Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have now heard there is an unoffical quote on Asians as well as women in a lot of top tier schools. Women are making up larger numbers of classes now, especially in Grad school.

Steve, Do you mean a restrictive quota?

 

Asians and women seem to be represented in higher percentages than their populations in college (in California at least.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, Do you mean a restrictive quota?

 

Asians and women seem to be represented in higher percentages than their populations in college (in California at least.)

 

Yes, it turns out that there is a shortage of males at some schools. Especially in grad courses and professional schools (law schools), etc. Also, an over- representation of Asians in proportion to their respective populations. Asians are obviously not happy about it and are using other means to get in by claiming any non Asian ancestry they have (such as a person is half Korean, half white) as being White on their application or choosing the 'other' box.

 

In a perfect world its based purely on grades and scores but its not a perfect world. There is a vast, vast disparity in the quality if K-12 schools in the same metropolitan area that someone from an inferior school has a distinct disadvantage.

 

So, I like what Jeb Bush proposed in Florida where if you're in the top 10 percentale in your school you can ge accepted in the University of Florida system. However, I would not agree to such a program unless there was an effor to be made to move the worse schools up to the standards of the better schools.

 

I think its time to move away from race based preferential admission to one of socio-economic status which often my mean the same thing but I think a poor white kid from Barstow, California should get preferntial treatment than the son of a wealthy Black doctor in LA when applying to Cal. Lack of opportunity to be used more of a guide than race if we are going to use non grade/scores factors.

 

What makes the Asian factor a bit murky is that Asians in bad schools still do extremely well oftentimes and so would be deserviing in the criteria I mentioned.

 

Its a complex (not to some folks who say, best grade/scores wins..lol) issue and a sensitive one for all. If I had kids, I'd be pissed as hell if the time and money I spent getting them prepared for college and seeing their hard work be trivialized to some extent because of non school factors.

 

I won't begin to claim I know the answers just offering some possibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, since you posted your views on affirmative action, I'd be interested on your views on Title 9, which mandates an equal amount of money at colleges be spent on females as well as male athletics. Obviously, the two big money makers at colleges are men's football and basketball, which help pay for every other program, men and woman's. Not even woman's basketball comes close to paying its own way. Most colleges have dropped programs, like wrestling and rowing, because they are mandated to provide both men and woman's programs in those sports. I can't say that I'm totally against title 9 (I know several woman that probably wouldn't have gone to college without a scholarship), but to put such strict guidelines on colleges that forces them to choose which programs to cut is wrong.

 

LOL allistar, you like to pick the tough ones don't you? hah

In a word,its flawed. Very flawed at schools that don't have the financial resources. LSU, UCLA, Florida can fund what we called 'non revenue' sports in my day well but the Western Kentucky's of the world struggle. Football funds everything, even the male sports with the exception of basketball which often pays for itself. I ran track in college and the football and basketball teams made money we didn't. I'm not even sure baseball makes money at most major unis. A championship women's team can make some claim to making money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the U. Conn and Tennessee women's basketball program didn't more than pay for their programs with increased alumni contributions because of their nationally recoginized and famous teams. However, those would be the rare exceptions.

 

My view its one of those well meaning 'liberal' programs that ended up doing more harm than good at many schools. Its a tough program to enact at schools that lack money and I'll like to see changes done to it. One thing was made to help is allowing schools to survey interest in a program and if its going to be under represented with very little interest then allow a pass on that program.

 

This will sound a little like socialism and perhaps it is but have the big conferences and big schools contribute a wee bit more and use that money to fund programs at poorer schools if they can prove they lack the financial resources.

 

Title IX is not going to be rescinded so any suggestions and changes I recommend will be basedo n that premise. I'll deal with the reality of it.

 

So, I will have to the commie route and say that with the amount of money the NCAA pulls in each year and its a lot, help fund the schools that are struggling. Maybe they do that already and if they do its not enough. Lets face it, these schools and conferences make tons of money. Football teams have their own leased planes nowadays.

 

Finally, I'd like to see the regulation changed for exemption on a case by case basis rather than the draconian standards set in the law. An independent panel set up so that some fringe, militant women's group or the ACLU can't just arbitrarily file a suit.

 

High Schools have it tougher. I'd like to see each state's education board or athletic council be allowed to exempt on a case by case basis. It may become a bit politicized at the state level but its the only thing I can think of.

 

Tweaking Title IX at the federal level needs to be done but I don't know the sentiment. I may be a 'holy grail' of sorts to women groups. Probably like trying to tweak the civil rights act for minorities. Dang, tough call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reminded of my time as an Army instructor in the 1990s, when the Women's Army Corps had already been merged into the Army proper. Women are still restricted to noncombat MOS's, but they can get into almost everything else. The male NCOs used to complain that whenever it came to doing any heaving lifting etc, like as not the female soldiers would expect the guys to do it. Nevertheless, they wanted to be at the head of the promotion list because of being women. I saw exceptions (one gal could probably whip 2/3rd of the guys in the battalion!)), but generally this was true. Promotion should be based on qualifications, not gender, race etc. A staff sergeant gave us an example in class. He said: "Suppose 3 soldiers apply to be chosen for warrant officer - 1 white male, 1 black mail, 1 minority female. Who gets it?" Even the women had to agree - the minority female without question. AA in the military???

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, Colin Powell's rise was because of Affirmative Action and even more ironic it was Republicans in the department of defense that pushed for him. The reason its been said he was a Republican was out of loyalty to the Republicans that got him where he was.

Clarence Thomas clearly benefited from AA but is one of its staunchest opponents.

The largest group to enter the middle class were the Blacks in the '80s and '90s. No doubt AA was one of many reasons.

I may have mentioned I wouldn't put my race on college apps. A bit too much willful pride in those days. Never wanted it argued that I was handed anything but truth is I'm sure I benefited from it (AA that is) along the way. I got into better grade schools from outreach programs amd such.

When I was a manager and had to hire, I actually looked to find a cross section of people. Not because of any great need to diversify for diversity sake but I wanted a mix of opinions and backgrounds so that I can get good ideas from my staff. The pre-requisite was they had to be able to do the job well.

 

In terms of education and AA, we need to get better k-12 schools and bring the level of quality up in the poorer schools. If schools were of a general, somewhat equal quality (damn near impossible given the size of the U.S.) there wouldn't be some peoples need to help some more than others.

 

Black conservative author Thomas Sowell wrote a few books on ths subject and his findings were that either AA didn't work or had negative net effects. I think America has seen some mixed results depending on the situation. The problem is we take a well meaning thing sometimes and over do it in America at times. We stop applying logic and reason to things that require it out of fear we are labled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sowell is brilliant and an example of someone who never needed AA.

 

AA actually helped a white friend keep his job. Civil Service says last hired, first to be let go. Since everyone hired after him was black, the bosses didn't dare fire any of them. And since he was senior to them, he couldn't be let go either.

 

But I saw it the other way. I applied for several jobs in the States that I was more than qualified for. Each time the employers told me they had enough male employees and wanted more females. One of these was writing and revising Army training manuals and field manuals. WTF, I'm an Army vet, as operations sergeant of my company maintianed the FMs and ARs, and have also been an editor. Instead, they hired some young housewives who had no idea of what to do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://beta.local.yahoo.com/news-gas-prices-25-cents-one-week-stations-pass-mark.html

Gas Prices Up 25 Cents In One Week, Some Stations Pass $5 Mark

 

We are one of the world's biggest oil producers and that's what's so ironic about oil prices. Going back to the '73 oil embargo we have learned how oil prices can help cause recessions or at least make it worse but we continue to and willfully base our economy on it.

 

We don't try and ween ourselves off it because the oil industry has so much power. The Republican answer is to drill more in places we said no to otherwise. The fact is no matter how much we have drilled domestically in new places oil prices keep going up and we keep being dependent on the prices that occur on it from faraway countries. New oil fields around the world are being discovered all the time. Russia has tons of oil and natural gas for example they keep finding. However, we keep seeing prices go up and up and up. Its a sick joke that we as a people keep falling for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...