Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

PhillyB

let's have a calm, rational discussion about scholarships for minorities

95 posts in this topic

is the intent of scholarships to reward people for hard work or to provide opportunities for people and lift society at large?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Providing opportunites for people and lifting society at large doesn't have to be race-based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Providing opportunites for people and lifting society at large doesn't have to be race-based.

i didn't say it did... I was curious what people thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be based on the household income, not the color of the skin. Individuals are programmed to think someone is black when they hear "underprivileged". There are more whites living in poverty in the south than any other based on the population percentages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope but it should be need based.

This is just another way that republicans want to keep the income gap growing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i didn't say it did... I was curious what people thought.

Well the answer is yes.

There still can be scholarships that do that in addition to inticing the best/brightest to their university.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer using the term "targeted scholarships" myself. Doesn't necessarily have to be race based but it has some criteria other than just academics. And in the interest of disclosure, I went to college on a full ride academic scholarship (tuition, room and board, book allowance) and my family couldn't have paid for it otherwise.

Reality: When the scholarship comes from a public university (which means it's coming from the government) adding race as a criteria is going to mean issues. You're always going to wind up with a case where someone's kid meets all the criteria except race, and that's a bad spot. And there's the rightful argument that you don't become "color blind" by considering color.

Money that comes from the university/government should be portioned by as objective a set of criteria as possible. If you're going to consider anything at all in the demographics, the one that'll get the least argument is income. Though there'll be some with issues there too, scholarships based on income are the easiest sell.

(I'm honestly not a big fan of giving scholarship advantages to in-state kids over out-of-state either, though I get why it's done)

But if you still wanna keep some targeted scholarships - and I'd be fine, with that, would encourage it, honestly - maybe the thing to do is privatize them.

There are plenty of businesses, foundations, endowments, and other entities who sponsor educational grants and such. If you want to have scholarships and such that are targeted to race, gender, religion, or whatever, have them be sponsored by private entities. The selection process can still be administered by the school, but the money can be paid and the criteria set by the entity that's sponsoring it.

When the funding comes from a private source, you lessen the "challengability" because a private entity can do whatever it wants with it's money. Government could even encourage this sort of thing by offering tax breaks, though to avoid issues, the tax breaks shouldn't have particular criteria attached (puts you back to square one). Could people still boycott or sue those entities? Yeah, but again, since they're private entities, who's to tell them how they can spend their money?

So in the end, my best suggestion for continuing to offer targeted scholarships would be to privatize them, thus taking the focus off the government but still allowing the school to benefit and administer. Issues to be worked out? Sure, as there are with anything, but I think it could work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so is eliminating this scholarship a victory for anyone? is this truly a step towards a colorblind future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope but it should be need based.

This is just another way that republicans want to keep the income gap growing

Andrew Luck didn't need that scholarship money, his Dad is a pretty well to do fella.

What the fug does family income have to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how those opposed to minority scholarships are taking an incredibly socialistic view of the distribution of scholarship money by suggesting that the correct thing to do would be centralize the money and redistribute it to eliminate any "unfair advantages"

Where as the truth is, Scholarships are primarily from private firms, organizations or colleges. There is no central fund for scholarship money and while it is regulated it does not exclude people from contributing money to whatever their heart desires. The government does participate in minority scholarships but has not done so by eliminating any other scholarship they already have. Meaning there is no disadvantage. Not everyone is going to qualify for the children of farm workers scholarship, but you cant get mad unless that scholarship is actually going to replace one you would otherwise get.

The introduction of minority scholarships did not eliminate other scholarships. Meaning that there is generally the same amount of merit-based or non minority scholarships as there was before its introduction. So this is a moot point. Seriously, what is the problem. You want to eliminate a scholarship because you dont quailfy? There should be no say so by any non-contributor about where the money is going, until the introduction of one scholarship means that another one can no longer exist. All scholarships are inherently biased and the people who win them likely had some advantage over their competition.

Academic scholarships are predominately won by a certain demographic, Minority scholarships have their own demographic, as does union scholarships, athletic scholarships, needs based, religious etc... Literally dozens of categories and THOUSANDS of scholarships.

It truly is a sad and pathetic individual that is so jealous and hateful they they feel that they need to remove a scholarship from the pot as opposed to adding another one.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • elton simpson was monitored over a 9 year period (fbi claims there were breaks but at the least there were still years of monitoring) and at least $132,000 in cash was spent on one informant alone. here's the fbi's version in the immediate aftermath of the shooting:   Three hours before gunmen attacked an anti-Prophet Muhammad event in Garland, Texas on Sunday, the FBI sent a bulletin to local police with a photo of one of the shooters, Elton Simpson, noting that he was "interested in the event," FBI director James Comey said. At the time, the FBI had no reason to believe that Simpson intended to attack the event, Comey told reporters Thursday. Nor did the agency know that Simpson was already on his way there. Comey also said that he does not believe that the police officer who shot Simpson and the second gunman, Soofi Nadir, was aware of the bulletin. He went on to say that while the investigation of the Phoenix gunmen is far from complete, Comey believes the FBI acted appropriately. ..... Two weeks before the Garland event, which invited artists to draw illustrations of Muhammad, the FBI and Homeland Security warned law enforcement agencies across the country that it was at risk of being targeted by Islamic extremists. The advisory noted that supporters of ISIS and other terror groups had posted links to the contest on Twitter. Simpson was reading those posts, and communicated with an American in Somalia who'd called for attacking the event, investigators have said. The FBI then developed information that Simpson might be interested in traveling to Garland, Comey said. The Sunday bulletin followed. ..... The FBI now has hundreds of investigations of potential home grown extremists under way, with cases open in every state. "I know there are other Elton Simpsons out there," Comey said. Finding them, however, is a "very hard task," he said. Investigators can follow messages that are posted on public twitter accounts. But ISIS recruiters are steering people off Twitter into encrypted forums, which the government cannot see, Comey said. "Its the old going-dark problem, in living color," said Comey. He added: "We have hundreds working on it around the clock. But in almost every case of violence, someone saw something. A friend, a family member. Its more important than ever for people to speak up."     ^^^just a reminder for the bolded parts that a federal agent was in the car directly behind them as they opened their doors and began their short lived attack
    • Looks like it has potential. BvS was terrible. I will say the extended version was a better film but still not good. Suicide Squad was one of the worst films I've seen in a while.  That said of course I will waste my money and go see this. I hope they bring back Batman's more cunning qualities in future films. I got the sense that in BvS he was a what you see is what you get type of guy. You don't get the feeling that he has something up his sleeve at all times. Which was something Nolan/Bale had, almost Bond-esque.
    • Saw it the other night and found it surprisingly decent. The acting was pretty damn good for a power rangers movie. Obvious plot holes are obvious and the plot advances before it's ready at times but it's not a bad movie. I thought the suits were cool but the zords looked terrible and the megazord was hideous. Would have been better off copying the original one tit for tat.