[W:148] Affirmative Action promotes systemic racial discrimination.

[TurtleDude]

Is Judge Jackson an AA pick for the SCOTUS? Clearly, yes, Biden said he wanted a black woman.

Is she qualified? Best I can tell, she certainly is.

Are there judges who are significantly more qualified than her, so she's preventing a significantly more qualified person from getting the job? I think it would be hard to make that case.

So I'm OK with Judge Jackson being the nominee, and I hope and expect that she'll be confirmed.

Out of nine judges on the SCOTUS, the representation will be:

- 67% white
- 22% black
- 11% Hispanic
- 0% Asian

- 55% men
- 45% women

So, relative to the US population, that means substantial overrepresentation of blacks, and underrepresentation of Hispanics and especially Asians.

she is "qualified" -she has a good academic record and has held the sort of prior employment that is generally seen as most important experience for this position

is she one of the very best legal minds that is available? nothing suggests that is true.
would she even be thought of for this position but for her race and gender, and the extremely thin field of jurists who meet Biden's quotas? NO

 

[LessBiased?]

she is "qualified" -she has a good academic record and has held the sort of prior employment that is generally seen as most important experience for this position

is she one of the very best legal minds that is available? nothing suggests that is true.
would she even be thought of for this position but for her race and gender, and the extremely thin field of jurists who meet Biden's quotas? NO

At this level, how can one tell who has a better 'legal mind'? Seems like you have to set a high bar based on education and experience and ability to answer questions in the hearing, and then it's pretty much pass/fail relative to that bar. And we know that political leaning makes a big difference in the judgments of judges, so these nominations are at least as much about politics as qualifications anyway.

 

[TurtleDude]

At this level, how can one tell who has a better 'legal mind'? Seems like you have to set a high bar based on education and experience and ability to answer questions in the hearing, and then it's pretty much pass/fail relative to that bar. And we know that political leaning makes a big difference in the judgments of judges, so these nominations are at least as much about politics as qualifications anyway.

I would go by their reputation as a current judge or litigator. Her race and Gender are the main reasons why she was selected. with those two requirements in place, the pickings were mighty slim because there are few black women who were even close to being top of their class at a major league law school. Jackson was in the top third of her class at Harvard, but that's about it

 

[jaeger19]

she is "qualified" -she has a good academic record and has held the sort of prior employment that is generally seen as most important experience for this position

is she one of the very best legal minds that is available? nothing suggests that is true.
would she even be thought of for this position but for her race and gender, and the extremely thin field of jurists who meet Biden's quotas? NO

You might have missed this:

Let's say you offered a law class for prospective law students..and you went to the schools and had them submit prospective students based on their performance on an exam you design.
And you find all you get are black students and all women.
No men..no whites no Asians etc..
And you try to figure out why..year after year you only get black women in your class ..
And you discover that the school teachers are discouraging men from taking the test.
That some teachers are taking the black women aside and using the answer key and are giving them extra tutoring to do well on the test. The schools as an institution are purposely having black women an advantage in taking your test..( unbeknownst to the students of course..they just work hard)

This goes on for years and you discover a disturbing trend. There is a plethora of lawyers (again lawyers are mostly black women now), who are in the fields of family law, and divorce law... but very few in criminal law, and corporate law.
In addition, lawyers are a dime a dozen in urban areas.. particularly in large ones... but there is a dearth of lawyers in rural areas.


What would you do? Would you continue to only admit black women to your law class..knowing full well that good male and white candidates were being pushed out?
Please answer.

 

[TurtleDude]

You might have missed this:

Let's say you offered a law class for prospective law students..and you went to the schools and had them submit prospective students based on their performance on an exam you design.
And you find all you get are black students and all women.
No men..no whites no Asians etc..
And you try to figure out why..year after year you only get black women in your class ..
And you discover that the school teachers are discouraging men from taking the test.
That some teachers are taking the black women aside and using the answer key and are giving them extra tutoring to do well on the test. The schools as an institution are purposely having black women an advantage in taking your test..( unbeknownst to the students of course..they just work hard)

This goes on for years and you discover a disturbing trend. There is a plethora of lawyers (again lawyers are mostly black women now), who are in the fields of family law, and divorce law... but very few in criminal law, and corporate law.
In addition, lawyers are a dime a dozen in urban areas.. particularly in large ones... but there is a dearth of lawyers in rural areas.


What would you do? Would you continue to only admit black women to your law class..knowing full well that good male and white candidates were being pushed out?
Please answer.

that ignores many relevant facts and thus your analogy fails. just admit the fact that you support affirmative racial spoils since it benefits or may benefit you and yours. and I happily admit it is deleterious to the interests of my family

 

[LessBiased?]

that ignores many relevant facts and thus your analogy fails. just admit the fact that you support affirmative racial spoils since it benefits or may benefit you and yours. and I happily admit it is deleterious to the interests of my family

You do make a valid point that people will tend to (not always) favor what supports their perceived interests - and then will make arguments to justify their position.

 

[TurtleDude]

You do make a valid point that people will tend to (not always) favor what supports their perceived interests - and then will make arguments to justify their position.

my two nieces are Chinese-American. Both were at the top of their class at an extremely prestigious NYC private school -one has graduated Yale, the other is an undergraduate. I believe both intend to apply to law school. They are both members of the least favored ethnic groups.

 

[jaeger19]

that ignores many relevant facts and thus your analogy fails. just admit the fact that you support affirmative racial spoils since it benefits or may benefit you and yours. and I happily admit it is deleterious to the interests of my family

Stop prevaricating. And answer the question. Your failure to answer is why you fail.

Affirmative action does not directly benefit me or mine. At all.
It benefits our society however.

Again:

Let's say you offered a law class for prospective law students..and you went to the schools and had them submit prospective students based on their performance on an exam you design.
And you find all you get are black students and all women.
No men..no whites no Asians etc..
And you try to figure out why..year after year you only get black women in your class ..
And you discover that the school teachers are discouraging men from taking the test.
That some teachers are taking the black women aside and using the answer key and are giving them extra tutoring to do well on the test. The schools as an institution are purposely having black women an advantage in taking your test..( unbeknownst to the students of course..they just work hard)

This goes on for years and you discover a disturbing trend. There is a plethora of lawyers (again lawyers are mostly black women now), who are in the fields of family law, and divorce law... but very few in criminal law, and corporate law.
In addition, lawyers are a dime a dozen in urban areas.. particularly in large ones... but there is a dearth of lawyers in rural areas.


What would you do? Would you continue to only admit black women to your law class..knowing full well that good male and white candidates were being pushed out?
Please answer.

 

[TurtleDude]

Stop prevaricating. And answer the question. Your failure to answer is why you fail.

Affirmative action does not directly benefit me or mine. At all.
It benefits our society however.

Again:

Let's say you offered a law class for prospective law students..and you went to the schools and had them submit prospective students based on their performance on an exam you design.
And you find all you get are black students and all women.
No men..no whites no Asians etc..
And you try to figure out why..year after year you only get black women in your class ..
And you discover that the school teachers are discouraging men from taking the test.
That some teachers are taking the black women aside and using the answer key and are giving them extra tutoring to do well on the test. The schools as an institution are purposely having black women an advantage in taking your test..( unbeknownst to the students of course..they just work hard)

This goes on for years and you discover a disturbing trend. There is a plethora of lawyers (again lawyers are mostly black women now), who are in the fields of family law, and divorce law... but very few in criminal law, and corporate law.
In addition, lawyers are a dime a dozen in urban areas.. particularly in large ones... but there is a dearth of lawyers in rural areas.


What would you do? Would you continue to only admit black women to your law class..knowing full well that good male and white candidates were being pushed out?
Please answer.

how does it benefit society to allocate top educations on those who are not the top academic talent? how is society better off having a black lawyer who went to Yale Law instead of a better qualified Asian or White lawyer?

 

[LessBiased?]

how does it benefit society to allocate top educations on those who are not the top academic talent? how is society better off having a black lawyer who went to Yale Law instead of a better qualified Asian or White lawyer?

I wouldn’t agree that elite schools all provide a top education. Their graduates tend to do better because they were stronger students to begin with. A study looking at students with equally strong qualifications, some who attended elite universities and others who attended state universities, found that both groups did equally well in their careers.

Main value of attending an elite university is for bragging rights and opening doors to further attendance of elite universities and for academic careers.

In the real world, what matters is how well someone can do their job. I hired someone with degrees from Hopkins, and he turned out to be a dummy and a cheat (white guy from an affluent family). I hired someone with strong grades from a no-name university, and he’s one of my best and brightest.

 

[TurtleDude]

I wouldn’t agree that elite schools all provide a top education. Their graduates tend to do better because they were stronger students to begin with. A study looking at students with equally strong qualifications, some who attended elite universities and others who attended state universities, found that both groups did equally well in their careers.

Main value of attending an elite university is for bragging rights and opening doors to further attendance of elite universities and for academic careers.

In the real world, what matters is how well someone can do their job. I hired someone with degrees from Hopkins, and he turned out to be a dummy and a cheat (white guy from an affluent family). I hired someone with strong grades from a no-name university, and he’s one of my best and brightest.

that's a fair evaluation. And as a retired trial attorney, I can tell you that some really good trial attorneys attended night school or community law schools and some bad ones were Harvard Law Review. the main value of top law degrees is going to the really big bucks firms or getting a professorship. which leads to questions why do we need affirmative action at top law schools

 

[LessBiased?]

that's a fair evaluation. And as a retired trial attorney, I can tell you that some really good trial attorneys attended night school or community law schools and some bad ones were Harvard Law Review. the main value of top law degrees is going to the really big bucks firms or getting a professorship. which leads to questions why do we need affirmative action at top law schools

Yes, it only strengthens the argument that AA makes no sense for private elite institutions. If there's going to be any AA at all for college admissions, it should be for public colleges and universities which are subsidized by tax dollars.

 

[jaeger19]

how does it benefit society to allocate top educations on those who are not the top academic talent? how is society better off having a black lawyer who went to Yale Law instead of a better qualified Asian or White lawyer?

Lets see. Do you think your personal background and experiences at all influence the way you ask questions, the rapport you have with a client, how you view a case?
Do you think that a client may answer differently or open up more or be more conservative with their answers depending on whether their cultural background is similar to their lawyers?

 

[jaeger19]

Yes, it only strengthens the argument that AA makes no sense for private elite institutions. If there's going to be any AA at all for college admissions, it should be for public colleges and universities which are subsidized by tax dollars.

You realize that the private elite institutions are the ones that are CHOOSING to do this practice right?

 

[TurtleDude]

Lets see. Do you think your personal background and experiences at all influence the way you ask questions, the rapport you have with a client, how you view a case?
Do you think that a client may answer differently or open up more or be more conservative with their answers depending on whether their cultural background is similar to their lawyers?

you miss the point.

 

[LessBiased?]

You realize that the private elite institutions are the ones that are CHOOSING to do this practice right?

Yes, probably a liberal do-gooder motivation which is good in intention, not so good in its discriminatory results.

 

[jaeger19]

Yes, probably a liberal do-gooder motivation which is good in intention, not so good in its discriminatory results.

Why would you say that.?

Lets take medical schools and medical training. Its well established science that ones culture has different views on health and medicine and on treatments, how the family reacts and takes care of individuals, not to mention language differences.. and that differences in cultures/race between a provider and patients can cause problems. In addition, differences in race and culture can lead to disparity in where providers locate and practice.

Would not a medical school.. whose mission is to produce clinicians that can best serve all patients and communities recognize that diversity in its clinicians is important in how effectively medicine is practiced? in society?

Please explain.

 

[LessBiased?]

Why would you say that.?

Lets take medical schools and medical training. Its well established science that ones culture has different views on health and medicine and on treatments, how the family reacts and takes care of individuals, not to mention language differences.. and that differences in cultures/race between a provider and patients can cause problems. In addition, differences in race and culture can lead to disparity in where providers locate and practice.

Would not a medical school.. whose mission is to produce clinicians that can best serve all patients and communities recognize that diversity in its clinicians is important in how effectively medicine is practiced? in society?

Please explain.

I can see more of an argument for AA for med school and maybe law school (in other words, professional schools) than for undergrad or grad school. But even there, I don't think the bar for admissions should be lowered substantially due to racial preference. There IS a difference in how good doctors and lawyers are, and it DOES correlate with grades, SAT scores, MCAT scores, LSAT scores, etc. That's why people care about those grades and scores.

 

[jaeger19]

I can see more of an argument for AA for med school and maybe law school (in other words, professional schools) than for undergrad or grad school. But even there, I don't think the bar for admissions should be lowered substantially due to racial preference. There IS a difference in how good doctors and lawyers are, and it DOES correlate with grades, SAT scores, MCAT scores, LSAT scores, etc. That's why people care about those grades and scores.

No they don;t.
You know what they call the person who graduates dead last in medical school? Doctor.

I posted this to Turtle but he ignored it. Lets see if you can do better.

Graduation rates 2020 of black students in harvard 97.4%
Graduation rates 2020 of white students in harvard 97.9%

A whopping .5% difference.

Please explain how this is possible considering all the black folks that got into harvard through lower SAT scores.. which according to you.. correlate so well with ability.

Why do you not see a significant difference in graduation rates with white students and black students... if SATs matter and the black students are getting in with substantially sub par SATs?

Please explain.

 

[TurtleDude]

Why would you say that.?

Lets take medical schools and medical training. Its well established science that ones culture has different views on health and medicine and on treatments, how the family reacts and takes care of individuals, not to mention language differences.. and that differences in cultures/race between a provider and patients can cause problems. In addition, differences in race and culture can lead to disparity in where providers locate and practice.

Would not a medical school.. whose mission is to produce clinicians that can best serve all patients and communities recognize that diversity in its clinicians is important in how effectively medicine is practiced? in society?

Please explain.

that is all well and good and can be accomplished by the DO medical schools and community MD schools. Passing over top candidates at the very top schools is stupid

 

[jaeger19]

that is all well and good and can be accomplished by the DO medical schools and community MD schools. Passing over top candidates at the very top schools is stupid

Umm..
Please explain your rationale on how "this can be accomplished with DO medical schools and "community MD schools".

Why should an elite school which has a mission to be a leader in making the medical profession better ignore such a vital part of providing society with clinicians that can handle the needs of society?

Please explain how you are in a position to know whats better for the medical practice than say the Harvard admissions folks that make these decisions.

 

[LessBiased?]

No they don;t.
You know what they call the person who graduates dead last in medical school? Doctor.

I posted this to Turtle but he ignored it. Lets see if you can do better.

Graduation rates 2020 of black students in harvard 97.4%
Graduation rates 2020 of white students in harvard 97.9%

A whopping .5% difference.

Please explain how this is possible considering all the black folks that got into harvard through lower SAT scores.. which according to you.. correlate so well with ability.

Why do you not see a significant difference in graduation rates with white students and black students... if SATs matter and the black students are getting in with substantially sub par SATs?

Please explain.

I agree with TurtleDude's response, and I also don't want the doctor or lawyer who graduated at the bottom of their class, regardless of which school they graduated from, especially if AA might be part of the reason they got in.

Did you know that some people struggle and graduate with close to C average, while other graduate with close to an A average? There's a big difference in how capable those students are and how well, on average, they do in their careers.

You are fast becoming the leading apologist on DP for low standards.

 

[jaeger19]

I agree with TurtleDude's response, and I also don't want the doctor or lawyer who graduated at the bottom of their class, regardless of which school they graduated from, especially if AA might be part of the reason they got in.

Did you know that some people struggle and graduate with close to C average, while other graduate with close to an A average? There's a big difference in how capable those students are and how well, on average, they do in their careers.

You are fast becoming the leading apologist on DP for low standards.

You probably have seen a number of clinicians that have graduated at the bottom of their class. Cripes.. how would you know.?

Yes.. I know exactly that some struggle to graduate. They have to work very hard to get a passing grade.. while others find it really easy to get said passing grade.

Yet both of them will pass the medical exams. and both of them may be fine clinicians. In fact..the student that struggled to graduate may be a MUCH better clinician than the one that graduated in the top of the class. I have had a number of student clinicians where the one that scored the highest grades were not so good.. with patients. No common sense at all. One was UNSAFE.
I had one instance where I was the supervisor and I had a third year.. who missed that a patient was having an obvious acute cardiovascular incident. The patient was short of breath, lips were starting to turn blue, and they were starting to crash and I asked her... "what should we do". And she suggested we "order physical therapy".
I then coded the patient.
I actually fought to have her removed from the program it was that scary. (There were other incidents but not so egregious as those).
Yet she was the top score at an elite medical school.

 

[LessBiased?]

You probably have seen a number of clinicians that have graduated at the bottom of their class. Cripes.. how would you know.?

Yes.. I know exactly that some struggle to graduate. They have to work very hard to get a passing grade.. while others find it really easy to get said passing grade.

Yet both of them will pass the medical exams. and both of them may be fine clinicians. In fact..the student that struggled to graduate may be a MUCH better clinician than the one that graduated in the top of the class. I have had a number of student clinicians where the one that scored the highest grades were not so good.. with patients. No common sense at all. One was UNSAFE.
I had one instance where I was the supervisor and I had a third year.. who missed that a patient was having an obvious acute cardiovascular incident. The patient was short of breath, lips were starting to turn blue, and they were starting to crash and I asked her... "what should we do". And she suggested we "order physical therapy".
I then coded the patient.
I actually fought to have her removed from the program it was that scary. (There were other incidents but not so egregious as those).
Yet she was the top score at an elite medical school.

That's a good anecdote.

My field is engineering, and I've had a couple engineers who were analytically quite smart, but both lacked people skills, and both were overconfident, one of them dangerously so. So yes, people can be 'too smart' in some ways, without having the whole package, which may make them less effective practitioners.

But that doesn't mean you want the people from near the bottom of the class either. I've had a couple of those too, and they were very limited and sloppy. One was fired (black male) because he was dumb and couldn't show up for work on time, and one (black female) implied she was not appreciated because of discrimination, whereas the real problem was that she was the weakest engineer in her group.

Now before you think I'm picking on black people, one of them is pretty good (though somewhat lacking in drive) and another was one of my best (immigrant from Africa).

I'm pretty sure that few or none of my docs were at the bottom of their class.

 

[jaeger19]

That's a good anecdote.

My field is engineering, and I've had a couple engineers who were analytically quite smart, but both lacked people skills, and both were overconfident, one of them dangerously so. So yes, people can be 'too smart' in some ways, without having the whole package, which may make them less effective practitioners.

But that doesn't mean you want the people from near the bottom of the class either. I've had a couple of those too, and they were very limited and sloppy. One was fired (black male) because he was dumb and couldn't show up for work on time, and one (black female) implied she was not appreciated because of discrimination, whereas the real problem was that she was the weakest engineer in her group.

Now before you think I'm picking on black people, one of them is pretty good (though somewhat lacking in drive) and another was one of my best (immigrant from Africa).

I'm pretty sure that few or none of my docs were at the bottom of their class.

Oh boy... you and turtle are why institutional racism continues. You are simply so set in your bias and stereotypes that you cannot even see how illogical your position is. You even contradict yourself. You and turtle have already admitted that those that score high, and graduate top in the class can be poor in the field. And those that scored low..can be excellent.

And now its "but but I don;t want my doc to be the bottom of their class".

Well you need to think about that for a minute. So lets say that my alma mater graduates 120 doctors. All of course pass the medical exam and are licensed.
Now.. you don;t want to have a doctor that graduated in the bottom of their class. SO.. presumably.. you would not want the doctors that graduated 120 to say 101 because thats the bottom of the class. but maybe student 100 to 1 would be fine.

But what if that school had only admitted 100 students.. and they all graduated? Now all of a sudden..
Student 100 is at the bottom of the class. So the SAME doctor..that would have been FINE having... is NOW at the bottom of the class. so NOW you don;t want to have him/her.

but presumably you might now have student at 50.. since they are in the middle of the graduating class. But what if the school had only admitted 50 people? NOW that SAME DOCTOR.. is now at the BOTTOM of the class?

See where your error in logic is?

Turtledude exposed this further. He thought he was supporting his premise.. but he ended up saying that a black student that "rocks the lower quintile" at harvard...

Well if they went to an EASIER school.. they would be at the TOP of their class? ITS THE SAME PERSON WITH THE SAME ABILITIES!!!

At every turn your premise is being proven wrong and illogical.. and yet it persists.