Would anyone be ok with this if gender and race were excluded from college applications and people were accepted or declined based on their merit of acceptance and not different admissions standards for different genders/minorities?
Free tuition for Blacks
- Thread starter bflow22
- Start date
I agree with you and if those students want to help kids that need help then they should simply pay more to the school. The school can then create a fund for kids that need assistance. That way the folks that need help are getting it form the group that is promoting the help. I say this because I find it hard to make a point about money when people are trying to spend other peoples money. This would come straight off the bottom line and either the gov't would help pay for it or the school would pass the cost onto the students that are paying. The word "Free" is not really free. I mean yeah you may not pay for it but someone is paying for it therefore it is not free.
The schools that are state/federal supported probably have to keep a ratio that is set by the gov't. That is the only reason I can see why gender or race are even needed.
If I was black, I'd be offended by what those students are proposing. God damn - they don't think black people can compete?
I'd love to hear opinions of some black people.
I'd love to hear opinions of some black people.
I always found this video funny. Especially when the guy went to Harlem and asked black people about this. They had that "WTF are they talking about" look on their faces.
I totally agree with you, Ice.
IF..........
the industry failing is due to changes in technology or market conditions, NOT if the industry failing is due to government regulations. In that case, it is the government's fault, so they should have a hand in providing short term relief, but not perpetual relief.
Or it could just be, you know, demographics in Wisconsin
http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/55
Article says 2%, demos say 6%, those aren't the same number. What am I missing?
That a very small % of the population is black so you would expect a small % of the enrollment to also be black. Are we expecting the college to have enrollment be exactly the same breakdown of the population? What am I missing?
You are the one who brought this argument up, and it doesn't hold water. If we expect our massive public universities to reflect the population of the state they are in, then UW is failing. If the school only has 2% afam enrollment then the school isn't serving the state's or nation's population proportionally, and no, 2% is not close to 6% in this regard.
And to answer your question directly, yes: large public universities should endeavor to serve their State's population proportionally.
I say do it.........and watch as the drop out rate in Wisconsin doubles and less than 5% who participate in free college would have the work ethic and discipline to complete a four year degree program under this new "free college act"....then the next thing you know these same people will be pleading for some one to take the courses for the free college act participants, because they are culturally biased, and when your done with that carry my books for me because they're just so damn heavy...
How many blacks apply to UW compared with other races? I don't expect the public universities to reflect the population of the state they are in just pointing out that demographics may be one reason for the low % of black students. I expect universities to admit the best applicants regardless of race.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion. So you do understand that tuition would be free in this crazy and stupid example. Didn't say that they would allow completely unqualified people in. Assuming they'd have to qualify first, wouldn't this be akin to receiving a full ride scholarship? Is it your contention that kids receiving full rides drop out more often? Again, they didn't say open the doors for just anyone AND it's also free. I would agree dropout rates would probably be 75% if that's the case. Either way its a stupid idea to just across the board give free education "solely" based on race.
For the record I don't mind race, gender and other factors to be considered because diversity has some strengths. I draw the line at unqualified folks being allowed to help reach those goals however.
Notice I said unqualified. I have seen idiots argue against an individual who was a minority getting in who was completely qualified. They found someone who was rejected who was slightly more qualified in a measure or two. They didn't search the entire white acceptees tho to see how many of them they were more qualified than. Just the one minority.
This video is hilarious. It's a joke. What makes it a joke is how it's used as propaganda. Everything said in that video can be true and it can also be true that those policies disproportionately effect poor black folks and even poor white folks. One woman said she uses the internet at work. Great part of the population to ask. I'll go down to IBM and ask a bunch of folks if they have healthcare. I'm guessing 100% will say yes then I'll conclude that everyone has healthcare already.
What folks need to do is get outside your comfort zone and do some work with those less fortunate than yourself. Come to your own conclusions. Do some work during election time and you'll see that these issues are very real from the ID and transportation stand point. There should be drives right now getting those folks IDs but sadly largely the democrats start these drives right at election time because they assume all these folks are going to vote for them. That's the only reason they want to help them get IDs. They don't care about those folks. What about right now? Don't they need IDs right now? Yet they'll wait till election time and complain. That disingenuous nature is where we should be angry with the democrats.
The point the video does make is that the real racist in the video are the white kids. The reasons they gave for not being able to get an ID can be used on poor white people BUT those kids brought up the racism.
I don't think the video makes any point. Nothing in the video is untrue your point or theirs. The policy is rooted in racism and that's no secret. Those kids didn't express it well just like the questions being asked to the black folks were simple and straight forward and they answered those questions. That's fair. What's unfair is to draw the conclusions that were drawn.
If you think those white kids are racist for, even in an incorrect fashion, trying to protect those they saw as being mistreated then you need to re-examine what racism is. Racist is thrown around way too much. Racist have full intent on harming others in a number of different ways because of their race and race alone. Those kids definitely aren't racist.
This is not true at all. According to the Wisconsin Historical Society, Wisconsin had approximately 1,200 slaves as of 1860. As for the assertion that most blacks in Wisconsin are ancestors of southern slaves, that also seems not to be the case. Far fewer southern blacks migrated to Wisconsin that other states given that there was less demand for the kind of rural labor skills which most blacks would have had at the time. So many of the African Americans in Wisconsin are descendant from Wisconsin slaves. There was indeed still segregation well into the 20th century, most notably in Milwaukee.
In fact, it wasn't until 1979 - a full 25 years after Brown vs. Board, that the city of Milwaukee began to desegregate its schools.
Now I'm not really arguing one way or the other for affirmative action or free tuition. I just wanted to point out that Wisconsin actually has a longer history of segregation than many southern states, most of which had begun integration by the mid 60s and so if the basis of your support for one side or another is that Wisconsin never had slaves, that's based on a false premise.
You are right, I misread it. Thanks for pointing that out. Anyway, the point still stands that Wisconsin did have slaves at one point and does have a history of segregation.
I don't mind paying for the blacks, or even the Jews. Mexicans and homos are where I draw the line.
Wow. I knew Illinois had had a lot of slaves but I didn't know about Wisconsin. They were freed well before the civil war I assume? Maybe before statehood or soon after? I also didn't know Wisconsin didn't participate in the 20th century migration. Even though the state is only 2% black I do realize Milwaukee has larger concentrations. I assume that's where most of the segregation was.
I did learn that NY had a larger slave population than some southern states. And while many were freed, sadly many were sold to southerners. Origin of the phrase "sold down the river".
Thanks for the education!
Yeah it looks like that's what happened in Wisconsin, some became freed, probably into indentured servitude, some were sold to the south.
Voting is a responsibilty of an American citizen that should be taken seriously.
If you don't have the motivation and desire to get an ID that proves you are a citizen of the United States of America - you dont take that responsibility serious enough and you shouldn't vote. This country did away with the original requirements to own property in this country before you had a say in how its run and has given every citizen the opportunity.
Everyone who is serious, responsible, and takes time to educate themselves has the ability to vote in the United States.
Obtaining identification in this country is not burdensome to those who take responsibilities seriously and to suggest otherwise is to embrace Ignorant ideas that are not in the best interest of this society in the year 2017.
Last edited:
At first I was all.....
Then...after seeing the responses..
Then @iceheart08 and others posted...
and then one of the funniests threads turned into politics again... thanks...
Then...after seeing the responses..
Then @iceheart08 and others posted...
and then one of the funniests threads turned into politics again... thanks...
LOL for anyone to "suggest" otherwise is to embrace ignorant ideas and are not in the best interest of this society. I wish your statement had something to do with what I said.
Folks don't lump all Liberals in one basket. I find what these students want to do to be very disrespectful to the intelligence and work ethic of black people in general. It's 2017 and a different world. Still have a lot of work to do but improving all the time.
Uh no. It was white, candy assed, liberals in gov't that destroyed the coal industry. Nobody needs to "prop up" anything. If there's been any "propping up", it's been candy assed liberals propping up companies like Solyndra, etc.
I have no idea what types of IDs are required under ID Voting laws, but if a so called 'Real ID' is required, the bolded is objectively false. It took me roughly 3 months, 3 trips to the DMV, and a trip to the department of vital statistics in the state I was born in to replace my valid and unexpired Maryland license.
Natural gas killed coal. Coal employs an entire community of miners, shift managers, machine operators and requests its employees to endure difficult manual labor with little hope of life longevity. Natural gas just needs a couple of guys checking up on the fracking equipment twice a day. Automation and globalization will always replace jobs, and it's only going to accelerate.
Don't really disagree with much of what you're saying. My problem was with the "propping up" statement to which I was responding, and basically the silly idea that CO2 is something harmful; which is associated moreso with coal.
Well, count me in. The coal industry is a dirty (literally) one. There are some MAJOR problems with burning coal:
1. CO2: As someone points out below, CO2 is harmless (unless you have too much or too little... just like O2). Burning coal pumps out CO2 big time... as well as CO (which is NOT Harmless. CO2 is a greenhouse gass and pumping it out into the atmosphere is not a good thing.
2. Burning coal produces some really nasty gasses (in addition to CO2), like bunches of sulpher based chemicals (including sulfuric acid). These get put in the atmosphere and are then washed out by rain/snow. This can damage areas hundreds of miles away (acid rain). This was a MUCH bigger problem in the 70s before the candy asses made the coal industry filter those gasses and stop killing farmer's crops.
3. Burning coal produces a bunch of ash. This ash is rich in heavy metals, most notably arsenic, mercury, and lead. When rain falls on these ash piles, these and other heavy metals are washed down into the water tables which is where lots of folks get their drinking water from. Again, the coal industry didn't voluntarily fix this. Those same candy asses had to make the coal industry waterproof their ash piles b/c they apparently had NO PROBLEM poisoning the public.
Coal is a crap industry right now and hopefully, it goes the way of the dodo bird. The government has been an important (and good) element of change. Slavery was outlawed, Separate but Equal was outlawed, Segregated Schools were outlawed, florocarbins were outlawed. These are all good changes that states and industry would have kept around if the feds didn't force the issue.
So the government isn't always bad and neither are liberals. Actually, I have NO PROBLEM with paying some of my taxes to help out the people who are out of work in the coal industry. They helped build America and we should help them get back on their feet and train in something else.
