Affirmative Action in the US

On May 5, 11:37 pm, pg <pen...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 5, 8:17 pm, Wakalukong <wakaluk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 4:26 pm,RichAsianKid<richasian...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On May 4, 11:10 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > It will be nice if India can catch up with China.  We don't know
the=

> > > > full consequences but it is probably good.  The key phrase is
'India=

> > > > is on the cusp of something big' which is the position Indian had
be=
en
> > > > stuck at for the past 60 years.
>
> > > > Tiger economies are snapping at US heelsBut it's not clear whether
> > > > Beijing or New Delhi will catch up first
>
> > > > Richard Wachman
> > > > The Observer,
>
> > (snip)
> > ----------
>
> > Comparison between China and India is just a sideshow; the US is still
> > the country to beat economically.  If we base our *****sment on how
> > free and how open to talent an economy is and will be, then the US
> > will still be ahead for a long time.  On present and foreseeable
> > factors, the only ones who can cause America to topple from the top
> > are Americans themselves.
>
> > Wakalukong
>
> From a person who have spent 20+ years in the US, I'll tell you that
> US ain't _that_ free.
>
> True, comparitively it's much freer than many Asian countries, but it
> ain't free.
>
> Many Asian students are NOT allowed admission to top schools such as
> UCLA, Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Princeton and son on simply because they
> are Asians. Racial discrimination? You bet.
>
> But in the US, they turn the thing around --- accusing the Asians
> being too bright, that the Asian kids are taking up all the slots,
> causing the poor black kids to lose their chance on education.
>
> Bull****? You bet.
>
> But in the US, they turn THAT around again --- saying that they need
> to reserve slots for the poor black kids because it is only "fair"
> that the black kids got to study in Princeton. Having said that, those
> black kids that got into the top schools just don't have the caliber
> to compete. So how they finish school? What else? "Race Card", again.
>
> They (black kids) get to graduate with inflated scores. But this time,
> the one who inflated the scores aren't the lecturers, it's the school
> admin who doctored the scoresheet (might as well calling it score****)
> to let those black kids attain graduation.
>
> Ever wonder why that Condoleezza Rice being so dumb yet can get top
> honor degree? Read the above.
>
> So now she got the post of the Secretary of State of the United States
> of America.
>
> Poor Uncle Sam.

One major study showed (and another study subsequently confirmed) that
in a race neutral policy, 2 out of 3 blacks and 1 out of 2 Hispanics
would not have been admitted to elite colleges. Whites would increase
by 4%, Asians by one-third. If you're interested I can cite your
references.

As for professional schools such as medicine:

Racial and Ethnic
Admission Preferences
at the University of
Michigan Medical
School
By Althea K. Nagai, Ph.D.

http://www.ceousa.org/pdfs/UMichMed%20final.pdf

**Highlights**
Probabilties of Admission. Likewise, probabilities of admission favor
blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics over whites and Asians for
every year. For instance, an in-state male candidate, with no parent
connection to UMMS and with an MCAT score and science GPA equal to the
medians for black admittees, in 1999 would have had the following
probabilities of admission:

  =B7 a 72 percent chance if black;
  =B7 a 17 percent chance if Hispanic;
  =B7 a 2 percent chance if Asian; and
  =B7 a 6 percent chance if white.

Significant disparities between blacks and to a lesser extent
Hispanics
versus Asians and whites were found for 2003 and 2004, although the
gaps were not as large as those in 1999.

In 2005, chances of admission for candidates with credentials of the
average black admittee were greater for blacks than in 2004, while
changing little for the other groups. The chance of admission for a
male applicant from Michigan with no parent who attended UMMS and with
the same test scores and science grades as the average black admittee
in 2005:

  =B7 rises to 23 percent if black;
  =B7 drops to 7 percent if Hispanic; and
  =B7 drops to 1 percent if Asian or white.

The disparities are perhaps even more dramatic as test scores and
grades improve somewhat. In 2005, if a candidate had a total MCAT
score
of 41 and an undergraduate science GPA of 3.6, there was a three in
four chance of admission if black, and a four in ten chance if
Hispanic. If the candidate was white, the chances drop to roughly a
one
in ten chance, and if Asian, 6 percent. With a score of 43 and a
science GPA of 3.8, chances rise to nine in ten if black and three in
four if Hispanic, but only to one in three if white and one in five if
Asian.

As for law schools -- after prop 2 took effect in Michigan

    http://insidehighered.com/news/2007/06/19/michigan


"The percentage of African American, Hispanic and Native American
students admitted to the University of Michigan Law School for next
fall fell from 39.6 percent for those students whose applications were
considered before enactment of a state law banning race-based
preferences in December to 5.5 percent thereafter." (!!) That's before
and after prop 2 of course.

Point: when race is not taken into account, **most** underrepresented
minorities just cannot make it on their own.

   ***Over 86% of minorities would not be admitted to U of M law
school if race or affirmative action were not a factor.*** (!!!)


So I ask you: why would you choose to see a black doctor or lawyer
knowing that he more than likely slipped in through the back door?