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.
because you are a racist. you said race should be used in admission decisions. why to your racist mind, discrimation against white or asians are justified. what a racist and hypocrit
Once again, I never said that one race is superior to another. So, your accusations of racism are baseless. I said race should be one of the factors used in the admission process, to ensure a more balanced student body.
If Asians smarten up and realize democrats are *not* their friends, it could put a quick end to this here nonsense. Long as they behave like some other usual demographics democrats will take their votes for granted and remain in power.
Notice that Liu guy now in Albany isn't helping their cause.
The problem is that minorities generally view the Republicans as the "white supremacist" party. There aren't any viable 3rd party so most either don't vote or only vote Democrat as they see the Democrat as the brand for minorities even though Democrats haven't past as single legislation that benefited minorities the last decade or so after Clinton.
I just wonder what happens to someone who is mixed or adopted under this system. A lot of people are a mix of Chinese or Indian, and African American or Afro Caribbean. Would it just go by their last name?
Last edited by fatsquirrel; 06-21-2019 at 11:42 AM..
Once again, I never said that one race is superior to another. So, your accusations of racism are baseless. I said race should be one of the factors used in the admission process, to ensure a more balanced student body.
If all races are equal, why choose it to be a factor?
Should we also add other arbitrary qualities such as hair type, eye color, nose size, etc?
If all races are equal, why choose it to be a factor?
Should we also add other arbitrary qualities such as hair type, eye color, nose size, etc?
Shhhhh you are making too much sense. Obama's or Colin Powell's kids should get special privilege because of the color of their skin, not their socioeconomic status, kick out the poor Asians because they have too much privilege. Look at the shape of their eyes - they are part of the oppression!
So how do we all feel about something like household income / economic level as a preferential selection? Or someone excelling relative to a generally underperforming school? Wasn't that the actual proposed reformed admissions and not a strict race quota?
If all races are equal, why choose it to be a factor?
Should we also add other arbitrary qualities such as hair type, eye color, nose size, etc?
Because public institutions should reflect the demographics of the public being served. No one demographic should be allowed to hog all of of available resources, which are clearly limited. And the current system does just that.
Again, the difference between an Asian kid who scored 99% and a Black kid who scored 91% is not huge, in terms of academics, but can be humongous in terms of other traits, e.g. leadership ability, communication skills, commitment to public service, etc. If you want to create a balanced student body, you need to consider all of these traits, and not only the academics.
Because public institutions should reflect the demographics of the public being served. No one demographic should be allowed to hog all of of available resources, which are clearly limited. And the current system does just that.
Again, the difference between an Asian kid who scored 99% and a Black kid who scored 91% is not huge, in terms of academics, but can be humongous in terms of other traits, e.g. leadership ability, communication skills, commitment to public service, etc. If you want to create a balanced student body, you need to consider all of these traits, and not only the academics.
Why don't we do like every other school system does and give people opportunities based upon living in a specific area? People in normal school systems in New Jersey and Connecticut don't have to take tests in academics or leadership to attain a normal high school education.
They just go to the school in their area and they don't really have charter schools either. But here, we have layers upon layers of tests, magnet schools, charter schools named after billionaires like Carl Icahn, and so forth, to split up the kids... for what reason?
Colleges in the UK, Australia and Canada don't care about leadership and public service either. They select students solely based on their GPA. In France they have a test called the baccalaureate.
Because public institutions should reflect the demographics of the public being served. No one demographic should be allowed to hog all of of available resources, which are clearly limited. And the current system does just that.
Again, the difference between an Asian kid who scored 99% and a Black kid who scored 91% is not huge, in terms of academics, but can be humongous in terms of other traits, e.g. leadership ability, communication skills, commitment to public service, etc. If you want to create a balanced student body, you need to consider all of these traits, and not only the academics.
That would be a huge difference on a civil service exam
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.
