California Senate Passes Discrimination Bill SCA-5….

[ocrenter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]

Yes… and perhaps supported by Blacks also.
Grass roots Hispanics and Blacks tend to be lower class who would most benefit from affirmative action.

But, in a couple more decades, SCA5 may not work out so well for Hispanics when they become majority in the state.

Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Tea Party is very good a seizing issues and building moral outrage. Notice that they’ve been very silent. A similar issue is playing out differently in Michigan were there are few Asian. U of Michigan is pretty good… I can see Chinese investors buying houses all around Ann Arbor for their kids.[/quote]

Brian, that’s an excellent point, yes, Tea Party is UNUSUALLY silent on this issue. This is going to end up becoming a tool for affirmative admission of whites. They know it! Absolutely brilliant!

Ed “the Tool that had to settle for optometry school” Hernandez, when are you going to wake up?

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]

Like I said before, Prop 209 was a populist White based initiative. SC_5 is the same. The Tea Party is populist based, as is part of the Democratic party, especially the unions.

For all the talk about merit and objective measures of merit, people only want to selectively practice what they preach. They use political tools to suppress minorities that were not culturally adjusted. And now it’s coming to bite them in the butt.

[/quote]

I think you and some other posters have it all wrong on this. Back when Prop 209 passed, the Asian population was already disproportionately high in universities like UCLA. There was already a lot of energy behind racial quotas BEFORE Prop 209, especially because of Asians, not whites. IMO, too many people here have the mistaken belief that white people are racist and don’t want anyone else to succeed. As a white person, I find this to be incredibly ignorant and offensive. Most of us would much rather have a merit-based system over a racial quota system.

For those who would prefer a racial quota, it’s because they feel certain minorities (usually black and Hispanic) are being discriminated against, and they want them to have more opportunities for advancement. It is NOT out of self-interest that these white people want a quota system; they truly believe that certain minorities deserve an extra hand up because they are often starting from a less advantageous position. This is why the teachers’ unions advocate for racial quotas in many cases — they see firsthand how some minorities really have a lot more going against them from the beginning.

[CA renter]

[quote=sjglaze3]Umm, what about MRI, PET and CT scanners? Huge changes in the last 10 years.[/quote]

Yes, some changes that make them faster and show more detail, but these technologies existed long before this past decade.

Again, incremental changes to technologies that have been around for a fairly long time are good, but they are not the kind of changes that can fuel the growth necessary to solve our economic problems.

We need altogether NEW innovations and technologies that will greatly improve the well-being of people and society, IMO. And, more than anything, we need to create and BUILD these things here in order for it to do any good.

[CA renter]

[quote=dumbrenter]Why don’t you start with yourself? Stop wasting time on this social board and get busy in your lab with some ‘life-altering’ stuff?

[quote=CA renter]AN, you could do most of those things 15 years ago with a computer. The on-the-go usefulness is what I mean by navigation (relating your location to local activities and establishments, etc.), and I admit that it’s easier to find the nearest restaurant, etc. when you’re out and about. That IS an improvement. But being able to watch movies, spend time on Facebook, and play games (and we had handheld devices for that years ago, too) on your phone is “fluff” as far as I’m concerned.

In our glory days, we built rocket ships that could take us to the moon, satellites that could beam back pictures of outer space, we eradicated polio, we learned how to mass-produce penicillin, we built highways and more reliable cars/trucks that could carry people and goods across the states and into other countries. We (and others) built the first computers.

Nothing that you’ve mentioned comes anywhere close, IMO. We need to stop focusing on “social media” and phones and start creating things that will result in life-altering improvements and discoveries.[/quote][/quote]

Best post, yet! 🙂 I’m working on it. It would be great if all the Piggs with STEM degrees get to work on it, as well. After all, they’re the ones who claim that they will change the world. Heck, I’d be happy to help fund and run the business if someone (or a group of people) here comes up with something interesting.

[ocrenter]

[quote=CA renter]

I think you and some other posters have it all wrong on this. Back when Prop 209 passed, the Asian population was already disproportionately high in universities like UCLA. There was already a lot of energy behind racial quotas BEFORE Prop 209, especially because of Asians, not whites. IMO, too many people here have the mistaken belief that white people are racist and don’t want anyone else to succeed. As a white person, I find this to be incredibly ignorant and offensive. Most of us would much rather have a merit-based system over a racial quota system.

For those who would prefer a racial quota, it’s because they feel certain minorities (usually black and Hispanic) are being discriminated against, and they want them to have more opportunities for advancement. It is NOT out of self-interest that these white people want a quota system; they truly believe that certain minorities deserve an extra hand up because they are often starting from a less advantageous position. This is why the teachers’ unions advocate for racial quotas in many cases — they see firsthand how some minorities really have a lot more going against them from the beginning.[/quote]

I have no doubt people that support racial quota and affirmative action have good intentions. But just look at the graph, don’t you see the progressive and steady improvement the Hispanic population have made WITHOUT affirmative action since prop 209?

And please explain why minorities who received preferential admissions all end up with much lower graduation rate? Because they are set up for failure by being mismatched to a more competitive environment then they can handle.

There’s no question affirmative action hurts the students it intends to help, that’s the bottom line here.

[CA renter]

They end up with lower graduation rates because they start out at a severe disadvantage. As you know, most Asians and many/most whites in the UC system have very supportive families who have always made sure their kids had the resources to succeed.

It doesn’t hurt them, but it won’t guarantee that they will succeed in schools as well as the Asian and white populations do, either.

IMO, most of the “exceptional” students will succeed anyway. The quota system is there to give others a fighting chance.

And note that the black student population has also gone down since they eliminated AA at the universities. Asians, OTOH, seem to have fared about the same before and after Prop 209. But we also have to look at the population increases of various groups, and Hispanics have grown in number far faster than any of the other groups which might explain their increasing numbers. Whites, as a percentage of the population, have been decreasing (as have blacks, IIRC). Asians have been increasing, so the fact that their percentages at the universities are the same might mean there’s a slight decline as a percentage of the population. Not sure about any of that, though.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]IMO, most of the “exceptional” students will succeed anyway. The quota system is there to give others a fighting chance.[/quote]Who’s the “others” you’re referring to? The Asian students who live in low income area and parents working hard in their blue collar jobs or the middle/upper-middle class Hispanics/Black students?

[quote=CA renter]And note that the black student population has also gone down since they eliminated AA at the universities. Asians, OTOH, seem to have fared about the same before and after Prop 209. But we also have to look at the population increases of various groups, and Hispanics have grown in number far faster than any of the other groups which might explain their increasing numbers. Whites, as a percentage of the population, have been decreasing (as have blacks, IIRC). Asians have been increasing, so the fact that their percentages at the universities are the same might mean there’s a slight decline as a percentage of the population. Not sure about any of that, though.[/quote]Black students population went down because their academic does not match the rest of student body. Asians did not fare the same before and after Prop 209. Your OTOH is misinformed. Before Prop 209, Asian account for ~20-30% of UC, and after Prop 209, Asian accounts for 40-55% of UC student body. So, yes, when you actually remove the quotas and treat all students equal, you get to see where they stand against the rest of the student body.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]Best post, yet! 🙂 I’m working on it. It would be great if all the Piggs with STEM degrees get to work on it, as well. After all, they’re the ones who claim that they will change the world. Heck, I’d be happy to help fund and run the business if someone (or a group of people) here comes up with something interesting.[/quote]
You’re the one who said all this social stuff are just fluff, not STEM Piggs. I think I’m changing the world here doing all these social “fluff” stuff, especially when I was successful in preventing someone to buy a house in 2005 or right now bringing attention to the overt discrimination against Asian American students in CA. So, why are you participating in this fluff?

[livinincali]

[quote=CA renter]They end up with lower graduation rates because they start out at a severe disadvantage. As you know, most Asians and many/most whites in the UC system have very supportive families who have always made sure their kids had the resources to succeed.

It doesn’t hurt them, but it won’t guarantee that they will succeed in schools as well as the Asian and white populations do, either.

IMO, most of the “exceptional” students will succeed anyway. The quota system is there to give others a fighting chance.

And note that the black student population has also gone down since they eliminated AA at the universities. Asians, OTOH, seem to have fared about the same before and after Prop 209. But we also have to look at the population increases of various groups, and Hispanics have grown in number far faster than any of the other groups which might explain their increasing numbers. Whites, as a percentage of the population, have been decreasing (as have blacks, IIRC). Asians have been increasing, so the fact that their percentages at the universities are the same might mean there’s a slight decline as a percentage of the population. Not sure about any of that, though.[/quote]

I really don’t get this mindset that somehow giving people that are already at a significant disadvantage an opportunity is worthwhile. They already have a system in place that allows these students to prove themselves in Community Colleges and earn their way in UC or Cal State schools. Why are we allowing disadvantaged groups to run up a bunch of debt in a 4 year college that they’re likely to fail at? Get a part time job, and go to a community college. If you figure out you can hack it then transfer.

[ocrenter]

[quote=CA renter]They end up with lower graduation rates because they start out at a severe disadvantage. As you know, most Asians and many/most whites in the UC system have very supportive families who have always made sure their kids had the resources to succeed.[/quote]

The debate isn’t that they are starting at a position of disadvantage, we all agree that is the case. The point is how to help them succeed.

[quote=CA renter]It doesn’t hurt them, but it won’t guarantee that they will succeed in schools as well as the Asian and white populations do, either. [/quote]

What in the world??? Of course the disadvantage hurt. That’s what makes it a disadvantage. The disadvantage hurt by reducing chances of success. That’s how it hurts.

[quote=CA renter]
IMO, most of the “exceptional” students will succeed anyway. The quota system is there to give others a fighting chance. [/quote]

But that’s an argument for elimination of quota and affirmative action. The “exceptional” will ALWAYS do well. They are not the ones that need a bump up! If you have 100 students, and one of them is “exceptional”, do you elevate ALL 100 from a regional college to IVY league? The one “exceptional” student will succeed, and may even excel beyond expectation. What about the other 99 that’s NOT exceptional and landed in the IVY league or a prominent public school with cut throat competition? Those other 99 are going to sink and fail.

So if you are working on a social strategy to uplift a disadvantaged people as a whole, do you institute a wholesale program that elevates that one “exceptional” student while guaranteeing the failure of the other 99? Or do you work on taking care of the said disadvantage early on so by the time they apply to colleges they can compete on their own two feet?

[quote=CA renter]
And note that the black student population has also gone down since they eliminated AA at the universities. Asians, OTOH, seem to have fared about the same before and after Prop 209. But we also have to look at the population increases of various groups, and Hispanics have grown in number far faster than any of the other groups which might explain their increasing numbers. Whites, as a percentage of the population, have been decreasing (as have blacks, IIRC). Asians have been increasing, so the fact that their percentages at the universities are the same might mean there’s a slight decline as a percentage of the population. Not sure about any of that, though.[/quote]

Once you removed the affirmative action you saw the number of Asian Americans jump. Which brings to question the quota system of the IVY league, where the Asian population remains stuck at 15-20% despite population growth.

The white population in California did not drop 20% in 25 years. but that’s how much they dropped after prop 209. proving that affirmative action actually helped whites buffer against the Asians in the past.

[ocrenter]

[quote=livinincali]

I really don’t get this mindset that somehow giving people that are already at a significant disadvantage an opportunity is worthwhile. They already have a system in place that allows these students to prove themselves in Community Colleges and earn their way in UC or Cal State schools. Why are we allowing disadvantaged groups to run up a bunch of debt in a 4 year college that they’re likely to fail at? Get a part time job, and go to a community college. If you figure out you can hack it then transfer.[/quote]

Because it makes people like CAR “feel better.” 40 years of treating liberal bleeding hearts and we are nowhere better at fixing the chronic disadvantage of Hispanics and Blacks.

[an]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=livinincali]

I really don’t get this mindset that somehow giving people that are already at a significant disadvantage an opportunity is worthwhile. They already have a system in place that allows these students to prove themselves in Community Colleges and earn their way in UC or Cal State schools. Why are we allowing disadvantaged groups to run up a bunch of debt in a 4 year college that they’re likely to fail at? Get a part time job, and go to a community college. If you figure out you can hack it then transfer.[/quote]

Because it makes people like CAR “feel better.” 40 years of treating liberal bleeding hearts and we are nowhere better at fixing the chronic disadvantage of Hispanics and Blacks.[/quote]I never understand the mindset of people like CAR. They’re so willing to give disadvantaged teens a leg up at the university level, yet they vehemently oppose giving the same disadvantaged kids a leg up at the elementary/middle/high school level. If they’re so inclined to have quotas at the University level, why not do the same for the elementary/middle/high school level?

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=CA renter] IMO, too many people here have the mistaken belief that white people are racist and don’t want anyone else to succeed. As a white person, I find this to be incredibly ignorant and offensive. Most of us would much rather have a merit-based system over a racial quota system.
[/quote]

I will answer this since you addressed it to me.

I don’t believe that Whites are racist, or anymore racist than other races. I do however believe that people in general are tribal.

We say that we want merit, but we really don’t. To be honest, a lot of the merit stuff we dreamt up are just barriers to entry, to prevent people who didn’t jump through the same hoops from entering.

Some of the “merit” institutions we setup send the message that more intelligent people deserve/merit better lives with more money. If we really believed that, we’d apply that principle to ourselves and our own children.

[ocrenter]

[quote=AN]I never understand the mindset of people like CAR. They’re so willing to give disadvantaged teens a leg up at the university level, yet they vehemently oppose giving the same disadvantaged kids a leg up at the elementary/middle/high school level. If they’re so inclined to have quotas at the University level, why not do the same for the elementary/middle/high school level?[/quote]

Because now it interferes with the unions, which has a lock on secondary schools.

It is ok to push the Asians aside at the college level to satisfy that guilt about disadvantaged minorities (no union members were hurt in the process). But it is not ok to make actual reform that makes a difference because union toes would be step upon.

[an]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=AN]I never understand the mindset of people like CAR. They’re so willing to give disadvantaged teens a leg up at the university level, yet they vehemently oppose giving the same disadvantaged kids a leg up at the elementary/middle/high school level. If they’re so inclined to have quotas at the University level, why not do the same for the elementary/middle/high school level?[/quote]

Because now it interferes with the unions, which has a lock on secondary schools.

It is ok to push the Asians aside at the college level to satisfy that guilt about disadvantaged minorities (no union members were hurt in the process). But it is not ok to make actual reform that makes a difference because union toes would be step upon.[/quote]I guess my question was more rhetorical, but I totally agree with you. It amazes me when I see these kind of hypocrisis.

[Author]

Posts