WSDOT: Too few minorities, women on tunnel project
Comments
-
West Seattle has good AP classes but the rest suck.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The best school I ever went to as a kid was in West Seattle.CollegeDoog said:
Ingraham is made up of mainly the north end minority community and is severely underfunded.dnc said:
Okay I've been gone for awhile, what are you implying with this list. That those three schools are primarily full of minorities and poor schools? Or that they're better than Garfield and Franklin? I'm not sure which angle you're playing here. I lived in Sealth's district. It sucked, that's why I went to Franklin. Has it cleaned things up a bit?CollegeDoog said:
Ingraham, Chief Sealth, West Seattle...dnc said:
Why do you hate Franklin?CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
Of course, Garfield and Franklin are two of the best three public schools in the city.
West Seattle and Sealth face the same issues.
If you live in these areas, access to a better education is much more difficult to come by. -
Lakeside has good AP classes but the rest suck.
-
I need to see a championshipCollegeDoog said:My #RoughRiders jazz band is gonna unseat them this March.
Cook it! -
Causation? I'd lay the blame on other policies, not the one that helps those from disadvantaged backgrounds get better educations.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Those policies have been in place for 40 years.CollegeDoog said:
I speak from a statistical position.CuntWaffle said:
Once again you speak of minorities like they are a peg below other people, as in you have no faith that they can accomplish things that everyone should be able to. If you have determination and drive you will succeed.CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
The fact is class mobility is low and continues to decline.
I don't understand why some hate policies that seek to reverse that trend.
You have just presented a logical argument that those policies have failed miserably.
-
What other policies are those?CollegeDoog said:
Causation? I'd lay the blame on other policies, not the one that helps those from disadvantaged backgrounds get better educations.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Those policies have been in place for 40 years.CollegeDoog said:
I speak from a statistical position.CuntWaffle said:
Once again you speak of minorities like they are a peg below other people, as in you have no faith that they can accomplish things that everyone should be able to. If you have determination and drive you will succeed.CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
The fact is class mobility is low and continues to decline.
I don't understand why some hate policies that seek to reverse that trend.
You have just presented a logical argument that those policies have failed miserably.
You're the one who linked affirmative action to lower class mobility, not me. -
I know you're being sarcastic but we don't have AP classes. Everything is an "AP" class.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Lakeside has good AP classes but the rest suck.
-
Studies show that the link between family background and future income is especially strong in the US than in other countries. Wealthy families still have better access to education like private schools, or well funded public schools. There are lots of wealthy Midd students that went to Rye HS in Westchester, Darien HS in Connecticut, and other public schools in wealthy areas.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
What other policies are those?CollegeDoog said:
Causation? I'd lay the blame on other policies, not the one that helps those from disadvantaged backgrounds get better educations.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Those policies have been in place for 40 years.CollegeDoog said:
I speak from a statistical position.CuntWaffle said:
Once again you speak of minorities like they are a peg below other people, as in you have no faith that they can accomplish things that everyone should be able to. If you have determination and drive you will succeed.CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
The fact is class mobility is low and continues to decline.
I don't understand why some hate policies that seek to reverse that trend.
You have just presented a logical argument that those policies have failed miserably.
You're the one who linked affirmative action to lower class mobility, not me.
I'd say the misuse of public funds in education and the shitiness of public teachers unions is the biggest hamper.
Public education in America is woeful.
-
Totally agree. Affirmative action is just a way of distracting from the REAL problems that you've correctly identified.CollegeDoog said:
Studies show that the link between family background and future income is especially strong in the US than in other countries. Wealthy families still have better access to education like private schools, or well funded public schools. There are lots of wealthy Midd students that went to Rye HS in Westchester, Darien HS in Connecticut, and other public schools in wealthy areas.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
What other policies are those?CollegeDoog said:
Causation? I'd lay the blame on other policies, not the one that helps those from disadvantaged backgrounds get better educations.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Those policies have been in place for 40 years.CollegeDoog said:
I speak from a statistical position.CuntWaffle said:
Once again you speak of minorities like they are a peg below other people, as in you have no faith that they can accomplish things that everyone should be able to. If you have determination and drive you will succeed.CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
The fact is class mobility is low and continues to decline.
I don't understand why some hate policies that seek to reverse that trend.
You have just presented a logical argument that those policies have failed miserably.
You're the one who linked affirmative action to lower class mobility, not me.
I'd say the misuse of public funds in education and the shitiness of public teachers unions is the biggest hamper.
Public education in America is woeful. -
It's not the answer to everything but it's not inherently a "bad" law and it's not the reason social mobility is down.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Totally agree. Affirmative action is just a way of distracting ifrom the REAL problems that you've correctly identified.CollegeDoog said:
Studies show that the link between family background and future income is especially strong in the US than in other countries. Wealthy families still have better access to education like private schools, or well funded public schools. There are lots of wealthy Midd students that went to Rye HS in Westchester, Darien HS in Connecticut, and other public schools in wealthy areas.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
What other policies are those?CollegeDoog said:
Causation? I'd lay the blame on other policies, not the one that helps those from disadvantaged backgrounds get better educations.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Those policies have been in place for 40 years.CollegeDoog said:
I speak from a statistical position.CuntWaffle said:
Once again you speak of minorities like they are a peg below other people, as in you have no faith that they can accomplish things that everyone should be able to. If you have determination and drive you will succeed.CollegeDoog said:People coming from poorer areas generally go to high schools that aren't as good as those from more affluent areas.
In Seattle you can look a schools like Garfield, Rainier Beach, Cleveland. These are minority heavy schools. If a kid can do well with that kind of disadvantage I think they deserve a boost in the admissions process.
The fact is class mobility is low and continues to decline.
I don't understand why some hate policies that seek to reverse that trend.
You have just presented a logical argument that those policies have failed miserably.
You're the one who linked affirmative action to lower class mobility, not me.
I'd say the misuse of public funds in education and the shitiness of public teachers unions is the biggest hamper.
Public education in America is woeful.
There are much more cynical factors in play. -
CollegeDoog said:
Look, AA isn't perfect and there are egregous examples of its misuse popping up. For instance wealthy African Americans students are a huge benefactor in the college admissions process.RaceBannon said:
Self loathing is sadCollegeDoog said:Why are we even building a tunnel? Waterfront streets would be much bettter.
Also, AA is necessary.
I find the trust fund babies who lack any real skills getting jobs on Wall Street because of dad much more appalling.
I don't like that it makes people too beholden to their background although they may have different views.
But there's something to be said about "critical mass" in education and the socioeconomic intentions of the law.
I imagine it will become less important over time.
Justice O'Connor's opinion in Grutter v Bollinger is a good read.
If the trust fund babies get the Wall Street job, they have to be good at it to keep it. Their rich daddy can't save them from getting fired if they consistently lose their clients Millions.
AA is reverse sexism and racism whose only function is to keep those that normally wouldn't be good enough to get a job or keep it, on board a company to meet their diversity goals.
In many insistences, the benefactors of AA are good enough to be hired and maybe even promoted anyway. In most cities, people have evolved enough to look beyond a person's skin color or breastesses. Discrimination laws in hiring and the workplace have bigger teeth than you may realize. AA, at least in most areas has outlived it's designation. It's more about nanny politics now.
Please do tell of what you learned by being exposed to people who normally didn't deserve to be where they are. I'm curious to know.
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/0207c5b8d9863e3a221f61582bd6bfa3_100.png)
