Anesthesiologist nominated as surgeon general

[deleted171991]

Imagine you have two candidates:
Kid A: Scores very well on an entrance exam. He comes from a privileged background where he attends private school with small class sizes and enthusiastic teachers. His parents pay for extra tutors and has time for all the fun touchy-feely nonsense that kids do these days to make a spiffy application (violin lessons, polo, whatever).

Kid B: Also scores well on entrance exam, but maybe not quite as well as Kid A. He comes from a one-parent family because his dad is in jail and his mom is addicted to heroin. He attends an underfunded and overcrowded public school. He spends his free time working jobs because his mom is too busy getting high to pay the rent.

I would take Kid B every single time over Kid A. By going off a purely objective measurement like a test score, you miss some subjective qualities that are important in a candidate. I get that you want the best of the best in whatever field we are talking about, but some kids don't have the opportunity to show what they are truly capable of because of circumstances they have no control over. Race-based "points" on an application are stupid, but so are privilege-based "points."

And this is why most non-objective extracurricular crap is worth exactly that. If it doesn't make the kid a better doctor, engineer, whatever, it's worthless. And if it does, show me the exam results.

Yes, tutoring will have an impact on test results but it's not because of "test-taking skills". (Anybody can learn those skills just by doing enough questions, even foreigners like me.) It's because of knowledge. The more you study the more you know. As easy as that. And, I am sorry, Kid B should not get into the same school as Kid A, regardless of the Hollywood-level life stories. We are talking about the Olympics, not the Special Olympics.

Good schools should depend a lot on building upon pre-existing knowledge. This shouldn't be "no child left behind". Get up to the same level as the other candidates. You didn't make it this year? No problem, you can try again the next one, after you improve. It may take more than a generation to get into Yale or Harvard or a good school, so what? Just because they are Millennials they shouldn't get a free pass.

Btw, when we get truly equal opportunity in K-12 education (meaning equal funding for schools regardless of local taxes), and objective measures of performance for college/university admission, the family background doesn't matter that much. What matter much more are the teachers and the classmates (which again get more homogeneous with well- and equally-funded public schools). In a fair system, Donald Trump probably wouldn't have gotten into Wharton, or GW Bush into Yale and Harvard, with all the tutoring in the world.

Affirmative action is just another kind of pork.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GravelRider]

And this is why most non-objective extracurricular crap is worth exactly that. If it doesn't make the kid a better doctor, engineer, whatever, it's worthless. And if it does, show me the exam results.

Yes, tutoring will have an impact on test results but it's not because of "test-taking skills". (Anybody can learn those skills just by doing enough questions, even foreigners like me.) It's because of knowledge. The more you study the more you know. As easy as that. And, I am sorry, Kid B should not get into the same school as Kid A, regardless of the Hollywood-level life stories. We are talking about the Olympics, not the Special Olympics.

Good schools should depend a lot on building upon pre-existing knowledge. This shouldn't be "no child left behind". Get up to the same level as the other candidates. You didn't make it this year? No problem, you can try again the next one, after you improve. It may take more than a generation to get into Yale or Harvard or a good school, so what? Just because they are Millennials they shouldn't get a free pass.

Btw, when we get truly equal opportunity in K-12 education (meaning equal funding for schools regardless of local taxes), and objective measures of performance for college/university admission, the family background doesn't matter that much. What matter much more are the teachers and the classmates (which again get more homogeneous with well- and equally-funded public schools). In a fair system, Donald Trump probably wouldn't have gotten into Wharton, or GW Bush into Yale and Harvard, with all the tutoring in the world.

Affirmative action is just another kind of pork.

I simply don't agree that multiple guess test results are a good demonstration of knowledge. They just aren't. Plus, you are alluding to innate capabilities here. I agree that not everyone is born with the ability to do higher level math, but Kid B in my example grew up in an environment where he did not have the chance to demonstrate his capabilities. Not only is Kid B missing out on an opportunity in your world of multiple guess tests, but society is missing out on a productive member that is likely more capable than Kid A, but just hasn't had the chance to show it. Until we have truly equal K-12 early education (which will never happen) we won't have a way to objectively measure someone's innate capabilities.

 

[doctalaughs]

I simply don't agree that multiple guess test results are a good demonstration of knowledge. They just aren't. Plus, you are alluding to innate capabilities here. I agree that not everyone is born with the ability to do higher level math, but Kid B in my example grew up in an environment where he did not have the chance to demonstrate his capabilities. Not only is Kid B missing out on an opportunity in your world of multiple guess tests, but society is missing out on a productive member that is likely more capable than Kid A, but just hasn't had the chance to show it. Until we have truly equal K-12 early education (which will never happen) we won't have a way to objectively measure someone's innate capabilities.

You guys have moved the goalposts in this discussion.

Now we are arguing whether kids that grow up in resource-poor environments should get extra perks/consideration. That's a totally different argument separate from race (and btw they currently do get advantages in the form of financial aid- if you get into Harvard and your family makes less than about 50k/yr you won't pay a cent whereas the son/daughter of a doctor will pay about 280k over 4 years if you consider that "fair").

I want someone to tell me why you should automatically get a much lower admission standard purely if you are black or hispanic versus asian or white, totally independent of socioeconomic status.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Except that we are doing it the wrong way. The very wrong way. It's bordering racism in the 30s, when they invented "interviewing" to keep Jewish students out of academia (admissions used to be 100% entrance exam-based), except now we are doing it to Asians and Whites. Positive discrimination for a group is negative discrimination for all others.

The right way to do it is to give all poor kids financial support, even full rider, federally-sponsored, if they get into a college based on their own merit. No more extra points for being a minority, one-eyed, three-eyed, whatever. Everything based on merit with need-based financial help. No more interviews, essays and other subjective bull**** that invites positive or negative discrimination. Admission committees completely blinded to candidates, by law, otherwise ineligible for federal funds.

Nobody should get extra points for something that is not their merit/fault. That should also apply to "diversity in the workplace". Affirmative action and overwhelming political correctness are discriminatory, period, and that's why Trump got elected. Nobody should get a pass based on being a minority (and that includes all the minority workers employers are afraid to fire, but would have fired long time ago had they been heterosexual white men).

Before I came to the US, it had never occurred to me to wonder if a minority graduate's diploma is worth less than a majority one's. Affirmative action does a disservice to outstanding people who belong to positively discriminated groups. That's why some of them are not taken seriously just based on their degree. The saddest thing is when a minority patient asks for a white male doctor, because s/he doesn't trust all the affirmative action crap.

I don't disagree with what you say, for the most part. Scholarships/free rides are great for poor communities of ANY ethnic background are great. And merit based everything is better than favoritism. No question.

The reality is that favoritism and non-merit based selections have partly created the situation that currently exists. Money and power have created the gaps that exist. That age old paradigm has improved, but its disastrous effects on the poor and minorities hasn't gone away. To say that now we'll "make all things equal" is grossly inadequate to right a wrong that has destroyed communities.

I hate the idea of favoritism. It's not American. But expecting kids from the $hittiest communities to suddenly be competitive with middle or upper-class communities just because you're offering free rides to college is unrealistic and will change NOTHING. And however it's done, SOMETHING needs to be done to change the semi-apocalyptic environment that so many people in America live in.

"Diversity in the workplace" is another issue entirely.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

I am sure. That's my point exactly, that most of them are way above average people. It still doesn't make it fair or right. Those kids have dreams, too, and deserve to be treated equally.

Affirmative action exists mainly to keep favoritism legal for college admissions. Abolishing affirmative action for being discriminatory would quickly lead to abolishing any form of positive discrimination, such as alumni- or donation- or connection-based admissions (e.g. Jared Kushner, George W Bush, Donald J Trump etc.). And that doesn't sit well with certain people (always follow the money). It's a well-known fact that elite schools tend to select at least some of their freshmen not based on past performance, but likelihood of future performance and donations (which has to do a lot with families, wealth and connections).

So the poor Asian or white kid is mostly f*cked. Hence Trump.

I usually agree with you, but conservatives that want to overturn affirmative action are frequently on the receiving end of the benefits of donation- or connection- based advancement. They do NOT seem too concerned about losing that power, nor should they.

 

[doctalaughs]

I usually agree with you, but conservatives that want to overturn affirmative action are frequently on the receiving end of the benefits of donation- or connection- based advancement. They do NOT seem too concerned about losing that power, nor should they.

Both powerful conservatives and liberals benefit from donations and connections so there's no real difference here.

You can't selectively help 1 struggling group at the expense of another, which is basically the definition of affirmative action. Although this might seem a minor issue, it's representative of the heart of why democrats lost the election (poor and middle class working whites feeling the democrats ignored them for the last few decades while championing identity politics causes)





Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Both powerful conservatives and liberals benefit from donations and connections so there's no real difference here.

You can't selectively help 1 struggling group at the expense of another, which is basically the definition of affirmative action. Although this might seem a minor issue, it's representative of the heart of why democrats lost the election (poor and middle class working whites feeling the democrats ignored them for the last few decades while championing identity politics causes)





Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I know both liberals and conservatives benefit from connections. Read the post I was responding to for why I pointed out conservatives in that case.

Their are many issues why democrats are losers. And identity politics are big in both sides. I agree it's part of why HRC lost, but support for struggling communities via methods that conservatives disagree with is part of what separates the parties, and isn't going away.

 

[doctalaughs]

I know both liberals and conservatives benefit from connections. Read the post I was responding to for why I pointed out conservatives in that case.

Their are many issues why democrats are losers. And identity politics are big in both sides. I agree it's part of why HRC lost, but support for struggling communities via methods that conservatives disagree with is part of what separates the parties, and isn't going away.

Guess we can agree on that.

I think the tides have turned against the democrats despite an outrageous republican campaign/president. They will continue to be out in the cold unless they:

1. Convince poor/middle class whites they aren't going to put the interests of other groups ahead of theirs.

2. Convince the general public that the incredible amount of tax revenue already collected isn't going 50% directly into the toilet. Admit that some things should be cut because they are wasteful or generating an endless cycle of increased dependency on government.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Guess we can agree on that.

I think the tides have turned against the democrats despite an outrageous republican campaign/president. They will continue to be out in the cold unless they:

1. Convince poor/middle class whites they aren't going to put the interests of other groups ahead of theirs.

2. Convince the general public that the incredible amount of tax revenue already collected isn't going 50% directly into the toilet. Admit that some things should be cut because they are wasteful or generating an endless cycle of increased dependency on government.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Completely disagree. The country is getting more diverse, more urban and suburban, more progressive, and mass social networks are making the world smaller. Support for progressive politics and politicians will only keep growing.
To me, this is why republicans are making every effort to make voting MORE difficult under the guise of election fraud.

 

[doctalaughs]

Completely disagree. The country is getting more diverse, more urban and suburban, more progressive, and mass social networks are making the world smaller. Support for progressive politics and politicians will only keep growing.
To me, this is why republicans are making every effort to make voting MORE difficult under the guise of election fraud.

True- the population is getting more diverse and urban.

I'm not sure what you mean by "progressive" but I do not think the diversity/urban/socially connected trend necessarily translates to democrats winning, especially if they can't change their message and goals.

If the repubs can move towards abandoning their stupid social agenda they will find their fiscally conservative, cut waste/dependance, smaller government, self-reliance message resonating more with both whites and all other colors.

The fact that a higher % of blacks voted for Trump than Romney in spite of an overtly racist candidate shows that if the Repubs nominate someone reasonable the tides will continue to shift towards them irrespective of demographics.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[ZzzPlz]

True- the population is getting more diverse and urban.

I'm not sure what you mean by "progressive" but I do not think the diversity/urban/socially connected trend necessarily translates to democrats winning, especially if they can't change their message and goals.

If the repubs can move towards abandoning their stupid social agenda they will find their fiscally conservative, cut waste/dependance, smaller government, self-reliance message resonating more with both whites and all other colors.

The fact that a higher % of blacks voted for Trump than Romney in spite of an overtly racist candidate shows that if the Repubs nominate someone reasonable the tides will continue to shift towards them irrespective of demographics.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You don't think that % has anything to do with Romney running against a black opponent?

 

[nimbus]

If the repubs can move towards abandoning their stupid social agenda they will find their fiscally conservative, cut waste/dependance, smaller government, self-reliance message resonating more with both whites and all other colors.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I always find this line of reasoning ironic when it comes from the mouth of someone who works in healthcare, the military or both. The largest beneficiaries of big government. Doctors don't like big government but whenever cuts to Medicare are on the block we scream and cry like little girls. I want bigger government and a fatter check from Medicare. Healthcare is the "waste" and so is the military. I see every day how much waste there is in the system.

 

[pgg]

I always find this line of reasoning ironic when it comes from the mouth of someone who works in healthcare, the military or both. The largest beneficiaries of big government. Doctors don't like big government but whenever cuts to Medicare are on the block we scream and cry like little girls. I want bigger government and a fatter check from Medicare. Healthcare is the "waste" and so is the military. I see every day how much waste there is in the system.

I'm a military doctor and I think the military should get large cuts, and undergo another round of BRAC in the 1990s pattern. I've accepted the sad reality that healthcare is going to be an expensive bureaucratic totally f'd up mess in this country for the duration of my career and probably the rest of my life, but despite that hospitals wills stay open and I'll keep working.

 

[pgg]

Completely disagree. The country is getting more diverse, more urban and suburban, more progressive, and mass social networks are making the world smaller. Support for progressive politics and politicians will only keep growing.

I've been hearing this demographic tide theory for 20+ years, and I believed it, but I'm not so sure I should keep believing it.

US Senate: 52 R, 46 D, 2 independent
US House: 246 R, 187 D (the largest majority since 1931)
Governors are 2:1 Republican now (33 : 16 with 1 independent).
State legislatures are almost 3:1 Republican now (32 : 12 with 6 split)

And it's not like Trump had wonderful coattails for these Rs to ride in on.

 

[doctalaughs]

I always find this line of reasoning ironic when it comes from the mouth of someone who works in healthcare, the military or both. The largest beneficiaries of big government. Doctors don't like big government but whenever cuts to Medicare are on the block we scream and cry like little girls. I want bigger government and a fatter check from Medicare. Healthcare is the "waste" and so is the military. I see every day how much waste there is in the system.

Healthcare and the military have tremendous waste. Mind-boggling waste, just like most things largely run or funded by the government.

Doctors did fine when the government was smaller. The portion of GDP doctors have been "paid" has been relatively flat though whereas astronomical increases in GDP spending has been largely gobbled up by others at the healthcare trough.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[anbuitachi]

I always find this line of reasoning ironic when it comes from the mouth of someone who works in healthcare, the military or both. The largest beneficiaries of big government. Doctors don't like big government but whenever cuts to Medicare are on the block we scream and cry like little girls. I want bigger government and a fatter check from Medicare. Healthcare is the "waste" and so is the military. I see every day how much waste there is in the system.

A lot of it is medico legal cause. I bet if there were no lawyers, we wouldn't care so much about using 1 bottle of xyz drug for multiple patients if we use sterile technique instead of using 5mg of a 200 mg labetalol bottle when it is on national shortage and tossing the rest because you can't use it for another patient.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

I've been hearing this demographic tide theory for 20+ years, and I believed it, but I'm not so sure I should keep believing it.

US Senate: 52 R, 46 D, 2 independent
US House: 246 R, 187 D (the largest majority since 1931)
Governors are 2:1 Republican now (33 : 16 with 1 independent).
State legislatures are almost 3:1 Republican now (32 : 12 with 6 split)

And it's not like Trump had wonderful coattails for these Rs to ride in on.

It's a good point, but the current proportions might reflect a backlash AGAINST the changes we're talking about. And the changes are coming fast and furious. How did the country feel about gay marriage, drug legalization, and socialized medicine ten or twenty years ago?

Hispanic and Asian populations are growing at something like 15 times the rate of non-Hispanic whites. And the current elderly, who are one of the largest (if not THE largest) voting blocks, grew up in a time where race and ethnicity were of central importance, and division on racial grounds seemed ok. As WE become the elderly, we'll be of generations that lived in a connected, global social climate and a diverse country.

These facts don't guarantee democratic votes. And a monolithic voting block would be bad for the country anyway. We HAVE to have AT LEAST two powerful parties. But things are changing, however anyone wants to interpret how the changes will effect future politics.

 

[nimbus]

A lot of it is medico legal cause. I bet if there were no lawyers, we wouldn't care so much about using 1 bottle of xyz drug for multiple patients if we use sterile technique instead of using 5mg of a 200 mg labetalol bottle when it is on national shortage and tossing the rest because you can't use it for another patient.

I'm also talking about doing procedures of dubious benefit because we can get paid for it or staffing a VA operating room with 8 anesthesia providers when there's enough work for 3. People are always gaming the government.

 

[GravelRider]

A lot of it is medico legal cause. I bet if there were no lawyers, we wouldn't care so much about using 1 bottle of xyz drug for multiple patients if we use sterile technique instead of using 5mg of a 200 mg labetalol bottle when it is on national shortage and tossing the rest because you can't use it for another patient.

The lawyers don't care about that stuff. It's the Joint Commission and the Nursing Overlords that care about stuff like OR dress codes and multi-use vials

 

[chocomorsel]

A lot of it is medico legal cause. I bet if there were no lawyers, we wouldn't care so much about using 1 bottle of xyz drug for multiple patients if we use sterile technique instead of using 5mg of a 200 mg labetalol bottle when it is on national shortage and tossing the rest because you can't use it for another patient.

Where I work, we still use labetalok 200mg as multiuse. At least the nurses still do. And so do I. It's not disallowed.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Implicit Racial Bias in Medical School Admissions : Academic Medicine

Multiple recent studies showing ethnic/gender biases in admissions, AOA selection, etc...

 

[pgg]

Implicit Racial Bias in Medical School Admissions : Academic Medicine

Multiple recent studies showing ethnic/gender biases in admissions, AOA selection, etc...

Have you ever taken an implicit association test? They're interesting.

Some debate as to whether what they measure is predictive of behavior.

 

[doctalaughs]

Implicit Racial Bias in Medical School Admissions : Academic Medicine

Multiple recent studies showing ethnic/gender biases in admissions, AOA selection, etc...

Of course the admissions committee demonstrate white "preference" on an IAT test. Most people in our society do, and they are still people. The problem is that unconscious bias is NOT racism - it's a built-in innate feature of humans that you cannot change. Of course the human brain uses past experience to influence future judgements - duh, we didn't need to waste money on a study to know this.

The answer is legally mandated race-blind admissions based purely on scores, stats, tests, grades etc. The committee should not even know applicant names. Of course certain minorities on average score a standard deviation below other minorities and whites, but that is another matter. At least we would not be unconsciously discriminating against any single individual which is the "fairest" it can be.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Of course the admissions committee demonstrate white "preference" on an IAT test. Most people in our society do, and they are still people. The problem is that unconscious bias is NOT racism - it's a built-in innate feature of humans that you cannot change. Of course the human brain uses past experience to influence future judgements - duh, we didn't need to waste money on a study to know this.

The answer is legally mandated race-blind admissions based purely on scores, stats, tests, grades etc. The committee should not even know applicant names. Of course certain minorities on average score a standard deviation below other minorities and whites, but that is another matter. At least we would not be unconsciously discriminating against any single individual which is the "fairest" it can be.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

It's probably a little innate, but far more learned.

It doesn't matter what it is at this point anyway. It exists, and the people whose communities need the upward mobility the most are being discriminated against.

Completely unbiased testing and admissions don't currently exist. If someone can establish that, great.

 

[doctalaughs]

It's probably a little innate, but far more learned.

It doesn't matter what it is at this point anyway. It exists, and the people whose communities need the upward mobility the most are being discriminated against.

Completely unbiased testing and admissions don't currently exist. If someone can establish that, great.

I've never understood how people can argue that objective tests such as ACT, SAT, mcat etc are "biased" but whatever. Just because 1 minority group does statistically worse on a test does not prove bias... that is circular reasoning.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[nimbus]

I've never understood how people can argue that objective tests such as ACT, SAT, mcat etc are "biased" but whatever. Just because 1 minority group does statistically worse on a test does not prove bias... that is circular reasoning.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

The instruction, learning environment, family support, peer support, etc are biased. Not the exams.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

I've never understood how people can argue that objective tests such as ACT, SAT, mcat etc are "biased" but whatever. Just because 1 minority group does statistically worse on a test does not prove bias... that is circular reasoning.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I don't disagree with that. I don't know if those particular tests are biased.

 

[doctalaughs]

I don't disagree with that. I don't know if those particular tests are biased.

Sounds like we agree but there are thousands of articles and media stories about how these standardized tests are racist because blacks/hispanics score significantly lower on them, thus "discriminating" against admission/job opportunities etc. It's a very big part of the whole affirmative action /victimhood movement that is so wrong.

There are definitely obvious and clear reasons why they score so much lower on objective tests, and 99% of that is cultural + familial values that do not emphasize education. Why that is not obvious is beyond me. You've got other minority colors/ethnicities (ie certain asian cultures, jews etc) that go from abject poverty, discrimination, genocide etc to positions of wealth/power/achievement in 1 generation because of the strong emphasis on education and hard work in their cultures.

Changing a culture is very hard but needs to be done instead of blindly lowering the bar based on skin tone, which by definition hurts other groups (and themselves in the long run).


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[GravelRider]

Sounds like we agree but there are thousands of articles and media stories about how these standardized tests are racist because blacks/hispanics score significantly lower on them, thus "discriminating" against admission/job opportunities etc. It's a very big part of the whole affirmative action /victimhood movement that is so wrong.

There are definitely obvious and clear reasons why they score so much lower on objective tests, and 99% of that is cultural + familial values that do not emphasize education. Why that is not obvious is beyond me. You've got other minority colors/ethnicities (ie certain asian cultures, jews etc) that go from abject poverty, discrimination, genocide etc to positions of wealth/power/achievement in 1 generation because of the strong emphasis on education and hard work in their cultures.

Changing a culture is very hard but needs to be done instead of blindly lowering the bar based on skin tone, which by definition hurts other groups (and themselves in the long run).


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Familial values?

Is it familial values that keep the rural white populations from getting educations and jobs? Or are they still victims of the coastal "elites?"

 

[Pooh & Annie]

clear reasons why they score so much lower on objective tests, and 99% of that is cultural + familial values that do not emphasize education. Why that is not obvious is beyond me. You've got other minority colors/ethnicities (ie certain asian cultures, jews etc) that go from abject poverty, discrimination, genocide etc to positions of wealth/power/achievement in 1 generation because of the strong emphasis on education and hard work in their cultures.

That's because ethnic groups like Asians and Jews have a non-American cultural identity that they share and can take pride in. They tend/tended to settle in communities with shared histories, and had religions/languages/professions that they brought with them to the US.

History for African-Americans is almost completely American, because they lost every aspect of their own culture over generations and generations of slavery and then segregation. Their shared experience in the US until the last 50 years or so was as property or lowest class of citizen. Why would you expect someone who shares a history/language/religion with a previously completely ruling class to suddenly unleash some desire for education and prosperity in a place that never saw them as equals and never allowed them any special occupation/training/education?

I think African-Americans are now carving out a strong unique cultural identity (i.e. Music, sports, etc...), but that doesn't yet include higher education and professionalism. Unfortunately it seems like success is a one-in-a-million shot based on talent. Not the easily accessible success that education offers.

Further evidence is the success of newer African immigrants like Nigerians and Kenyans. They have cultures that they are connected to and take pride in, and they have been very successful in the US. I think I had 10-15 Nigerians in my med school class, and I think each one of them came from educated families.

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to say "look at Jews and Asians who were poor. Why can't black people do that?" There is no reason to expect that they should "do that".

 

[deleted171991]

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to say "look at Jews and Asians who were poor. Why can't black people do that?" There is no reason to expect that they should "do that".

Why not? Asians and Jews have done it despite being discriminated against, now and in the past, respectively.

This whole cultural identity excuse is BS. Poor people have wrong values all around the world, not just in the US. And success has a lot to do with family values. If a family values education, it will make sacrifices to educate its children, and will push those children to the limit, like a "tiger mother". As simple as that. It's all about grit and ambition.

Affirmative action is BS, just a means to buy votes or a boogeyman, depending on the party. What kids need is equal opportunity, based on merit, beginning from good K-12 schools for everybody, not just for the rich neighborhoods. So if the poor kid wants to learn, s/he can learn.

What most poor kids need is a big brother, a successful role model. Most successful people stand on generations of giants from their own families/communities.

 

[doctalaughs]

Familial values?

Is it familial values that keep the rural white populations from getting educations and jobs? Or are they still victims of the coastal "elites?"

Yes, some poor whites are "victims" of cultural or familial values that prevent them from being successful. Read "hillbilly elegy" and take it from someone who grew up that way. Whites are not immune from this phenomenon, it's just more prevalent in certain groups (blacks, hispanics etc) and much less in other minorities or ethnicities.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[doctalaughs]

That's because ethnic groups like Asians and Jews have a non-American cultural identity that they share and can take pride in. They tend/tended to settle in communities with shared histories, and had religions/languages/professions that they brought with them to the US.

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to say "look at Jews and Asians who were poor. Why can't black people do that?" There is no reason to expect that they should "do that".

I see you conveniently ignore hispanics, the other major group targeted by affirmative action but they have a rich/tight cultural heritage. Just one that doesn't value education in the same way as Asian/Jewish cultures etc.

Regarding African Americans, if you think slavery shattered families and cultural values MORE than other oppressed groups (for example, those that experienced mass genocide and scattering of families all over the world) please explain why.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[GravelRider]

Yes, some poor whites are "victims" of cultural or familial values that prevent them from being successful. Read "hillbilly elegy" and take it from someone who grew up that way. Whites are not immune from this phenomenon, it's just more prevalent in certain groups (blacks, hispanics etc) and much less in other minorities or ethnicities.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

My point is we just elected a president on a victimhood movement that asserts that the rural white communities are victims of the evil globalists on the coasts.

However, I do agree with you that "familial values" (or more simply put, "culture") can hold certain communities back. My point is that minority communities are not the only ones who ascribe to victim mentality when it's convenient. I'm also not sure it's more prevalent in minority communities. It's human nature to blame someone else (usually someone not like you) for your misfortune. One could even argue that blaming affirmative action for any lack of success is a victim mentality.

Hillbilly Elegy has been checked out of my library almost continuously since it came out.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Why not? Asians and Jews have done it despite being discriminated against, now and in the past, respectively.

This whole cultural identity excuse is BS. Poor people have wrong values all around the world, not just in the US. And success has a lot to do with family values. If a family values education, it will make sacrifices to educate its children, and will push those children to the limit, like a "tiger mother". As simple as that. It's all about grit and ambition.

Affirmative action is BS, just a means to buy votes or a boogeyman, depending on the party. What kids need is equal opportunity, based on merit, beginning from good K-12 schools for everybody, not just for the rich neighborhoods. So if the poor kid wants to learn, s/he can learn.

What most poor kids need is a big brother, a successful role model. Most successful people stand on generations of giants from their own families/communities.

Yes, I agree with you about what poor people need.

When someone's history is slavery and second class citizenship based on their race, who are the successful "giants" from their community/family? These are entertainers, sports stars, etc... Not doctors and lawyers. It's either make it big or live in poverty under those conditions.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

I see you conveniently ignore hispanics, the other major group targeted by affirmative action but they have a rich/tight cultural heritage. Just one that doesn't value education in the same way as Asian/Jewish cultures etc.

Regarding African Americans, if you think slavery shattered families and cultural values MORE than other oppressed groups (for example, those that experienced mass genocide and scattering of families all over the world) please explain why.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I mentioned Asians and Jews because that's who you mentioned. "Hispanics" are a broad class and include generally successful nationalities like Cubans, argentinians, or Colombians, and less financially succesful like Mexicans or Dominicans.

My concern is probably more specifically directed toward the black community because the troubles those communities are in are almost purely a result of America's racist history. They lost everything about their cultures, languages, religions, even families, by force. When that ended the country did all it could to keep them from thriving. Now after less than a lifetime of real efforts at equality, people don't understand why they aren't all of a sudden professional white collar folks. That's f@cking stupid, in my opinion.

Your second point I don't have anything to say about. I'm Jewish, ethnically if not philosophically. If I can see the difference between Jews doing everything in their power to escape genocide by coming to the United States, and Africans coming to the US by force in the bottom of ships and living as slaves for generations, so should you.

Everyone needs to work hard to be succesful. We all agree. Some people are at a distinct disadvantage, and have to work harder, which, fair or not, everyone also agrees on. But I think there are differences in the circumstances in some cases that deserve efforts to right certain wrongs that have directly led to the desperation of those communities.
Yes this country f@cked over poor people of every race since the beginning. But it took away virtually EVERYTHING from some people for generations, and that's not easy to fix.

 

[doctalaughs]

I mentioned Asians and Jews because that's who you mentioned. "Hispanics" are a broad class and include generally successful nationalities like Cubans, argentinians, or Colombians, and less financially succesful like Mexicans or Dominicans.

My concern is probably more specifically directed toward the black community because the troubles those communities are in are almost purely a result of America's racist history. They lost everything about their cultures, languages, religions, even families, by force. When that ended the country did all it could to keep them from thriving. Now after less than a lifetime of real efforts at equality, people don't understand why they aren't all of a sudden professional white collar folks. That's f@cking stupid, in my opinion.

Your second point I don't have anything to say about. I'm Jewish, ethnically if not philosophically. If I can see the difference between Jews doing everything in their power to escape genocide by coming to the United States, and Africans coming to the US by force in the bottom of ships and living as slaves for generations, so should you.

Everyone needs to work hard to be succesful. We all agree. Some people are at a distinct disadvantage, and have to work harder, which, fair or not, everyone also agrees on. But I think there are differences in the circumstances in some cases that deserve efforts to right certain wrongs that have directly led to the desperation of those communities.
Yes this country f@cked over poor people of every race since the beginning. But it took away virtually EVERYTHING from some people for generations, and that's not easy to fix.

Ok then by your reasoning why are we lowering the admissions standards for the Nigerians in your med school class? The successful Cubans, Colombians and Argentinians?

As you know, Jews were barred from many schools, clubs, hospitals and jobs for decades in the US. Are they arguing their bar should be lowered now as compensation? Asians are fighting lawsuits because they must have far higher than average qualifications to enter certain schools.

AA is a travesty. Although Trump is a bumbling idiot I agree with his stance on a few things , including this.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Ok then by your reasoning why are we lowering the admissions standards for the Nigerians in your med school class? The successful Cubans, Colombians and Argentinians?

As you know, Jews were barred from many schools, clubs, hospitals and jobs for decades in the US. Are they arguing their bar should be lowered now as compensation? Asians are fighting lawsuits because they must have far higher than average qualifications to enter certain schools.

AA is a travesty. Although Trump is a bumbling idiot I agree with his stance on a few things , including this.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Jews and Asians are doing fine. I have no idea what the admission standards are for Nigerians, Cubans, or Argentinians. You can normalize the admission requirements however you want for them. They aren't who I'm talking about.

AA sucks, but it's no "travesty." I agree with the bumbling idiot part for sure. And I don't think he has a "stance" on much of anything.

 

[doctalaughs]

Jews and Asians are doing fine. I have no idea what the admission standards are for Nigerians, Cubans, or Argentinians. You can normalize the admission requirements however you want for them. They aren't who I'm talking about.

AA sucks, but it's no "travesty." I agree with the bumbling idiot part for sure. And I don't think he has a "stance" on much of anything.

I'll correct that for you - MOST jews/asians are doing fine but not all. Do you think it's fair to apply a higher standard to all in a skin color/ ethnic group because some of them are doing well? Sounds like discrimination to me, which is exactly what AA pretends it's "against." The hypocrisy is stunning.

Imagine the uproar if we said all blacks had to statistically score a half standard deviation above the average to be considered at X school. There would probably be riots in today's age, yet somehow it's ok for asians.

And don't pretend you don't know what box Nigerians check on school admission forms, or Colombians/Argentinians etc. There's only like 7-8 choices on the form, and only 2-3 will significantly boost your chances at securing the position.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile