• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Affirmative action before the SCOTUS today

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Haven't read the ruling, but someone on CNN just said it permits the use of socio-economics as an admission criteria. I suspect this is how racial diversity will continue with admissions. It may be better this way.
 
Listen to righties shit like this no longer exists. Who needs AA. Like said same as back in the day just reworded.
 
Homerboy said:
In a perfect world with a level playing field, we wouldn't need AA.
We grow closer to a perfect, level playing field with AA.
Click to expand...
In a vacuum perhaps, if you discount the backlash.

If you don't think bigger, our society will drive jealously and hatred until such policy is broken and minorities are scapegoated. This is a competitive society based on shiving the guy next to you so you can take his and get ahead. FYGM is driven into us by force of necessity. You need a strong and direct attack on that core principle driving the economic rat race. Or we will always end up at each other's throats one way or another.

A... handout... to address systemic bias / racism will only be accepted by people if they already feel secure and fulfilled. To that end, I speak for Basic Income and a few other programs.

Do not spin the wheel, break the wheel.
 
This ruling won't matter to most.
That is, until the minority doctor that could have saved your life is not there because some less skilled white doctor took their place who is unable to save your life.
Let's just hope its Donald Trump or Clarence Thomas on that operating table when the wrong doctor picks up the knife. Wouldn't that be priceless....
 
Supremes left a loophole big enough to drive a dump truck through with their tacit admission that written statements and other factors could still be considered.

Its really just what Unis have always done. If they really just stuck with test scores and GPA then campuses would be disproportionately Asian, East Indian, and South East Asian In character. They're not because the old "need to be well rounded" yarn left a loop hole to exclude extremely well qualified on paper students so Uni's didn't "lose their character".

Same will happen now. Unis will just look at "race adjacent" factors and decide based on those. Never was such a mythical place as fair, unbiased admission standards.
 
It's rather funny yet very reasonable to think that every single conservative judge on that Court is a sock puppet being manipulated by their corporate sponsors, of whom know that stirring the shit against the liberals (of whom now represent the majority of the nation by popular vote) has everything to do with keeping the court in their back pockets via playing to the emotions of the dumbfuck working class conservatives that keep voting the way the aristocrat class wants them to.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Haven't read the ruling, but someone on CNN just said it permits the use of socio-economics as an admission criteria. I suspect this is how racial diversity will continue with admissions. It may be better this way.
Click to expand...
Depends on one's definition of better. In theory, it's a more ethical/accurate solution. Many recent immigrant families were solidly working class with modest incomes until the children attended college and became professionals. But instead of socioeconomics, race alone was somewhat of a dominant factor for competitive college admissions.

In practice, California's Prop 209 has proven that Black student enrollment at elite universities will likely crater post- affirmative action. UCs have recruited strenuously over the past two decades to improve diversity, so it's not quite as stark as it was in the late 1990s after 209's passage.

I actually believe the elite private universities had de facto racial quotas; but I still believe in affirmative action at this time to ensure campus diversity. The obvious problem is that admissions is a zero sum game. If judging just by the numbers, there should be a sweet spot in between what the Ivy's do versus what UC Berkeley and UCLA currently do.

I LOL'd when Mike Pence told NBC News that affirmative action was necessary 50 years ago, but not today. Society has come a long way in that time, but the work continues.
 
sportage said:
This ruling won't matter to most.
That is, until the minority doctor that could have saved your life is not there because some less skilled white doctor took their place who is unable to save your life.
Let's just hope its Donald Trump or Clarence Thomas on that operating table when the wrong doctor picks up the knife. Wouldn't that be priceless....
Click to expand...
You have some serious issues.
 
HomerJS said:
By common sense, the results colleges will become fairer. Congrats. You got your wish.
Click to expand...
FTFY.

Merit based not race based admission should be the norm. Why should someone get a free ride because of how they were born?

Also if you are determined enough you will be accepted somewhere.

So I'm not buying that it's still the 1960s and discrimination is still necessary. The richest man in the world is African American.
 
FelixDeCat said:
FTFY.

Merit based not race based admission should be the norm. Why should someone get a free ride because of how they were born?

Also if you are determined enough you will be accepted somewhere.

So I'm not buying that it's still the 1960s and discrimination is still necessary.
Click to expand...
Merit? Get a job, parasite.
 
HomerJS said:
No, the country has some serious issues, that have just been made worse by this ruling.

Republicans have been attacking civil right gains made into law since 2010. You are getting your wish.
Click to expand...
I have no issue with merit based admissions. I also have no issue with providing supplementary training for those who have attended poor quality schools. I do have an issue with admissions being race based. I want my doctor, lawyer, accountant, and engineer to be the best. I don't care what they look like, I don't care about their skin color or sexual preference.
It's all about having faith in who's doing the job. The fellow who recently performed surgery on my testicle's got the job because of his ability, not his skin color.
 
Greenman said:
I have no issue with merit based admissions. I also have no issue with providing supplementary training for those who have attended poor quality schools. I do have an issue with admissions being race based. I want my doctor, lawyer, accountant, and engineer to be the best. I don't care what they look like, I don't care about their skin color or sexual preference.
It's all about having faith in who's doing the job. The fellow who recently performed surgery on my testicle's got the job because of his ability, not his skin color.
Click to expand...
So here's the problem - science clearly shows that race often trumps merit in ways that favor white people. Since we know that, should anything be done about it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top