Race vs. Class and affirmative action...

[The Captain]

news.yahoo.com/affirmative-action-ruling-contest-race-vs-class-141115528.html

"You can hear it, too — in conversations on elite college campuses, where the dearth of low-income students is replacing race as a topic of debate. And in the words of the first black president, who has said there's no good reason his own daughters should benefit from racial preferences when they apply to college."

I found this article very interesting and a fresh view on what I see as a growing issue (lack of upward mobility among those from lower socioeconomic class). 

The article had some good discussion points but I still wonder about giving "preference" to any category if they do not perform at the same level as other applicants. 

How can you give a leg up without discriminating against someone else?

[thyme4change]

I've thought this for a long time, but I suspect that a white boy who is the first to go to college will be easier to hide his poverty-ridden background than a 9th-generation wealthy black woman to hide her race or gender.  It is a tough issue.

All I know is that my kids won't be able to check to any box on any application that will help them step-over anyone else, so they will have to depend on a quality education and work ethic.  I will do my best to provide them with both.  

[haapai]

The cynic in me couldn't help but notice that highly-selective, private schools first started talking about their class skew when Grutter got cert.  Once the ruling came down, the concern faded. 

I suspect the same thing may happen this round.  With Kagan recused, the opinion is unlikely to be ground-breaking and there is no need to change admission criteria just to explain why none of the numbers changed in any meaningful way. 

I do not like being this cynical.  I saw the way that SAT scores varied by family income before the College Board stopped collecting that data. 

[Deleted]

How can you give a leg up without discriminating against someone else?

Very simple. You give everyone an equal change to work. Those that excel get promoted. I could care less what color a person that worked for me is. I want the best workers. They make both of us the most money.

Discrimination is a suckers game & costs you money.

[hoops902]

What about other characteristics?  There was a study done awhile back that the most defining trait of someone who's highly successful within a corporation was height.  The top of the chain was populated by people who were significantly taller than the average person of their gender.  Where's the equality for the little guy?

[thyme4change]

I heard that all collegiate athletes go on to be successful people, so from now on, I won't interview people, just take them to the parking lot and demand they show me their ball handling skills.  

[souldoubt]

I think the most qualified individual should get the scholarship, job, promotion, etc but I guess that makes me old fashioned.  If a scholarship is based on financial situation then that's a different story.  Anyways regarding race recent articles have shown that as early as this year there will be more "minority" children born than caucasian children.  In the not too distant future (I think by like 2050 or earlier) it's estimated that caucasians will no longer be the majority and actually I believe latinos will be.  I'm guessing caucasians won't get scholarships based on their race when that happens. 

[thyme4change]

In the not too distant future (I think by like 2050 or earlier) it's estimated that caucasians will no longer be the majority and actually I believe latinos will be. I'm guessing caucasians won't get scholarships based on their race when that happens.

I bet the white people will still have more than 50% of the money.

[Abby Normal]

Jun 19, 2013 12:24:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

In the not too distant future (I think by like 2050 or earlier) it's estimated that caucasians will no longer be the majority and actually I believe latinos will be. I'm guessing caucasians won't get scholarships based on their race when that happens.

I bet the white people will still have more than 50% of the money.

That's why we need to do away with the whole concept of money. We need to be a society that is solely based on  betterment of mankind. You know like Star Trek. 

But then, what would we talk about here...

[souldoubt]

Which is a moot point if they earned it but I'm sure some would disagree.  Personally I don't care who has 50% or more of the money because whether it's the flying spaghetti monster or whitey I can still improve my lot in life.  Most the people I've encountered who complain, want something for nothing and mooch off the system all have one thing in common and it isn't their race; it's the fact that they piss and moan while doing little or nothing to improve their situation. 

[thyme4change]

Jun 19, 2013 12:33:25 GMT -5 Abby Normal said:

Jun 19, 2013 12:24:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I bet the white people will still have more than 50% of the money.

That's why we need to do away with the whole concept of money. We need to be a society that is solely based on  betterment of mankind. You know like Star Trek. 

But then, what would we talk about here...

Didn't the USSR already try that?

[Abby Normal]

Jun 19, 2013 12:45:08 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jun 19, 2013 12:33:25 GMT -5 Abby Normal said:

That's why we need to do away with the whole concept of money. We need to be a society that is solely based on  betterment of mankind. You know like Star Trek. 

But then, what would we talk about here...

Didn't the USSR already try that?

But they didn't have the phasers and stuff that would make it work. Duh.

[thyme4change]

True - better weapons is clearly the way to a peaceful society.

[The Captain]

As long as you have people you will never have total equality or peace.

Someone will always think they are entitled to more of something than someone else.

Some will always think they deserve to have someone else support them.

In any large group of people this will always be true of some.  It's human nature.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 19, 2013 12:18:33 GMT -5 souldoubt said:

I think the most qualified individual should get the scholarship, job, promotion, etc but I guess that makes me old fashioned.  If a scholarship is based on financial situation then that's a different story.  Anyways regarding race recent articles have shown that as early as this year there will be more "minority" children born than caucasian children.  In the not too distant future (I think by like 2050 or earlier) it's estimated that caucasians will no longer be the majority and actually I believe latinos will be.  I'm guessing caucasians won't get scholarships based on their race when that happens. 

Latinos/Hispanics are not a classification of race. They are an ethnicity (or culture if you like).

[Deleted]

Women are also the new majority.

Funny from one of my grandsons.  He went to the doctor recently.  Afterwards, he told his mother, "Mom, I didn't know that boys could be doctors, too!"  Without really meaning to, it seems all of the doctors she uses are female.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2013 12:18:19 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

from now on, I won't interview people, just take them to the parking lot and demand they show me their ball handling skills.  

that's probably an interview tactic for a few professions....

[thyme4change]

Jun 19, 2013 13:20:56 GMT -5 @southernsusana said:

Women are also the new majority.

Funny from one of my grandson.  He went to the doctor recently.  Afterwards, he told his mother, "Mom, I didn't know that boys could be doctors, too!"  Without really meaning to, it seems all of the doctors she uses are female.

Love it.  One day we were talking to my son about professions when you grow up, and we suggested President of the United States.  He answered "I can't do that, because I'm not brown."  Boy oh boy, has the world changed since I was a kid.  

[souldoubt]

Jun 19, 2013 13:20:20 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jun 19, 2013 12:18:33 GMT -5 souldoubt said:

I think the most qualified individual should get the scholarship, job, promotion, etc but I guess that makes me old fashioned.  If a scholarship is based on financial situation then that's a different story.  Anyways regarding race recent articles have shown that as early as this year there will be more "minority" children born than caucasian children.  In the not too distant future (I think by like 2050 or earlier) it's estimated that caucasians will no longer be the majority and actually I believe latinos will be.  I'm guessing caucasians won't get scholarships based on their race when that happens. 

Latinos/Hispanics are not a classification of race. They are an ethnicity (or culture if you like).

I don't disagree but whenever you check boxes and they classify on anything in CA (probably some other states too) the box is something like latino/non white.  The articles published always refer to latinos outnumbering caucasians in the coming years and caucasians no longer being the majority.    

[thyme4change]

I don't think latinos will be the majority either.  I think there will be no majority.  Maybe Latinos will outnumber whites, but I don't think 50%+1 of our country will be Latino in my lifetime.  There are like 40 million people who identify as Latino right now (or something like that.)  To be a majority, there would need to be 150 million, right?  I would think that by that time, there would be more mixed race people than anything else.  

[Tennesseer]

Jun 19, 2013 13:33:01 GMT -5 souldoubt said:

Jun 19, 2013 13:20:20 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Latinos/Hispanics are not a classification of race. They are an ethnicity (or culture if you like).

I don't disagree but whenever you check boxes and they classify on anything in CA (probably some other states too) the box is something like latino/non white.  The articles published always refer to latinos outnumbering caucasians in the coming years and caucasians no longer being the majority.    

I understand. On census forms Latino/Hispanic is a sub category. It's broken down to white, black, etc. I guess it helps understand the Hispanic population.

I think what the articles are saying is in the future, whites will be the majority minority. No race will have more than 50% of the total population.

[thyme4change]

Okay - so I should have googled first, posted second.  There are an estimated 52 million Latinos, and there would need to be 160M to have a majority.  

[swamp]

Jun 19, 2013 12:18:19 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I heard that all collegiate athletes go on to be successful people, so from now on, I won't interview people, just take them to the parking lot and demand they show me their ball handling skills.  

I think you'd need to bring a guy with you.  Unless you're packing and not telling.

[thyme4change]

Come on Swamp - show me your ball handling skills.

[swamp]

[Phoenix84]

I'm opposed to affirmative action.  It never made sense to me to "fight" racial inequality by giving preference to one race over another.  That's the very definition of hypocrasy.

But if we are going to have affirmative action, it makes more sense to me to base selection criteria on socioeconomic class than race.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2013 15:03:43 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

I'm opposed to affirmative action.  It never made sense to me to "fight" racial inequality by giving preference to one race over another.  That's the very definition of hypocrasy.

But if we are going to have affirmative action, it makes more sense to me to base selection criteria on socioeconomic class than race.

Oh please!

Of course you are against because you've never been on the other side.

Affirmative action is not just about race but also gender. Women in general have benefited more from affirmative action than any race.

And yes it may not be perfect but at least it somewhat fight "the good old boy" club mentality.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 19, 2013 15:03:43 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

I'm opposed to affirmative action.  It never made sense to me to "fight" racial inequality by giving preference to one race over another.  That's the very definition of hypocrasy.

But if we are going to have affirmative action, it makes more sense to me to base selection criteria on socioeconomic class than race.

You might have been for it if you were born black or female and many years before 1984 as you were. You never were witness to blatant discrimination as many of us have seen.

[midjd]

How else would we fight racial inequality?

I don't think affirmative action is a perfect system, but I'm drawing a blank at what could be fairer AND more effective. There are still a depressing number of people (many of them in hiring roles, and some of whom post on this forum) who believe that women and minorities simply aren't as good/capable as white men.

[The Captain]

Jun 19, 2013 15:18:03 GMT -5 TheHaitian said:

Jun 19, 2013 15:03:43 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

I'm opposed to affirmative action.  It never made sense to me to "fight" racial inequality by giving preference to one race over another.  That's the very definition of hypocrasy.

But if we are going to have affirmative action, it makes more sense to me to base selection criteria on socioeconomic class than race.

Oh please!

Of course you are against because you've never been on the other side.

Affirmative action is not just about race but also gender. Women in general have benefited more from affirmative action than any race.

And yes it may not be perfect but at least it somewhat fight "the good old boy" club mentality.

Carl,

Just curious - do you think you would have advanced quicker in your career if you had been white?  You seem to be doing very well so I'm not sure what your perception is?

Personally, I am absolutely certain that had I been 12" taller I'd be sitting on the top floor right now .

As far as my gender holding me back, I can't say that has been the case.  Every man I've worked for has been better then me at the job.  I have no problem saying that.  Now maybe my opportunities have been limited because I don't smoke cigars or play golf but I guess I could take those hobbies up if I really wanted...