Not all of Europe is rolling over

[Lewkowski]

https://www.npr.org/sections/paralle...t-to-2-per-day

https://blisty.cz/art/78746-deport-a...e-borders.html

Interesting - America isn't alone in looking at Middle Eastern asylum seeks with a wary eye.

[Aimless]

I don't know how to tell you this but you're endorsing xenophobes and white supremacists. How long have you been consorting with the slimeballs at Defend Europa and Czech neo-nazis to own the libs?

[Lewkowski]

I don't know how to tell you this but you're endorsing xenophobes and white supremacists. How long have you been consorting with the slimeballs at Defend Europa and Czech neo-nazis to own the libs?

I don't make it a point to to study Italian and Eastern European politics. But in any event even people with different ideologies may find common ground on issues. For example I'm pretty far on the Right but I prefer drugs to be legalized something that many people on the Left also agree with.

"I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong."

[Loki]

I see you're now praising rabid anti-Semites and Putinists.

[RandBlade]

*Insert obligatory joke about Corbynistas*

Extremism makes strange bedfellows.

[Aimless]

"Pretty far on the right"

You're increasingly difficult to distinguish from your garden variety authoritarian white supremacist. You may try to disguise your position as being "on the right", but everyone here knows which axis it is that really defines your worldview. This lame excuse about not following local European politics is a red herring. We both know you spend your time perusing unsavory sites where you can engage with some of the western world's most repugnant people, many of whom are of course from European countries.

[Lewkowski]

"Pretty far on the right"

You're increasingly difficult to distinguish from your garden variety authoritarian white supremacist. You may try to disguise your position as being "on the right", but everyone here knows which axis it is that really defines your worldview. This lame excuse about not following local European politics is a red herring. We both know you spend your time perusing unsavory sites where you can engage with some of the western world's most repugnant people, many of whom are of course from European countries.

Yes the person who believes everyone should be judged by their actions and not based on their skin color is the white supremacist. Meanwhile people on this *very board* advocate for race based admission policies to college campuses. Get your head out of your ass.

[Timbuk2]

Meanwhile people on this *very board* advocate for race based admission policies to college campuses.

Citation needed.

[Lewkowski]

Citation needed.

Affirmative Action, every time its brought up multiple board members are ok with it.

[Timbuk2]

Affirmative Action, every time its brought up multiple board members are ok with it.

I'll need a quote. I don't believe I've seen anyone here support it.

[Aimless]

Yes the person who believes everyone should be judged by their actions and not based on their skin color is the white supremacist. Meanwhile people on this *very board* advocate for race based admission policies to college campuses. Get your head out of your ass.

Lewk, you and I both know what you are. Even if you were to argue that everyone else here is also racist, that doesn't change what YOU are, ya giant wuss.

[RandBlade]

Racism in dealing with applications absolutely is a problem. How to fix that is not easy but I don't believe it is via further racism.

Economically and corporately it is financially prudent and entirely rational to go out if your way to hire a larger share of discriminated against minorities.

[Aimless]

Racism in dealing with applications absolutely is a problem. How to fix that is not easy but I don't believe it is via further racism.

Economically and corporately it is financially prudent and entirely rational to go out if your way to hire a larger share of discriminated against minorities.

The obvious implication of this view in the context of findings from many studies is, of course, that the vast majority of employers in western countries are irrational fools.

[Loki]

Racism in dealing with applications absolutely is a problem. How to fix that is not easy but I don't believe it is via further racism.

Economically and corporately it is financially prudent and entirely rational to go out if your way to hire a larger share of discriminated against minorities.

Easy to say for those who benefited and continue to benefit from the racism.

[RandBlade]

The obvious implication of this view in the context of findings from many studies is, of course, that the vast majority of employers in western countries are irrational fools.

It does indeed.

Easy to say for those who benefited and continue to benefit from the racism.

Absolutely agreed. And employers who disproportionately hire more minorities are entirely rational actors and not because of affirmative action. Because when we do that we're doing the right thing - for not just the employees but the employers.

[Lewkowski]

Easy to say for those who benefited and continue to benefit from the racism.

You assume Affirmative Action actually helps. For example the kid who really shouldn't have qualified for a program ends up going, getting student loans and failing. Did AA make his life better, or worse?

[Aimless]

Extraordinarily (and characteristically) narrow analysis. Any such cases must be weighted against counterfactuals eg. those who succeed and those who find themselves in the same situation even without affirmative action. Hypotheticals that aren't informed are often not very informative, and this is one such case of an uninformative hypothetical.

[Lewkowski]

Extraordinarily (and characteristically) narrow analysis. Any such cases must be weighted against counterfactuals eg. those who succeed and those who find themselves in the same situation even without affirmative action. Hypotheticals that aren't informed are often not very informative, and this is one such case of an uninformative hypothetical.

https://www.heritage.org/courts/comm...ority-students

[Ominous Gamer]

https://www.heritage.org/courts/comm...ority-students

To give everyone some context, the heritage foundation is the group that got DeVos into the position she currently holds.

[Aimless]

https://www.heritage.org/courts/comm...ority-students

Yes, they've been touting Sander's research and advocacy on the mismatch hypothesis for over a decade, but evidence in support of a strong negative effect of overmatching due to AA is scant and weak.

Several reviews of the empirical literature on the mismatch hypothesis conducted over the past decade find that evidence in support of Sander's work is weak, that there is considerable evidence that contradicts his findings, that his conclusions are not supported by his own research, and that, to the extent that there is an effect of AA-related overmatching, it may be beneficial.

Academic reviews and analyses:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...49089X06000226

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...04070507800402

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...38040713500772

https://www.princeton.edu/ceps/worki...8rothstein.pdf

http://www.margaritamooney.com/wp-co...tiveaction.pdf

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files...sHispanics.pdf

https://www.uclalawreview.org/wp-con...empert-D64.pdf

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi...ty_scholarship

From the case referred to by Heritage:

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery...091098&EXT=pdf

Overviews for laymen:

https://psmag.com/news/affirmative-a...e-thomas-61276

https://www.brookings.edu/research/a...mative-action/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mative-action/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/o...ch-theory.html

The empirical data does not support your appealing common-sense intuition. Even if the evidence were more favorable to your position, Sander's data (for example) obscures important details. A black law student with low grades at a prestigious law school is not only different from his or her white peers due to their grades and test scores at admission but also due to their circumstances, that may subject them to substantially greater economic pressures as well as to other social and psychological pressures in the form of eg. discrimination at school, lower ability to network, lower access to mentoring etc. Even today, American law schools are very white, and very fucked-up. For an overview of the different pressures experienced by law students of different racial backgrounds, see: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu...&context=bjalp

It's possible that many of these students that are allegedly dangerously overmatched would be less thoroughly prepped than many of their peers. While one solution to that might be to shut out the potentially overmatched students (questionable if only considering overall harm vs benefit, as we see there might be overall benefit), another solution is to simply help them prep more thoroughly, so as to even the playing field for those who do not enter higher education from privileged backgrounds: https://nypost.com/2015/12/28/the-mi...rity-students/

I'm sorry but your argument is simply not persuasive. The empirical data does not support it but, rather, contradicts it. The analyses you rely on are flawed. The assumptions you make are misleading. So I don't think I can buy what you're selling.