Personally, what do you think of Affirmative Action?

[yesiambowling]

It's an excuse not to invest in elementary education or tackle the other issues that plague underprivileged neighborhoods. States don't want to tackle their public education issues so they settle for AA to fill quotas.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

What do you mean? What I said the problem with aa is that people start thinking it is important or key to black prosperity, if you think that aa is key to black prosperity than you are an example of what I'm saying, people are fighting for things that are not worth fighting for

so you're saying it's a misconception, not that it's actually happening

Aa in academics and in employment work differently, I think it's on open question wether standards are lowered for aa hires, because there is a lot of subjectivity in the hiring process

But in academics it's very clear that aa represents lowering standards, because in academics admittance is way more objective because you have grades and test scores, so in academics aa is basically a program that allows minority students with lower grades and lower scores into the school

For links google university of California or university of Michigan, 2 schools that got rid of aa

Academics is different because schools usually look at a wide array of different attributes when considering students for admission. One student may get in due to test scores, another student may get in for athletics, or grades. In some cases score requirements are lowered, because the tests have been proven to be more difficult for those coming from poor backgrounds regardless of the students mental aptitude.

 

[Zach Lowe]

link?

what @theworldismine13 said

I was gonna link you to studies but there are so many that I wouldn't know which to show you first

 

[Zach Lowe]

Actually the LSAT is the only standardized exam that is shown that whenever you control for all factors even socioeconomic status, African-Americans prefer worse. Thus, there is a built in bump in that regard, but they still go after AAs with high GPAs.

So you're wrong here. No pushes unqualified people of color to the top. Employers do not care, I can tell you that as someone who interviewed with top law firms. Do not get confused.

See but you're picking your words carefully

Yes you could say that it doesn't push unqualified people of color to the top I'll let that slide

but does it push semi-qualified people of color higher

that's the point of AA

 

[No1]

See but you're picking your words carefully

Yes you could say that it doesn't push unqualified people of color to the top I'll let that slide

but does it push semi-qualified people of color higher

that's the point of AA

No it doesn't. It specifically targets the fact that people of color tend to perform worse on the LSAT no matter what you control for. You're trying to fit my words into your narrative because it dispels it. The LSAT is unlike the SAT or other exams where the scores start to equalize if you account for socioeconomic factors. Your problem is that you judge qualifications in a very narrow sense.

As far as affirmative action goes, it doesn't happen in the workplace and it probably should. For a bunch of reasons, but that would require me to re-write philosophy papers. There are numerous reasons why AA are disadvantaged in jobs and in obtaining jobs. AA does not nearly counteract those biases that many social scientists have studied. AA detractors come down to this, and it's simple. They don't want it to negatively affect them and they fear that it may cost them or those around them jobs.

They somehow believe that less qualified people will get all these positions, etc. None of it happens in practice, but it's final exam times so I can't give a full enough answer right now. I would dare you to actually look at employment numbers and you'd see that it makes next to no difference.

 

[Zach Lowe]

No it doesn't. It specifically targets the fact that people of color tend to perform worse on the LSAT no matter what you control for. You're trying to fit my words into your narrative because it dispels it. The LSAT is unlike the SAT or other exams where the scores start to equalize if you account for socioeconomic factors. Your problem is that you judge qualifications in a very narrow sense.

As far as affirmative action goes, it doesn't happen in the workplace and it probably should. For a bunch of reasons, but that would require me to re-write philosophy papers. There are numerous reasons why AA are disadvantaged in jobs and in obtaining jobs. AA does not nearly counteract those biases that many social scientists have studied. AA detractors come down to this, and it's simple. They don't want it to negatively affect them and they fear that it may cost them or those around them jobs.

They somehow believe that less qualified people will get all these positions, etc. None of it happens in practice, but it's final exam times so I can't give a full enough answer right now. I would dare you to actually look at employment numbers and you'd see that it makes next to no difference.

if you really deny that AA doesn't assist people of lesser qualifications to get the admits/job opportunities they want then I don't know what to tell you

there's no way out of this AA - qualifications debate unless you consider being black/hispanic/etc. to be a qualification

your position of denial is totally ludicrous and I'm not sure that many AA supporters even think that way

a better position for you might be that it does indeed provide a boost that does get some lesser qualified people into schools and job positions but that's it's fair as a temporary measure until blacks and hispanics are able to overcome these "biases" you're talking about

 

[NZA]

i wish it really was commonly used, i need it right now

 

[No1]

if you really deny that AA doesn't assist people of lesser qualifications to get the admits/job opportunities they want then I don't know what to tell you

there's no way out of this AA - qualifications debate unless you consider being black/hispanic/etc. to be a qualification

your position of denial is totally ludicrous and I'm not sure that many AA supporters even think that way

a better position for you might be that it does indeed provide a boost that does get some lesser qualified people into schools and job positions but that's it's fair as a temporary measure until blacks and hispanics are able to overcome these "biases" you're talking about

You really sound like an uninformed person trying to tell someone who knows infinitely more about the subject than you something. That's why I'm laughing at you. I just explained law school to you which you know nothing about and you still doesn't get it. Do you want the video?First off you don't even have a working definition of qualified. Second, in your ignorance you can't cite to anything to substantiate your claim but there are numerous studies that show bias against applicants of color. To the point where black and white candidates with identical credentials are paid differently.

Third, AAs and Hispanics are underrepresented in all aspects of higher-end jobs and are barely present on elite college campuses so I really don't know where you get this idea of massive affirmative action help. Better yet, it leads people to assume that with their numbers that they're "entitled" to certain positions. It's like that University of Texas case right now, the girl complaining that she had to go to LSU is ridiculous. There were white candidates with lower numbers than her who got accepted and black candidates with better numbers than her that were rejected.

There are 400 students in a typical incoming class at Columbia/NYU Law Schools of that group 25 people are black in each. They typically come from elite universities and had honors and work experience in many cases. You're arguing based on what you believe and I'm arguing based on what is statistically available data.

You know nothing about the subject and it shows and that is why I said I wasn't going to write the essay right now because that's what it would require to get through to someone like you. Look at actual figures before you talk. At the typical firm, it's extremely rare for people of color to be given promotions to the highest positions and that's including Asian-Americans. So again you're crying about something that accomplishes very little in practice. The courts made it so you can't even institute plans that are aimed at giving AA to make up for historic injustice that led to discrepancies today.


Take these final two sentences however you want. You have no idea what you're talking about. Affirmative Action does not lead to higher promotion or employment for people of color, few organizations truly care about diversity and when they do it's really about women and people who are gay that have the same qualifications anyhow.

 

[MostReal]

Its needed

have you seen the black unemployment rate?

now imagine what it would be without AA

/thread

 

[bewitched]

it's needed to keep institutions in check and broaden their horizons with selecting people for schools or work. we only make up 13% of the population so if anything it helps us to not be excluded from opportunities that are out there for us which many people in positions of power want and can do.

 

[theworldismine13]

so you're saying it's a misconception, not that it's actually happening

It may or may not be happening, but either way I don't consider aa to be something that will lead to or is vital to black prosperity, I don't think it should be part of the black agenda, and I don't think black people need to be stressed out about it

Academics is different because schools usually look at a wide array of different attributes when considering students for admission. One student may get in due to test scores, another student may get in for athletics, or grades. In some cases score requirements are lowered, because the tests have been proven to be more difficult for those coming from poor backgrounds regardless of the students mental aptitude.[

I'm not sure what you are saying that contradicts anything except you are using words to obfuscate the basic point, bottom line is that in aa for academics, standards related to test scores and grades are lowered for underrepresented minorities

I don't think aa is a solution becuase it doesn't deal with why the underrepresented minority student has lower grades or test scores in the first place

The black agenda should be to raise the grades and test scores of black students not defending aa, aa imo is another example of black people outsourcing the black agenda to liberals

 

[MeachTheMonster]

It may or may not be happening, but either way I don't consider aa to be something that will lead to or is vital to black prosperity, I don't think it should be part of the black agenda, and I don't think black people need to be stressed out about it



I'm not sure what you are saying that contradicts anything except you are using words to obfuscate the basic point, bottom line is that in aa for academics, standards related to test scores and grades are lowered for underrepresented minorities

I don't think aa is a solution becuase it doesn't deal with why the underrepresented minority student has lower grades or test scores in the first place

The black agenda should be to raise the grades and test scores of black students not defending aa, aa imo is another example of black people outsourcing the black agenda to liberals

Can't disagree with anything you say here

As others have said it's not perfect but I'd rather have it than not.

 

[theworldismine13]

Can't disagree with anything you say here

As others have said it's not perfect but I'd rather have it than not.

Personally I could care less either way about aa becuase it's not vital to anything, but all the mental energy and political capital you put into defending aa is mental energy and political capital that you didn't put into how to raise test scores and grades of black students

At the end of the day aa is a liberal idea by white people based on notions of equality, which is fine, but black people should be about black domination not equality

 

[Zach Lowe]

@BarNone
Ok then

If AA doesn't artificially boost one's qualifications or artificially lower the bar for minorities then how exactly does it work? Does it force schools and employers to find more fully qualified people of color (who just aren't there)?

Stop it

What do you make of the fact that HLS graduates about 500-600 JD's per year, about 10% of which are black students, but only like 1-2 black students get cum laude (top 40%) or better per year? If the black HLS students had qualifications that were up to par, then wouldn't 40% of them get cum laude instead of like 2 per year out of 55 (less than 4%)?

Quit this politically correct/legal BS, everyone knows that AA gives unfair boosts, that's why a 4.0 black college grad with a median LSAT for HLS is an auto admit and a white student with the same stats would be a splitter who shouldn't expect to be admitted

 

[ogc163]

I personally don't think that it works out in relation to academics, the "mismatch hypothesis" is very prevalent and I do find it to be the most convincing anti AA argument atleast as it relates to certain grad schools and other specialized undergrad colleges. But at the same time there are departments/majors where there isn't a huge difference in quality between "elite" schools and smaller schools and so the mismatch/ruffling of signaling argument does not apply as strongly there imo. In terms of the workplace I think it depends on how important "diversity" actually plays a part in getting the job done, because that varies from place to place I think it would best be handled at the local level but there are obvious pitfalls from taking that approach. Overall I would rather not have AA but outside of a few parts of academia I don't think the effects of AA are huge to be honest. Here is a discussion between Glenn Loury and Corey Corey Brettschneider on the "mismatch hypothesis"

Bloggingheads.tv