Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Old 06-05-18, 05:22 PM
  #1  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

I consider this issue to be important enough to deserve its own thread.

This article is from the Atlantic - not exactly a bastion of the political right.

It says that although the supporters of affirmative action have good intentions, the actual results are that the policy hurts black students. It hurts them by putting them into schools that are above their ability, so they either end up dropping out, or, they abandon the STEM major that they had wanted in exchange for an easier major.

It also talks about how blacks are more likely to have white friends at the school if the school does not have affirmative action, because people tend to choose friends who are of the same academic ability as their own.

It also talks about how blacks are happier at schools that don't have affirmative action because there is never any question as to their qualifications.

It also says that the same problems happen with white students who are admitted for athletic reasons, and for legacy admissions too.

But most importantly, it says that blacks benefited when UCLA banned affirmative action. After the school ended affirmative action, the number of black freshman was cut in half. However, the number of blacks from these freshman classes who went on to graduate stayed the same.

In other words, UCLA's elimination of affirmative action did not reduce the number of blacks who graduated from UCLA. Instead, UCLA's elimination of affirmative action only reduced the number of blacks who dropped out of UCLA.

So instead of getting admitted to UCLA by affirmative action and then dropping out of UCLA because the work at UCLA was too hard for them, these blacks ended up going to easier colleges, where they were admitted based on merit, so they were capable of doing the work, and so they had a much better chance of graduating.

Before I post the Atlantic article, I'd like to post this one sentence from the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/o...dmissions.html

"A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities."

That sentence is in complete agreement with everything that is in the Atlantic article. That one sentence explains how affirmative actions sets blacks up for failure and dropping out by putting them into schools that are too difficult for them. We should get rid of affirmative action, and put blacks into schools that they get into based on merit. That way, they will have a much better chance of graduating.

Here is the Atlantic article:


https://www.theatlantic.com/national...action/263122/

The Painful Truth About Affirmative Action

Why racial preferences in college admissions hurt minority students -- and shroud the education system in dishonesty.

October 2, 2012

Affirmative action in university admissions started in the late 1960s as a noble effort to jump-start racial integration and foster equal opportunity. But somewhere along the decades, it has lost its way.

Over time, it has become a political lightning rod and one of our most divisive social policies. It has evolved into a regime of racial preferences at almost all selective schools -- preferences so strikingly large and politically unpopular that administrators work hard to conceal them. The largest, most aggressive preferences are usually reserved for upper-middle-class minorities on whom they often inflict significant academic harm, whereas more modest policies that could help working-class and poor people of all races are given short shrift. Academic leaders often find themselves flouting the law and acting in ways that aggravate the worst consequences of large preferences. They have become prisoners of a system that many privately deplore for its often-perverse unintended effects but feel they cannot escape.

The single biggest problem in this system -- a problem documented by a vast and growing array of research -- is the tendency of large preferences to boomerang and harm their intended beneficiaries. Large preferences often place students in environments where they can neither learn nor compete effectively -- even though these same students would thrive had they gone to less competitive but still quite good schools.

We refer to this problem as "mismatch," a word that largely explains why, even though blacks are more likely to enter college than are whites with similar backgrounds, they will usually get much lower grades, rank toward the bottom of the class, and far more often drop out. Because of mismatch, racial preference policies often stigmatize minorities, reinforce pernicious stereotypes, and undermine the self-confidence of beneficiaries, rather than creating the diverse racial utopias so often advertised in college campus brochures.

The mismatch effect happens when a school extends to a student such a large admissions preference -- sometimes because of a student's athletic prowess or legacy connection to the school, but usually because of the student's race -- that the student finds himself in a class where he has weaker academic preparation than nearly all of his classmates. The student who would flourish at, say, Wake Forest or the University of Richmond, instead finds himself at Duke, where the professors are not teaching at a pace designed for him -- they are teaching to the "middle" of the class, introducing terms and concepts at a speed that is unnerving even to the best-prepared student.

The student who is underprepared relative to others in that class falls behind from the start and becomes increasingly lost as the professor and his classmates race ahead. His grades on his first exams or papers put him at the bottom of the class. Worse, the experience may well induce panic and self-doubt, making learning even harder.


When explaining to friends how academic mismatch works, we sometimes say: Think back to high school and recall a subject at which you did fine but did not excel. Suppose you had suddenly been transferred into an advanced class in that subject with a friend who was about at your level and 18 other students who excelled in the subject and had already taken the intermediate course you just skipped. You would, in all likelihood, soon be struggling to keep up. The teacher might give you some extra attention but, in class, would be focusing on the median student, not you and your friend, and would probably be covering the material at what, to you, was a bewildering pace.

Wouldn't you have quickly fallen behind and then continued to fall farther and farther behind as the school year progressed? Now assume that you and the friend who joined you at the bottom of that class were both black and everyone else was Asian or white. How would that have felt? Might you have imagined that this could reinforce in the minds of your classmates the stereotype that blacks are weak students?

So we have a terrible confluence of forces putting students in classes for which they aren't prepared, causing them to lose confidence and underperform even more while, at the same time, consolidating the stereotype that they are inherently poor students. And you can see how at each level there are feedback effects that reinforce the self-doubts of all the students who are struggling.

Of course, being surrounded by very able peers can confer benefits, too -- the atmosphere may be more intellectually challenging, and one may learn a lot from observing others. We have no reason to think that small preferences are not, on net, beneficial. But contemporary racial preferences used by selective schools -- especially those extended to blacks and Native Americans -- tend to be extremely large, often amounting to the equivalent of hundreds of SAT points.

At the University of Texas, whose racial preference programs come before the Supreme Court for oral argument on October 10, the typical black student receiving a race preference placed at the 52nd percentile of the SAT; the typical white was at the 89th percentile. In other words, Texas is putting blacks who score at the middle of the college-aspiring population in the midst of highly competitive students. This is the sort of academic gap where mismatch flourishes. And, of course, mismatch does not occur merely with racial preferences; it shows up with large preferences of all types.

Research on the mismatch problem was almost non-existent until the mid-1990s; it has developed rapidly in the past half-dozen years, especially among labor economists. To cite just a few examples of the findings:

Black college freshmen are more likely to aspire to science or engineering careers than are white freshmen, but mismatch causes blacks to abandon these fields at twice the rate of whites.

Blacks who start college interested in pursuing a doctorate and an academic career are twice as likely to be derailed from this path if they attend a school where they are mismatched.

About half of black college students rank in the bottom 20 percent of their classes (and the bottom 10 percent in law school).

Black law school graduates are four times as likely to fail bar exams as are whites; mismatch explains half of this gap.

Interracial friendships are more likely to form among students with relatively similar levels of academic preparation; thus, blacks and Hispanics are more socially integrated on campuses where they are less academically mismatched.


Given the severity of the mismatch problem, and the importance of diversity issues to university leaders, one might expect that understanding and addressing mismatch would be at the very top of the academic agenda.

But in fact it is a largely invisible issue. With striking uniformity, university leaders view discussion of the mismatch problem as a threat to affirmative action and to racial peace on campuses, and therefore a subject to be avoided. They suppress data and even often ostracize faculty who attempt to point out the seriousness of mismatch. (See, for instance, the case of UT professor Lino Graglia, who was condemned by university officials after he observed that black and Mexican-American students were "not academically competitive" with their white peers.) We believe that the willful denial of the mismatch issue is as big a problem as mismatch itself.

A powerful example of these problems comes from UCLA, an elite school that used large racial preferences until the Proposition 209 ban took effect in 1998. The anticipated, devastating effects of the ban on preferences at UCLA and Berkeley on minorities were among the chief exhibits of those who attacked Prop 209 as a racist measure. Many predicted that over time blacks and Hispanics would virtually disappear from the UCLA campus.

And there was indeed a post-209 drop in minority enrollment as preferences were phased out. Although it was smaller and more short-lived than anticipated, it was still quite substantial: a 50 percent drop in black freshman enrollment and a 25 percent drop for Hispanics.
These drops precipitated ongoing protests by students and continual hand-wringing by administrators, and when, in 2006, there was a particularly low yield of black freshmen, the campus was roiled with agitation, so much so that the university reinstituted covert, illegal racial preferences.

Throughout these crises, university administrators constantly fed agitation against the preference ban by emphasizing the drop in undergraduate minority admissions. Never did the university point out one overwhelming fact: The total number of black and Hispanic students receiving bachelor's degrees were the same for the five classes after Prop 209 as for the five classes before.

How was this possible? First, the ban on preferences produced better-matched students at UCLA, students who were more likely to graduate. The black four-year graduation rate at UCLA doubled from the early 1990s to the years after Prop 209.

Second, strong black and Hispanic students accepted UCLA offers of admission at much higher rates after the preferences ban went into effect; their choices seem to suggest that they were eager to attend a school where the stigma of a preference could not be attached to them. This mitigated the drop in enrollment.

Third, many minority students who would have been admitted to UCLA with weak qualifications before Prop 209 were admitted to less elite schools instead; those who proved their academic mettle were able to transfer up to UCLA and graduate there.

Thus, Prop 209 changed the minority experience at UCLA from one of frequent failure to much more consistent success. The school granted as many bachelor degrees to minority students as it did before Prop 209 while admitting many fewer and thus dramatically reducing failure and drop-out rates. It was able, in other words, to greatly reduce mismatch.


But university officials were unable or unwilling to advertise this fact. They regularly issued statements suggesting that Prop 209's consequences had caused unalloyed harm to minorities, and they suppressed data on actual student performance. The university never confronted the mismatch problem, and rather than engage in a candid discussion of the true costs and benefits of a ban on preferences, it engineered secret policies to violate Prop 209's requirement that admissions be colorblind.

The odd dynamics behind UCLA's official behavior exist throughout the contemporary academic world. The quest for racial sensitivity has created environments in which it is not only difficult but downright risky for students and professors, not to mention administrators, to talk about what affirmative action has become and about the nature and effects of large admissions preferences. Simply acknowledging the fact that large preferences exist can trigger accusations that one is insulting or stigmatizing minority groups; suggesting that these preferences have counterproductive effects can lead to the immediate inference that one wants to eliminate or cut back efforts to help minority students.

The desire to be sensitive has sealed off failing programs from the scrutiny and dialogue necessary for healthy progress. It has also made racial preferences a force for economic inequality: academically well-prepared working class and poor Asian and white students are routinely passed over in favor of black and Hispanic students who are more affluent as well as less well-prepared.

The way racial preferences affect student outcomes is only part of the story. Equally relevant is the way the academic community has proved unequal to the task of reform -- showing great resourcefulness in blocking access to information, enforcing homogenous preference policies across institutions, and evading even legal restrictions on the use of preferences. All of this makes the quest for workable reforms -- which are most likely to come from the Supreme Court -- both more complex and more interesting than one might at first suspect.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-05-18, 05:31 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rosemount, MN
Posts: 31,455
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Didn't you post this before? With a similar comment at the top?
Draven is online now  
Old 06-05-18, 08:31 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hero
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 46,892
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

That's because affirmative action only worked when it benefitted whites.
inri222 is online now  
Old 06-05-18, 09:25 PM
  #4  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,523
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by Draven View Post
Didn't you post this before? With a similar comment at the top?
He posted This Thread years ago and this was the first reply in that thread:

Originally Posted by Groucho
I'm pretty sure there's already a thread about this. And I'm pretty sure that other thread was started by you.
I'll let this one slide since that last one was from 2009. I don't think we need a 9 year grundle bump.

But thanks for the blog cut and paste grundle. I guess you don't like Affirmative Action. Who would have thunk? This post will be my contribution to this thread.
VinVega is offline  
Old 06-05-18, 09:29 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hero
 
davidh777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Home of 2013 NFL champion Seahawks
Posts: 41,639
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

And here I thought Vin was about to lock it.
davidh777 is offline  
Old 06-05-18, 09:34 PM
  #6  
Dan
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: \_(ツ)_/
Posts: 20,167
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by davidh777 View Post
And here I thought Vin was about to lock it.
Someone's gotta pop it first!
Dan is offline  
Old 06-05-18, 09:54 PM
  #7  
Psi
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,294
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

It's a serious topic. That's why I don't want to discuss it with some people.
Psi is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 01:39 AM
  #8  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 21,582
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Not associating with the Memes and Toons crowd, eh?
creekdipper is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 06:38 AM
  #9  
Psi
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,294
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Some of the Deplorables.
Psi is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 08:50 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 30,366
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by inri222 View Post
That's because affirmative action only worked when it benefitted whites.

Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 08:58 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,230
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Yeah, I mentioned this before, since when I first heard about the detrimental effect of college admission Affirmative Action on whether minorities stay in their chosen field and their graduation rates, it seems obvious to me that it needs to be fixed since you are sabotaging the careers and higher education of millions of the brightest minorities.

It's one of those light bulb moments for me about programs meant to help, but actually do great damage.

Another eye opener was when I read about hispanic immigrants in, hmm, maybe it was Arizona, but there was some new feel good law that required teaching early grades in a secondary language if some threshold was met with the student immigrant population. Turns out the people complaining the loudest against the new law were the immigrant parents who weren't given a choice which language they wanted their children taught in. They wanted their kids to learn English, and they believed that being taught early grades in Spanish was going to hurt their children in the future.
PerryD is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 09:25 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,147
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Ok, this is quite a complex issue and one in which definitions are important.

Note that the atlantic article is a adaptation from their book. Reading some of the reviews, it seems that the authors argue that their definition of affirmative action is a positive step but the special preference component does not help.

Those are not my thoughts , just some commentary I read doing a review search of this book. I've just purchased this and will give it a good read though in an attempt to provide my own interpretation.

Note that my bias is as a Minority who benefitted from "affirmative action" programs such as after school study, junior college class availability, community outreach programs all designed to help me succeed. These programs we're severely curtailed after The debaucle of proposition 209 here in California. And if I'm reading the reviews properly, the authors find that special preference, only one component of "affirmative action" was the leading cause of problems.

I suggest, that a clear definition of what affirmative action means to posters here be discussed.
grip is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 11:39 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Nick Danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 22,360
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by grip View Post
Ok, this is quite a complex issue and one in which definitions are important.

Note that the atlantic article is a adaptation from their book. Reading some of the reviews, it seems that the authors argue that their definition of affirmative action is a positive step but the special preference component does not help.

Those are not my thoughts , just some commentary I read doing a review search of this book. I've just purchased this and will give it a good read though in an attempt to provide my own interpretation.

Note that my bias is as a Minority who benefitted from "affirmative action" programs such as after school study, junior college class availability, community outreach programs all designed to help me succeed. These programs we're severely curtailed after The debaucle of proposition 209 here in California. And if I'm reading the reviews properly, the authors find that special preference, only one component of "affirmative action" was the leading cause of problems.

I suggest, that a clear definition of what affirmative action means to posters here be discussed.
I've never thought about it before. I simply accepted the definition presented by the opponents. A quick search turned up this:

Myth 10: Support for affirmative action means support for preferential selection procedures that favor unqualified candidates over qualified candidates.

Actually, most supporters of affirmative action oppose this type of preferential selection. Preferential selection procedures can be ordered along the following continuum:

1 Selection among equally qualified candidates. The mildest form of affirmative action selection occurs when a female or minority candidate is chosen from a pool of equally qualified applicants (e.g., students with identical college entrance scores). Survey research suggests that three-quarters of the public does not see this type of affirmative action as discriminatory (Roper Center for Public Opinion, 1995d).

2 Selection among comparable candidates. A somewhat stronger form occurs when female or minority candidates are roughly comparable to other candidates (e.g., their college entrance scores are lower, but not by a significant amount). The logic here is similar to the logic of selecting among equally qualified candidates; all that is needed is an understanding that, for example, predictions based on an SAT score of 620 are virtually indistinguishable from predictions based on an SAT score of 630.

3 Selection among unequal candidates. A still stronger form of affirmative action occurs when qualified female or minority candidates are chosen over candidates whose records are better by a substantial amount.

4 Selection among qualified and unqualified candidates. The strongest form of preferential selection occurs when unqualified female or minority members are chosen over other candidates who are qualified. Although affirmative action is sometimes mistakenly equated with this form of preferential treatment, federal regulations explicitly prohibit affirmative action programs in which unqualified or unneeded employees are hired (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 2011).
http://www.understandingprejudice.or...les/affirm.htm

That's the preferential selection portion of a longer piece talking about different parts of affirmative action.
Nick Danger is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 12:08 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 46,892
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by inri222 View Post
That's because affirmative action only worked when it benefitted whites.
inri222 is online now  
Old 06-06-18, 04:40 PM
  #15  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by Draven View Post
Didn't you post this before? With a similar comment at the top?

Yes, multiple times. But none of the people here who support affirmative action said anything about it. Or about that quote from the New York Times, which I also posted multiple times without anyone commenting on it. I was very curious to know what the affirmative action supporters here thought, so I decided to give it its own thread.

.

Originally Posted by inri222 View Post
That's because affirmative action only worked when it benefitted whites.

As I explained in my comment in my first post, the article says the same harmful effects happen to white people who get admitted for legacy or athletic reasons.

.

Originally Posted by VinVega View Post
He posted This Thread years ago and this was the first reply in that thread:



I'll let this one slide since that last one was from 2009. I don't think we need a 9 year grundle bump.

But thanks for the blog cut and paste grundle. I guess you don't like Affirmative Action. Who would have thunk? This post will be my contribution to this thread.

That other thread was about how affirmative actions hurts whites.

This thread is about how affirmative actions hurts blacks.

And the two threads have completely different articles.


.

Originally Posted by PerryD View Post
Yeah, I mentioned this before, since when I first heard about the detrimental effect of college admission Affirmative Action on whether minorities stay in their chosen field and their graduation rates, it seems obvious to me that it needs to be fixed since you are sabotaging the careers and higher education of millions of the brightest minorities.

It's one of those light bulb moments for me about programs meant to help, but actually do great damage.


Thanks for making an on-topic post.


Originally Posted by PerryD View Post
Another eye opener was when I read about hispanic immigrants in, hmm, maybe it was Arizona, but there was some new feel good law that required teaching early grades in a secondary language if some threshold was met with the student immigrant population. Turns out the people complaining the loudest against the new law were the immigrant parents who weren't given a choice which language they wanted their children taught in. They wanted their kids to learn English, and they believed that being taught early grades in Spanish was going to hurt their children in the future.

That's another real world example of how the results are the exact opposite of the intentions.

.

Originally Posted by grip View Post
Ok, this is quite a complex issue and one in which definitions are important.

Note that the atlantic article is a adaptation from their book. Reading some of the reviews, it seems that the authors argue that their definition of affirmative action is a positive step but the special preference component does not help.

Those are not my thoughts , just some commentary I read doing a review search of this book. I've just purchased this and will give it a good read though in an attempt to provide my own interpretation.

Note that my bias is as a Minority who benefitted from "affirmative action" programs such as after school study, junior college class availability, community outreach programs all designed to help me succeed. These programs we're severely curtailed after The debaucle of proposition 209 here in California. And if I'm reading the reviews properly, the authors find that special preference, only one component of "affirmative action" was the leading cause of problems.

I suggest, that a clear definition of what affirmative action means to posters here be discussed.

I would hope for you to go to a college that matches your abilities. If the college is too hard, you will get frustrated and drop out. If the college is too easy, you will be wasting your potential.

As far as those after school and other programs, I think those should be available to all students of all races. Why should those programs only be available to some races, and not to others?

In this episode of WKRP in Cincinnati, Venus is all excited about an offer for a new, higher paying job. However, he turns down the job offer after he finds out that the only reason they wanted to hire him is because he is black. I'd be curious to hear your opinion of this:



.

Originally Posted by Nick Danger View Post
I've never thought about it before. I simply accepted the definition presented by the opponents. A quick search turned up this:


http://www.understandingprejudice.or...les/affirm.htm

That's the preferential selection portion of a longer piece talking about different parts of affirmative action.

It says, "Myth 10: Support for affirmative action means support for preferential selection procedures that favor unqualified candidates over qualified candidates."

The evidence in the Atlantic article, as well as the quote from the New York Times that I posted (both in my first post), both show that the so-called "myth" in your article is, in fact, real.

Last edited by grundle; 06-06-18 at 05:00 PM.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 04:59 PM
  #16  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

I'm curious to hear if anyone here who has actually read the Atlantic article can give an argument for why UCLA should bring back its affirmative action policy.

I'm also curious to hear if anyone here who has actually read the New York Times quote (also in my first post) can give an argument that that particular example of affirmative action does not hold blacks to lower standards.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 05:17 PM
  #17  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by Nick Danger View Post
I've never thought about it before. I simply accepted the definition presented by the opponents. A quick search turned up this:


http://www.understandingprejudice.or...les/affirm.htm

That's the preferential selection portion of a longer piece talking about different parts of affirmative action.
The article says:

"Myth 6: If Jewish people and Asian Americans can rapidly advance economically, African Americans should be able to do the same."

That's another so-called "myth" that actually turns out to be real.

In the U.S., Nigerian immigrants earn more money, and are better educated, than any other Demographic, and that includes whites and even Asians.

Apparently, someone forgot to tell them how "racist" the U.S. is.

The real reason they are so successful is because they strongly value education, and they almost always get married before their first child is born.

I think the U.S. should allow 50 million more African blacks like these to become U.S. citizens. This would end, once and for all, the bogus claim that "racism" is the primary thing holding so many blacks back.

As long as the black community refuses to address the fact that more than 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock (as well as addressing that this is a brand new problem that has nothing to with slavery, and didn't even begin until the "war on poverty" of the 1960s, which paid mothers far bigger benefits if they avoided getting married), the problems that so many people wrongly blame on "racism" will never be solved.

Among black children raised by married parents, the poverty rate is quite low. It's too bad that so many people blame poverty on "racism" instead of on having babies out of wedlock.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 05:26 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 30,366
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Shut up, grundle.
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 05:40 PM
  #19  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by inri222 View Post
I watched the entire video.

1) He says that only a white person who got C's in college could ever become U.S. president.

But in reality, Obama has never released his college transcripts, so we don't know what Obama's grades were.

Just as I know there is something in Trunp's tax returns that he does not want the public to see, I also know there is something in Obama's college transcripts that he does not want the public to see.

2) He says that affirmative action does not put students into colleges that they are not qualified for.

But the Atlantic articles proves that he is wrong.

Furthermore, while the opponents of affirmative action have been trying very hard for decades to get the necessary data to compare the graduation rates of blacks who were admitted based on merit to the graduation rates of blacks who were admitted based on affirmative action, the supporters of affirmative action have fought very hard to prevent this data from being released. The type of info such as that about UCLA in the Atlantic article is very hard to come by. I'd love to see way more data of such comparisons, but it is very difficult to find. However, in the few cases where such data has been revealed, those who got admitted based on merit had substantially higher graduation rates than those who were admitted based on affirmative action.

3) He says opponents of affirmative action never criticize these policies when they apply to whites.

But the Atlantic article specifically criticizes legacy and athletic admissions, which apply to whites.

4) He says it's not true that affirmative action holds blacks to lower standards.

But the quote from the New York Times (in my first post) proves that affirmative action does hold blacks to lower standards.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 05:41 PM
  #20  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,293
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by Why So Blu? View Post
Shut up, grundle.

Only if the mods make me.
grundle is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 07:23 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,466
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Yes, multiple times. But none of the people here who support affirmative action said anything about it.
Why should I? It's very clear you never listen and never absorb any information that goes against your preconceived notions. Last week, at your request, I typed out a long post on hate crime enhancements under the federal sentencing guidelines. It probably took me half an hour to research and write. All I got for my efforts was a "Thanks for responding." No discussion, no acknowledgment that the issue is nowhere near as simplistic as you portrayed it. Just "thanks for responding."

So, yeah. I've got better ways to use my time. If you're really interested in criticisms of Sander and Taylor, they're out there. I don't really need to spoon-feed them to you.
JasonF is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 07:30 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 30,366
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

^
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 08:07 PM
  #23  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,523
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by Why So Blu? View Post
Shut up, grundle.
mod note - This is not necessary. Just don't respond.
VinVega is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 09:25 PM
  #24  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 21,582
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Only if the mods make me.


Good response.
creekdipper is offline  
Old 06-06-18, 09:43 PM
  #25  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,523
Re: Real world evidence shows that affirmative action hurts black people

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Only if the mods make me.
Also not necessary.
VinVega is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.