5 ms·
It's not an anger at helping others catch up, but an anger at pulling people back. We can help people who are behind without sacrificing the people who are alre
by brankoB 7y ago
It's not an anger at helping others catch up, but an anger at pulling people back. We can help people who are behind without sacrificing the people who are already ahead.
- berbec 7y agoIsn't it both? There are only X spots per school. Every person being helped up and admitted is someone being pulled back and denied. I have no opinion on this debate, but school admissions are a zero-sum-game, afaik.
- brankoB 7y agoIn terms of school admissions I would agree. In terms of society in general however i'm not entirely convinced that it's a zero sum game.
- Dylan16807 7y agoOh in terms of something like money, taking X dollars from the richest and using it to help the poorest is extremely positive sum. This might be true for college admissions too, if you're flush with opportunities you're still ahead if you lose one. But there's still an aspect of "pulling people back". It's a hard tradeoff to design. But if you do it right you really can make something with better outcomes and more fairness, even if some will call it an abomination.
- CydeWeys 7y agoColleges aren't a zero sum game. The more qualified college goers there are over time, the more total college spots will be available. It's not like the number of universities (and the size of each) is some fixed constant. The entire pie can be, and is, grown.
- enraged_camel 7y ago>>We can help people who are behind without sacrificing the people who are already ahead. Again, the problem is you are viewing the world through a certain lens, where people are "ahead" or "behind".
- brankoB 7y agoOh I see now, I totally misinterpreted your comment, sorry.