<p>bitter much?</p>
<p>kwu:</p>
<p>I realize your anger about affirmative action, but it is an official policy which does bring much more diversity to universities and enables students of disadvantaged backgrounds (many with lower-representation at universities) to go to college. Personally, I don’t agree with it 100% because it DOES discriminate as it attempts to make up for the fallacies of the system. But, who is to say that those who suffered years of slavery-and persecution within the United States don’t deserve anything? There are no reparations for slavery–and the abuse suffered by African Americans. Therefore, there needs to be something to level out the fact that so many URMs are at lower socio-economic statuses. No, I am not an URM myself. But, I respect the struggles they have undergone to get equality. </p>
<p>The thing is hard work pays off for most people, not just Asians. Who is to say that others do not work as hard as Asians do? If you were in a place that was 100% white, I have a feeling that there would be children who are white working just as hard as you might be. Hard work is universal to success. Don’t write it off just because there is a system that attempts to help those who may not have the opportunities that you have.</p>
<p>At the same time, I know of many people who didn’t have to undergo much adversity at all, and rather belong to pretty affluent families yet have used their URM status to their advantage (unfairly, some might even argue). Just my opinion, but I feel that colleges should then emphasize on diversity of life EXPERIENCES, rather than simply one’s ethnicity. I’m sure there are plenty of people out there who would disagree with this though.</p>
<p>The colleges want to say they have a diverse student body because that is “in” right now. 50 years ago a white elitist student body was “in”. </p>
<p>@Iville “you also seem to be suggesting some sort of quota based system, which would be VERY BAD.”</p>
<p>There IS a quota system which I have pointed out. MOst elite colleges have 12% +/- hispanics/african americans which mathces the national demographic. And don;t say something rediculous like it’s a coincidence…</p>
<p>Whits are the ones who appear to be shafted when they are not a majortiy at almost all top tier school, while they are by far a majority in the US. And colleged can get away with this, because unlike with the other two races, people don’t care.</p>
<p>Edit: @as…etc Hard work is not synonamous with success…and hard work is relative. In ibanking, yes hard work does directly mean success. A successful artist “works hard” but instead of drowing their sorrows in a kaplan book, they are thinking. Also, think tanks…they do not have their nose to the grind constantly, but they are still innovative and successful. </p>
<p>Mostly, it appears that left brained fields (i.e. engineering etc.) require hard work in order for one to be a success.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: This is a super general assertion, and not correcting in many instances. It’s just that innovation does not come through keeping your nose to the grind.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yes, there are three races in the world</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>could you have picked a worse example? almost as much as hard work succeeding in ibanking depends on charisma, personality, contacts, how awesome other people think you are</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>hmm, i dont know, i think there are some people who do VERY well in engineering based principally on pure God-given talent</p>
<p>i think the majority of your generalizations are so silly that they weren’t worth writing…despite your “disclaimer”</p>
<p>as for the URM issue…i think there is some justification for affirmative action in service fields (like medicine, public health, social work, nursing, etc) because underserved and poor communities are full of URMs with whom its difficult to connect culturally/linguistically if you are not of the same ethnic group. But i realize that once i start making the argument for that it will have to trickle down to undergrad.</p>
<p>Ugg…</p>
<p>“yes, there are three races in the world”</p>
<p>Why would you bother writing this? You know that three races make up 94% of the US populatation. And Asians make up another 4.4%…just stop.</p>
<p>“could you have picked a worse example? almost as much as hard work succeeding in ibanking depends on charisma, personality, contacts, how awesome other people think you are”</p>
<p>Yeah it’s a bad example…but you see the point. Once again, why couldn’t you have just made a useful comment.</p>
<p>“as for the URM issue…i think there is some justification for affirmative action in service fields (like medicine, public health, social work, nursing, etc) because underserved and poor communities are full of URMs with whom its difficult to connect culturally/linguistically if you are not of the same ethnic group. But i realize that once i start making the argument for that it will have to trickle down to undergrad.”</p>
<p>You’re killing me…I said I don’t have a problem with affirmative action. I am simply stating that I believe that it is wrong to match the % of college with that of the nation for aa/hisp minorities but not do the same for the 2 other large races in the us.</p>
<p>"hmm, i dont know, i think there are some people who do VERY well in engineering based principally on pure God-given talent</p>
<p>i think the majority of your generalizations are so silly that they weren’t worth writing…despite your “disclaimer” "</p>
<p>All right, once again my example wasn’t perfect…but much better then the latter, :P. I’m trying to convey the point that those who are trying very hard to do a task with a known result are not prone to innovation. Let’s try this example…The roman engineers who thought of the aquaducts were not the same as those laden with specific building projects. All right it’s bad, but you get the point. (uh…don’t answer this one, it’s a whole separate arguement).</p>
<p>no, i still totally don’t see your point but i will just say that engineering is considered one of the most innovative disciplines </p>
<p>and my comment about the URM issue had absolutely nothing to do with you or anything you said…i was just giving my opinion</p>
<p>The OP asked if his urm status helps him, u talked about other things…</p>
<p>Ok, maybe you will see my point if you switch accounting with engineering.</p>
<p>“Why the hell, then, don’t they deserve the best?
Why do they have to work HARDER than the other races?
Or, to give the question a more bitter twist, why don’t the other races have to work as hard?”</p>
<p>I never disagreed.</p>
<p>“Therefore, there needs to be something to level out the fact that so many URMs are at lower socio-economic statuses.”</p>
<p>Look simple logic here, if you help poor people, and most URMs are poor you’re helping most URMs, but you’ll be helping those who are actually disadvantaged, not the son or daughter of a rich black NBA player. Admissions claim to be holisitc, looking at what you’ve achieved relative to opportunities, why then should they blindly discriminate on race?</p>
<p>AND what about poor asians and poor ORMs, someone (2nd generation immigrant) who’s father’s a taxi driver and mother’s a waitress, lives in a bad area and goes to a mediocre public school, is on top of all this further disadvantaged because his/her parents are very different culturally from his/her surroundings. This person has just as little if not less opportunity than someone who’s ancestors suffered under slavery. </p>
<p>“there is some justification for affirmative action … because underserved and poor communities are full of URMs with whom its difficult to connect culturally/linguistically if you are not of the same ethnic group.”</p>
<p>this too doesn’t warrant or lead to affirmative action, if you can better connect/communicate with customers then you are more qualified for the job, so a mexican restaurant with hispanic customers should have someone who speaks spanish, it brings in more revenue, as with a chinese restaurant in chinatown. the discrimination might, by virtue of the job, be positive, but it need not and should not be synthesized.</p>
<p>I concur. 10 char.</p>
<p>Edit: I’m done here…I think I understnad what they’re doing now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>ur talking about unskilled labor while i’m talking about health professionals…u see the problem with your point? It doesnt take much qualification to flip burgers.</p>
<p>adfjkl1,</p>
<p>That is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. The fact that it’s official doesn’t validate it. The notion that it is automatically better because it brings diversity is wrong. Diversity comes in many forms (economic, religious, cultural, sexual, political, etc.) and to use race as an arbitrary factor is unfair. Also, people with disadvantaged backgrounds can still go to college, but kwu is right in saying that people with far better qualifications shouldn’t be denied a particular education because someone else has a different skin color.</p>
<p>Your comment about how it helps victimized African-Americans is bogus. The persecuted African-Americans whose ancestors were enslaved hardly EVER benefit from aa. Statistically, it’s the Haitians and Jamaicans who immigrated to the US, who benefit from aa because they often have better grades/qualifications. So they’re not making reparations for anything!</p>
<p>If your issue really is that URMs are often economically worse off, then aa should be based on your socioeconomic status (although even that undermines meritocracy) because at least that benefits people who genuinely had fewer opportunities in life.</p>
<p>Lastly, I’m not Asian, but I think it’s absurd to say that Asians work about the same as whites or other groups. Asians have a legitimately earned a stereotype of working more than anyone else and foregoing social lives for school. I don’t think this is a good thing. But to say that whites or URMs work just as hard is, on balance, false.</p>
<p>I posted this on the Stanford forum, and I would like to repost it here, for the Columbia community to consider and respond to:</p>
<p>"According to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court will reconsider the role of the institution of Affirmative Action in our society in twenty-five year’s time.</p>
<p>Hopefully, by then, it will no longer be needed.</p>
<p>One thing I don’t understand, however:
If AA is used to target those outstanding students who have enormous potential, what exactly does that do for the African American and Hispanic American communities as a whole? Sure, they’ll have some great role models and leaders, but will the cycle of poverty really change? Is this really the way to go?</p>
<p>A point I have about the SAT:
It is by no means, a completely and utterly encompassing exam, but in my opinion any reasonably intelligent person should be able to score fairly high on it. It tests eighth grade reading and math skills: read the question, pick the right answer. Is this so difficult, even for someone from an impoverished background?"</p>
<p>I’d like to try to answer my own questions.
Wouldn’t it be a better idea for the government to spend money on programs that reach out to the poorest URM communities, to teach their children the value of a good education? Instead of offering opportunities to their best and brightest, and leaving the rest in the dust?</p>
<p>And, the “white guilt” argument is silly in this day and age, to be frank.</p>
<p>Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882!
World War II Japanese Internment Camps!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>what exactly do you define as a “fairly high” score?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>how does a public program change this attitude exactly? This attitude exists in all american children…crime and poverty just exacerbate the problem. This isn’t a solution its just BS fluff.</p>
<p>ok, so a lot of people seem to be against AA based on race/ethnicity… do you not mind that kid from South Dakota (w/ lower stats than your own) who “took your place” in a college because he brought geographic diversity? or what about the male/female who got in w/ lower stats, “just” because of his/her gender; does that bother you, too? (just wondering…)</p>
<p>There is not quota for geographic diversity…that I know of. I mean there is bound to be at least a couple very good applicants from each state, right? And I don’t think colleges care too much about the male/female ration. Most schools are not exactly 50/50. But in general yes, I believe the most qualified person should get in. Though, the most qualified person is not always the one with the 3.9+/2250+. I know plenty of people who get home after nine oclock do to ec’s(that they do well in), and I think (and colleges appear to as well) that they are more qualified then someone who just did some community service, couple clubs, and a sport or two for a couple year but has higher scores.</p>
<p>Are Arabs URMs?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was responding to an individual who had been offered admission to Stanford University with scores in the 500s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you think before you make these mind-numbing, intensely irritating generalizations?
Do you find it amusing to completely dismiss another person’s arguments and declare them null and void without evening pausing to consider them for even a moment?
Do you realize that as an alumnus of Columbia University, you represent Columbia and the quality of its student body, when you talk?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>actually we had an extensive discussion in my health economics class about the fact that american children do not regard education as highly as european children and i JUST read an article in US news earlier today that cited a documentary that was trying to make the case that indian and chinese children were generally more studious than american children and performed better in math and science as a result. </p>
<p>Is your response to everything questioning the other person’s intelligence because they simply don’t agree with some unjustified assertion you made? Seriously you should quickly work on changing this attitude before enrolling in a selective university…that is, if you get in… because that certainly won’t fly…I can just imagine you sitting in lit hum trying to argue your point by calling the other person stupid. I’m more than willing to have a mature discussion with you or anyone else here but the way you have presented yourself is neither mature nor intelligent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your hypocrisy… I’m speechless.
I’m not questioning your intelligence.
I’m attacking you for everything that you’re attacking me for.</p>