it is a time honored tradition all over America, practiced by every race, religion and political affiliation.
Not in a real sense. If it were this wouldnt be an issue.
an entirely private school could admit or disallow on any criteria it deemed in its best interest. Same as you do in your own home.
Could someone sue you because you refused them entry into your home based on skin color?
Making the assumption that because billionaire echo chambers fire up right wingers...that "this is why there is an issue" is false on the face....
"Harvard University is a private institution that was founded in 1636."
It's private. That doesn't mean public roads don't lead to it. But it's private.
I am a white male but if whites can't compete with Asians, then no special treatment. A study finds 43% of white students at Harvard were not admitted on merit but because of athletics, related to donors or children of faculty.
If daddy was a donor or you can play squash or water Polo, you are set.
Well part of the problem is that legacy admits might not be that good at a particular sport, but get a roster spot anyway.
For those who follow college baseball, USC (in CA) has the most CWS titles, but has been very average now for years.
Talking to several former coaches, you find that they cannot be as competitive as they use to be, because they have X amount of kids that are there as legacy players. It is not like these kids cannot play, but they would normally not be a top D1 prospect, and certainly not with a program like USC.
The results speak for themsleves.
Location: Somewhere between the Americas and Western Europe
2,180 posts, read 640,315 times
Reputation: 2092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
Not in a real sense. If it were this wouldnt be an issue.
an entirely private school could admit or disallow on any criteria it deemed in its best interest. Same as you do in your own home.
Could someone sue you because you refused them entry into your home based on skin color?
That's now how the law works. Your home isn't a public accommodation or a public place. Therefore you can discriminate about who enters. On the other hand, when you hold the house out for sale to the public, you can't discriminate on who you sell to.
Harvard is a private college, but it's not analogous to a private home. And for damn sure kids that go there qualify for federal loans, etc. Which means Harvard needs to play by the rules.
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.
