Barbaric

[spikepipsqueak]

I think the point that originally started this debate is the there are families in which tertiary education is inevitable and it takes effort to avoid it, and families where it is impossible due to finances or unlikely due to inherited attitudes. That second group has to fight in ways the first simply cannot begin to empathise with.

 

[Politesse]

I think the point that originally started this debate is the there are families in which tertiary education is inevitable and it takes effort to avoid it, and families where it is impossible due to finances or unlikely due to inherited attitudes. That second group has to fight in ways the first simply cannot begin to empathise with.

They can, but it requires listening with an open mind when people tell you stuff.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're making my point here!

It's the attitudes passed from parent to child, not the wealth.

How does giving an extra boost to the blacks from a good background do anything to help the poor blacks? Because that's what the current discrimination does--benefit those who share an attribute with those you want to help.

Ah, a proponent of intersectionality theory! That's becoming rare in the political "center".

From reading the Wikipedia on it is seems to be about classifying discrimination. That's not what I'm doing, I'm pointing out that "black" covers many who are middle class and above and get an easy road from the efforts meant to help those who are lower class. While at the same time being an extra hindrance to lower class whites.

 

[Toni]

You're making my point here!

It's the attitudes passed from parent to child, not the wealth.

How does giving an extra boost to the blacks from a good background do anything to help the poor blacks? Because that's what the current discrimination does--benefit those who share an attribute with those you want to help.

Ah, a proponent of intersectionality theory! That's becoming rare in the political "center".

From reading the Wikipedia on it is seems to be about classifying discrimination. That's not what I'm doing, I'm pointing out that "black" covers many who are middle class and above and get an easy road from the efforts meant to help those who are lower class. While at the same time being an extra hindrance to lower class whites.

No. Anti discrimination laws are intended to help those who are discriminated against. Unfortunately being middle class or upper class/wealthy does not stop discrimination on the bases of race ( or anything else). Money does help provide some insulation but it’s not as good a barrier as some like to assume.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're making my point here!

It's the attitudes passed from parent to child, not the wealth.

How does giving an extra boost to the blacks from a good background do anything to help the poor blacks? Because that's what the current discrimination does--benefit those who share an attribute with those you want to help.

Bullshit. I was able to attend university because the company my father worked for gave scholarships that pays the bulk of the costs of school for me.

My parents’ determination absolutely also made it possible. I’ve known many extremely bright and hardworking people who had parents ts who did not help them at all in any way, including encouragement. Some eventually found a way to further their education but when I think of the potential lost for those individuals, their families and society, I don’t know whether to cry or shake my fist in anger at the absurdity and utter waste.

You are still supporting my position, not yours!

Yes, family makes a huge difference. Anti-discrimination rules do not change that.

What in your argument addresses the fundamental issue that you're helping middle class blacks (that don't need it), and not helping poor of any race (that do need it)?

 

[Toni]

You're making my point here!

It's the attitudes passed from parent to child, not the wealth.

How does giving an extra boost to the blacks from a good background do anything to help the poor blacks? Because that's what the current discrimination does--benefit those who share an attribute with those you want to help.

Bullshit. I was able to attend university because the company my father worked for gave scholarships that pays the bulk of the costs of school for me.

My parents’ determination absolutely also made it possible. I’ve known many extremely bright and hardworking people who had parents ts who did not help them at all in any way, including encouragement. Some eventually found a way to further their education but when I think of the potential lost for those individuals, their families and society, I don’t know whether to cry or shake my fist in anger at the absurdity and utter waste.

You are still supporting my position, not yours!

Yes, family makes a huge difference. Anti-discrimination rules do not change that.

What in your argument addresses the fundamental issue that you're helping middle class blacks (that don't need it), and not helping poor of any race (that do need it)?

No. Family does make a lot of difference.

So does racial discrimination.

I have a long mental list of people who made it despite a rather profound lack of support up to and including physical, sexual and emotional abuse —and a list as long of people with well educated people who were pretty well off who still fucked yo their lives pretty spectacularly. These are people I’ve known for many many years and yeah, I know a lot of the ins and outs of their growing up times.

Families can make a tremendous difference for good and for ill but people can still face difficult circumstances and situations and not overcome these, despite living support and financial support from friends and family. And people can overcome bad circumstances and thrive.

What racism does not just put a thumb on the scales but can put full body weight on the scales. And blindfold a lot of people to the truth of the situation.

I realize this mostly lays outside your personal experiences, although I wonder if you haven’t noticed discrimination against your wife.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think the point that originally started this debate is the there are families in which tertiary education is inevitable and it takes effort to avoid it, and families where it is impossible due to finances or unlikely due to inherited attitudes. That second group has to fight in ways the first simply cannot begin to empathise with.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with this.

The problem is the underwear gnome logic in thinking that somehow introducing racial bias can somehow fix this.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're making my point here!

It's the attitudes passed from parent to child, not the wealth.

How does giving an extra boost to the blacks from a good background do anything to help the poor blacks? Because that's what the current discrimination does--benefit those who share an attribute with those you want to help.

Ah, a proponent of intersectionality theory! That's becoming rare in the political "center".

From reading the Wikipedia on it is seems to be about classifying discrimination. That's not what I'm doing, I'm pointing out that "black" covers many who are middle class and above and get an easy road from the efforts meant to help those who are lower class. While at the same time being an extra hindrance to lower class whites.

No. Anti discrimination laws are intended to help those who are discriminated against. Unfortunately being middle class or upper class/wealthy does not stop discrimination on the bases of race ( or anything else). Money does help provide some insulation but it’s not as good a barrier as some like to assume.

Intended to. Doesn't mean it works as you intend.