President Trump to rescind Obama's guidance that encourage racial consideration in college admission

[HockeyBjj]

I for one welcome our squinty eyed overlords

 

[Madmick]

Good. This isn't how we help build our black community back up. Two wrongs won't make a right.

Racism isn't the cure to racism.

Now I would like my fellow white people to join me in taking a moment to decompress, and stop being so scared. We don't have to fear integration with blacks. We deliberately segregated blacks in housing (related to school districts) even after we had continued segregating them for so long, and denying them access to our finest institutions of learning. Then we turn around and complain their population is ignorant.

Well, Rome wasn't built in a day, ya' know? People forget that school is actually a small part of how we become educated. Most of what we know and learn, how we form our thoughts and how we see the world, how we think, is cultural capital passed onto us by our parents. Educated parents raise educated children. Educated neighbors build educated communities.

Until we begin more meaningfully integrating our black community, in a controlled manner, certainly, into our more privileged areas and schools, at the K-12 level, we can't expect them to perform with greater parity as professional students.

The government, activists and do-gooders should invest in developing green space in the ghettos. Green spaces, community gardens and greenhouses would give the people something to be proud of and they could grow their own fruits and vegetables.

A new body of evidence suggests that adding greenery in vacant or gray settings reduces criminal activity nearby.

Here were go. This is something where liberals and conservative can get together.

Liberal watchdogs have already observed a growing disparity in urban areas: the Green Entitlement effect. Essentially, they've demonstrated an undeniable correlation throughout most American cities that those who live in poorer residencies are much less likely to have any sort of natural habitat within the surrounding area near where they live-- tree, rivers, parks, meadows, etc. Furthermore, the poorer the community, the greater the average distance between them and these environmental "luxuries". The wealthy are hoarding the trees because of the view.

Frankly, the more I learn about these topics, the more I believe that urban planning (along with unchecked inequality) is the great social failure here. Obviously it's not our gun laws because we aren't suffering this epidemic in rural areas. Contiguity of inequality seems to be one of the greatest aggravating factors, and that isn't something that can be blamed on Republicans, because typically we never control these City Councils, or the Mayor's office, or other municipal (and often county) positions of power in the cities where this is ravaging our population the most-- not even in stronghold "red" states. These are liberal strongholds.

Unlike Ben Shapiro, for example, I do support better government-assisted integration of primary and secondary schools, but I agree with him it can't be radical and wholesale. You have to rehabilitate the disadvantaged populations by slowly assimilating them into more privileged populations where they will be forced to adapt and conform. Otherwise you risk this, and liberals need to watch this-- this is real shit. If you want us to "listen", you have to listen back:



You have to spread disadvantaged minorities around the more privileged schools, and more privileged neighborhoods: drip by drip. This will not happen overnight. It takes time to heal. This isn't going to be achieved by building a shopping mall in a ghetto neighborhood. That just drives up prices, creates tension between the local population and businesses, who complain to city councils because their profits are being hurt, such as in Portland, so all of this ultimately drives out the minorities or disadvantaged, and "gentrifies" the area. The only win is we get a South Park episode out of it. I still recall that report I read of Harvard's analyzing the underperformance of the affirmative action minorities across the eight Ivy League universities relative to their incoming SAT scores and GPA-- worst among "Native" Americans and Blacks. But the thing that stood out to me was that the underperformance was disproportionately greater than would be predicted for those students who came from high schools with greater concentrations of black/minority students.

That's reflects culture, not genetics. You have an unmistakable control.

Trying to splint this disadvantage at such a late stage as higher education is pointless, and inappropriate. It's too late, and this is an atmosphere of professional students, so you end up institutionalizing racial discrimination to justify it (i.e affirmative action). It needs to happen earlier. Government intervention is appropriate to manipulate the environments, but not the outcomes or opportunities. The people have to manage those themselves, or you slide into autocracy where everything is decided via edicts issued from the bubble of Capitol Hill.

These were two posts from conservatives in the Chicago gun violence thread. It's all connected. We need to address the rampant inequality, especially where it is more contiguous, and that starts with addressing our terrible urban planning. That's something that liberals can do. Meanwhile, conservatives, why don't I ever hear free-market based ideas to address the growing divide? It's not going away. I don't like EU shakedowns, so here, let me throw out a truly rough cut idea I've been telling friends about for a long time.

We all know that the average CEO average wage in this country has gotten out of hand: 274x the average floor worker (it's much worse in other studies, up to 500x, and I've never seen it below 200x in recent years). Conservatives point out how a single leading figure can be the difference between Apple creating the iPhone under Jobs, and becoming the richest publicly traded company in the world, and then not much later run out of ideas so completely that Wall Street observers begin to suggest they take their cash capital and merge with Tesla, who is full of ideas, but has no cash. It's the difference between utopia and ruin. So they compete to buy these people with huge packages-- nothing excuses the golden parachutes, but we'll leave that for now.

So why not lower the baseline tax on corporations, relieving some of this pressure, but then add a second tax; this tax scales like the income tax, but it is based on the ratio of the CEO-to-baseline laborer wage. If it's 300x, your corporation is subject to a much stiffer tax rate than if it is 5x, in which case there really isn't a need for a second tax at all. Bonuses aren't exempt. Of course, corporations will do what they always do, and get creative with tax loopholes, but that's the right. Only the more deluded, radical libertarians or conservatives like Grover Norquist argue against a scaling income tax. Also, yes, it couldn't just be the CEO, or his salary would be easy to depress for the good of the company. It would have to be more comprehensive relative to management. The mathematicians could offer us all sorts of models for placing these salaries on a spread in order to evaluate the over parity of salary in a corporation.

This solves the rational conservative argument that they MUST offer these enormous salaries to attract the best talent, and all the data they have to substantiate this from history evaluating individual productivity, and market performance under different leaders with the same company. It's solved because everyone is subject to the same rubber band control of offering too much. Suddenly, you want to offer the best package to the most talented prospective CEOs, and other management, but if you offer too much, you penalize the corporation as a whole versus its competition because someone offering less might make out with a lower tax rate, and win on profit in the end. Suddenly we have a mechanism to maintain a tension.

Why don't we see ideas for compromise like this? Where are the eggheads?

 

[JDragon]

Nice. I've heard people complain about this(mostly Koreans) for a long time.

I think you meant to write:

Nice. I've heard people (mostly Koreans) complain about this for a long time.

 

[Bargey]

wait???!!! is this full-on no emphasis on color and just on scores/grades/extra curriculum activities then???

cause if so...

Asians be like "aight ya fuckin' JVs scrubs... get the fuck out of the line and let us through!" in every school entrance admission lines... lol.

Which is fine with me. If you put in the work and cross the finish line first then nobody has the damn right to suddenly tell you your last because Johnny who finished 6th has more melanin in his skin.

There is no worse form of non-violent racism than race-based affirmative action.

 

[GraveyardFilla]

im mostly OK with this, i think.

affirmative action, and similar policies have noble goals, and at one time were necessary. in 2018, though, i feel like creating policies that help minorities at the college level, is a bit like calling the fire dept after the building as burned already. we need to ensure that public schools (largely funded by LOCAL tax), are equitable everywhere. one that happens, you should (and do) see the so-called achievement gap shrink or disappear.

Agree for the most part except for equitable public schools. Those schools fail primarily because of shitty parenting. It would take a massive cultural shift to produce equitable outcomes. Until then it's basically throwing good money after bad.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Good. This isn't how we help build our black community back up. Two wrongs won't make a right.

Racism isn't the cure to racism.

Now I would like my fellow white people to join me in taking a moment to decompress, and stop being so scared. We don't have to fear integration with blacks. We deliberately segregated blacks in housing (related to school districts) even after we had continued segregating them for so long, and denying them access to our finest institutions of learning. Then we turn around and complain their population is ignorant.

Well, Rome wasn't built in a day, ya' know? People forget that school is actually a small part of how we become educated. Most of what we know and learn, how we form our thoughts and how we see the world, how we think, is cultural capital passed onto us by our parents. Educated parents raise educated children. Educated neighbors build educated communities.

Until we begin more meaningfully integrating our black community, in a controlled manner, certainly, into our more privileged areas and schools, at the K-12 level, we can't expect them to perform with greater parity as professional students.



These were two posts from conservatives in the Chicago gun violence thread. It's all connected. We need to address the rampant inequality, especially where it is more contiguous, and that starts with addressing our terrible urban planning. That's something that liberals can do. Meanwhile, conservatives, why don't I ever hear free-market based ideas to address the growing divide? It's not going away. I don't like EU shakedowns, so here, let me throw out a truly rough cut idea I've been telling friends about for a long time.

We all know that the average CEO average wage in this country has gotten out of hand: 274x the average floor worker (it's much worse in other studies, up to 500x, and I've never seen it below 200x in recent years). Conservatives point out how a single leading figure can be the difference between Apple creating the iPhone under Jobs, and becoming the richest publicly traded company in the world, and then not much later run out of ideas so completely that Wall Street observers begin to suggest they take their cash capital and merge with Tesla, who is full of ideas, but has no cash. It's the difference between utopia and ruin. So they compete to buy these people with huge packages-- nothing excuses the golden parachutes, but we'll leave that for now.

So why not lower the baseline tax on corporations, relieving some of this pressure, but then add a second tax; this tax scales like the income tax, but it is based on the ratio of the CEO-to-baseline laborer wage. If it's 300x, your corporation is subject to a much stiffer tax rate than if it is 5x, in which case there really isn't a need for a second tax at all. Bonuses aren't exempt. Of course, corporations will do what they always do, and get creative with tax loopholes, but that's the right. Only the more deluded, radical libertarians or conservatives like Grover Norquist argue against a scaling income tax. Also, yes, it couldn't just be the CEO, or his salary would be easy to depress for the good of the company. It would have to be more comprehensive relative to management. The mathematicians could offer us all sorts of models for placing these salaries on a spread in order to evaluate the over parity of salary in a corporation.

This solves the rational conservative argument that they MUST offer these enormous salaries to attract the best talent, and all the data they have to substantiate this from history evaluating individual productivity, and market performance under different leaders with the same company. It's solved because everyone is subject to the same rubber band control of offering too much. Suddenly, you want to offer the best package to the most talented prospective CEOs, and other management, but if you offer too much, you penalize the corporation as a whole versus its competition because someone offering less might make out with a lower tax rate, and win on profit in the end. Suddenly we have a mechanism to maintain a tension.

Why don't we see ideas for compromise like this? Where are the eggheads?

I have posted about Greening the Ghetto in a few threads and a few videos about black people starting groups to fight against the polluting factories and lack of green-space in their areas. The only person who has quoted anything is you. The only thing people seem to want to talk about is the negatives like climate change denial and racism against black people. They do not want to discuss possible approaches to tackling the problems.

 

[Rational Poster]

I have posted about Greening the Ghetto in a few threads and a few videos about black people starting groups to fight against the polluting factories and lack of green-space in their areas. The only person who has quoted anything is you. The only thing people seem to want to talk about is the negatives like climate change denial and racism against black people. They do not want to discuss possible approaches to tackling the problems.

Don't you think it would be quite the task to discuss solutions to climate change with climate change deniers just like it would be difficult to discuss solutions for racism against blacks with people who also deny racism even exists?

 

[Falsedawn]

Don't you think it would be quite the task to discuss solutions to climate change with climate change deniers just like it would be difficult to discuss solutions for racism against blacks with people who also deny racism even exists?

"Colorblindness" when a disparity exists isn't altruism, it's just ignoring the disparity.

Same people who are saying "civil rights are outdated". The first black child to inegrate is still alive, but we somehow leaped over this centuries long issue in 50 years.

<puh-lease75>

 

[Rational Poster]

"Colorblindness" when a disparity exists isn't altruism, it's just ignoring the disparity.

Same people who are saying "civil rights are outdated". The first black child to inegrate is still alive, but we somehow leaped over this centuries long issue in 50 years.

<puh-lease75>

My mom actually told me a story the other day about how her older sister tried to use the black kids coming to her high school for the first time as an excuse to stay home.

She wasn't racist she just didn't want to go to school.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Agree for the most part except for equitable public schools. Those schools fail primarily because of shitty parenting.

dunning kruger effect.

this is for sure a variable, but absolutely silly to claim with such confidence that it is the only variable, or even the most important one.

and many of those parents were kids when they became parents. or theyre extremely hard working, and have 2-3 part time jobs. so theyre left with the choice of parenting, or ensuring that food is put on the table in a marginally better neighborhood.

It would take a massive cultural shift to produce equitable outcomes. Until then it's basically throwing good money after bad.

if the way that people can pull themselves up through the social ladder is primarily education....then you simply should not have 2nd grade classes with 40 kids. thats bad policy. irresponsible. selfish. in a class like that (of which there are many in poor neighborhoods), even the hardest working kid will not teach themselves how to read, while the teacher is putting out fires on the other side of the room. silly to expect otherwise.

 

[Rygu]

Finally hard working Asians won't be discriminated against for their tireless work ethic.

 

[ineverpost]

I don't know what "guidance" is but it sounds like an opinion without any legal muscle, and rescinding it is just another meaningless move to convince the country bumpkin voters that he's making America great again.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Don't you think it would be quite the task to discuss solutions to climate change with climate change deniers just like it would be difficult to discuss solutions for racism against blacks with people who also deny racism even exists?

Of course, the problem is always the idiot who never gets what I am explaining. There is certainly no chance that the problem could be my approach to how I am explaining it.

One of the problems I find with people who talk about climate change and racism is that they are not specific enough. They will talk about climate change, mock deniers and post a bunch of charts, links to journals and point out the percentage of scientists who believe in climate change, but will never talk about a specific approach to a specific problem. The same thing goes with racism. There is a lot of condemnation and talk about privilege and systematic racism, but there is never a specific approach to a specific problem.

There is certainly a problem with "deplorables" who just don't get it and there will always be some people who cannot be reached. There is also a problem with how some people are trying to communicate problems. If they are not simply being self-righteous and smug, then they are lacking clarity and specific solutions to specific problems. More people would be willing to listen if they heard something like, "there is a lack of green-space in the ghetto which studies show lead to these problems. To combat the problems we are going to work with developers and educators to bring in green-spaces and educate the community to maintain these spaces". I find the problem is often with how things are being said. People seem more interested in condemning and riding a moral high horse than sincerely communicating.

An effective teacher will look at himself first and make the necessary adjustments if his students are not understanding the lesson. An ineffective teacher will not examine himself and only see his students as the problem.

 

[Black Helicopters]

Just by looking at the title you would think Trump is a progressive lol

 

[superpunch]

if the way that people can pull themselves up through the social ladder is primarily education....then you simply should not have 2nd grade classes with 40 kids. thats bad policy. irresponsible. selfish. in a class like that (of which there are many in poor neighborhoods), even the hardest working kid will not teach themselves how to read, while the teacher is putting out fires on the other side of the room. silly to expect otherwise.

Korea spends about half what we do on education, Japan about 2/3, per k-12 student. Japan and Korea both average class sizes ~35 students while American public schools average 23 students per class. Japan and Korea both outperform us. America spends the second most per k-12 student in the world, right after Sweden. Japanese and Korean American kids also outperform in American schools.

Academic performance differences have nothing to do with the schools. Blaming anything on lack of money spent and large class sizes is ridiculous. We already spend the most money and have small class sizes.

It's a cultural difference. You could probably just put Japanese kids into a public library with no teacher and no funding at all and they'd just teach themselves by reading books and using the internet. Japanese and Korean culture produces good students no matter the class size or money spent. It was illegal for African Americans to learn how to read until 150 years ago and then it was illegal for them to go to college or hold white collar jobs until about 50 years ago. What do you expect the resulting culture is going to be?

I'm not totally against affirmative action as a response to that. I don't like it ethically or philosophically. But just as a real-world thing, African American culture is the result of incredible racial discrimination and you might need to swing the racial discrimination pendulum the other way a bit to balance it. It's definitely not ethical or morally right. I don't think anyone will pretend it is. But it's definitely debatable that it might still be necessary.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Korea spends about half what we do on education, Japan about 2/3, per k-12 student. Japan and Korea both average class sizes ~35 students while American public schools average 23 students per class. Japan and Korea both outperform us. America spends the second most per k-12 student in the world, right after Sweden. Japanese and Korean American kids also outperform in American schools.

averages.

compare the numbers with poor american schools, to japanese schools.

Academic performance differences have nothing to do with the schools.

surely you dont F'ing believe such a nonsensical statement.

Blaming anything on lack of money spent and large class sizes is ridiculous. We already spend the most money and have small class sizes.

on AVERAGE....AVERAGE. national averages.

our wealthy suburban schools are the best public schools in the world. when their performance gets lumped in with the ghetto and trailer park schools, it drags their numbers down.

Japanese and Korean culture produces good students no matter the class size or money spent.

source? your sources dont say what you think they say. think.

It was illegal for African Americans to learn how to read until 150 years ago and then it was illegal for them to go to college or hold white collar jobs until about 50 years ago. What do you expect the results going to be?

thats an issue, you're right. now put them in 2nd grade classes where there are 35+ kids in them. 1 teacher. how often do you think this teacher actually gets to teach? do you expect kids of this age to be will smith in the pursuit of happiness movie?

 

[superpunch]

thats an issue, you're right. now put them in 2nd grade classes where there are 35+ kids in them. 1 teacher. how often do you think this teacher actually gets to teach?

Japanese schools average that many students. That means that many schools have 40+ kids per class all the time. Why is that a problem for inner city schools but not a problem for Japanese schools?

do you expect kids of this age to be will smith in the pursuit of happiness movie?

That's a figure of speech but I think it hits on something important: behavioral problems. The problem is that African American culture has broken family units. 72% of African American children are born out of wedlock and 67% are raised in single-parent families. That produces children with behavioral and psychological problems. Japan is the mirror opposite. 2.3% of children are born out of wedlock. The family unit is intact and that produces kids with less behavioral problems. You can teach a class of 40 kids no problem with the latter numbers -- and they do it all the time, more successfully than an American school with 25 kids. The problem isn't that an inner city school has 35 kids in a class. The problem is that 30 of those 35 kids are going to present the same problems that only 2 out of 50 kids would in the other culture. Because only 2.3% of Japanese kids are raised in the environment that ~70% of African American kids are. This isn't going to be solved by messing with funding and class sizes and other superficial nonsense. That's just the icing on the cake.

I don't think it's a poverty thing either. Lots of Japanese kids are in poverty and they don't have the same problems. I think the problem is that poverty correlates with trauma and broken family units in America and that's why you see that correlation.

 

[panamaican]

averages.

compare the numbers with poor american schools, to japanese schools.



surely you dont F'ing believe such a nonsensical statement.



on AVERAGE....AVERAGE. national averages.

our wealthy suburban schools are the best public schools in the world. when their performance gets lumped in with the ghetto and trailer park schools, it drags their numbers down.



source? your sources dont say what you think they say. think.



thats an issue, you're right. now put them in 2nd grade classes where there are 35+ kids in them. 1 teacher. how often do you think this teacher actually gets to teach? do you expect kids of this age to be will smith in the pursuit of happiness movie?

I think people really have no idea what the state of inner city schools are so they make the mistake of thinking that it's just like suburban schools only with more kids per classroom. That's coupled with a lack of foundational knowledge on early child development. The end result is a belief that there's a culture problem when most of the problems we're looking at are structural.

I'm a frequent lambaster of teacher's unions as detrimental in their current form but even I recognize that there's a baseline level of quality that has to be provided to maximize the chances for long academic success. A classroom with 40 kids simply cannot provide the same early learning experience as a classroom with 15 kids. A teacher who with a master's degree is better qualified than one without. A school with lead in the water and the paint and mold on the walls is probably not a safe environment for developing brains. An economic system that moves the best teachers to the wealthiest neighborhoods and leaves the poorest neighborhoods with the worst teachers is going to produce educational disparities. An education system that assigns more money to wealthy neighborhoods than poor ones will also produce educational disparities.

None of those things are created by "culture", although all of those things will create a "culture". People are mislabelling the supposed effect as the cause.

But that leads me to a separate point about "culture" that I hate - which is the implication that some cultures arise independent of the external forces placed upon them. And, similarly wrong, that said cultures will change even if the external forces remain largely the same.

 

[lifelessheap]

Japanese schools average that many students. That means that many schools have 40+ kids per class all the time. Why is that a problem for inner city schools but not a problem Japanese schools?


That's a figure of speech. The problem is that African American culture has broken family units. 72% of African American children are born out of wedlock and 67% are raised in single-parent families. That produces children with behavioral and psychological problems. Japan is the mirror opposite. 2.3% of children are born out of wedlock. The family unit is intact and that produces kids with less behavioral problems. You can teach a class of 40 kids no problem with the latter numbers -- and they do it all the time, more successfully than an American school with 25 kids. The problem isn't that an inner city school has 35 kids in a class. The problem is that 30 of those 35 kids are going to present the same problems that only 2 out of 50 kids would in the other culture. Because only 2.3% of Japanese kids are raised in the environment that ~70% of African American kids are. This isn't going to be solved by messing with funding and class sizes and other superficial nonsense. That's just the icing on the cake.

I don't think it's a poverty thing either. Lots of Japanese kids are in poverty and they don't have the same problems. I think the problem is that poverty correlates with trauma and broken family units in America and that's why you see that correlation.

If you research the statistics of what happens to children of single parent households you will realize that single parenting is basically child abuse. It takes two parents to raise a child properly, but nobody will point this out. No politician will advocate for strong family values, and NOBODY will point out black parenting failures or they get nuked with racism claims.

Good students come from strong families that teach personal responsibility and put an emphasis on education. Shitty students come from parents who fucking suck.

Who knew that parenting would be so central in producing good or bad children?!!

 

[Devout Pessimist]

If you research the statistics of what happens to children of single parent households you will realize that single parenting is basically child abuse. It takes two parents to raise a child properly, but nobody will point this out. No politician will advocate for strong family values, and NOBODY will point out black parenting failures or they get nuked with racism claims.

Good students come from strong families that teach personal responsibility and put an emphasis on education. Shitty students come from parents who fucking suck.

Who knew that parenting would be so central in producing good or bad children?!!

I do not know if Gandhi actually said this, but the quote is absolutely correct: