4 ms·

> "The SAT and ACT are a fantastic detector to identify rich and motivated parents who are willing to drop off their kid for 2 years at cramming centers for wee

> "The SAT and ACT are a fantastic detector to identify rich and motivated parents who are willing to drop off their kid for 2 years at cramming centers for weekly tutoring sessions and trial tests... and who are willing to pay thousands for it." It was great for me, as a poor minority who was highly dedicated to education and self-learning. Felt pretty good to do as well or better than the wealthier kids despite not having access to a tenth of resources they did. > "It’s all bullshit." Sure, if you're wealthy, you can find a bullshit way to get your kids into a better school that they deserve. But this changes nothing; the wealthy will find some new way to leverage their wealth to do the same and it will be back to business as usual. Meanwhile, it shafts the poor but hard-working students (including minorities!) who had a (semi-)objective way to show that they had talent and dedication, all in the name of pretend "diversity". That's the real bullshit here.

TomVDB 7y ago
Congratulations on making it in. The problem with these kind of discussions is that you can always find examples where the system worked in ways that favored those who would in general not benefit from it. I think there is no question that rich people on average have a huge leg up compared those who are not. That’s fundamentally broken. The fact that you, as member of the non-rich, were able to use that to your advantage doesn’t change that overall conclusion.
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  > "I think there is no question that rich people on average have a huge leg up compared those who are not. That’s fundamentally broken." We already know that it's fundamentally broken but we also know that this action isn't going to change that. So what exactly are you trying to say here?
  - TomVDB 7y ago
    The way I read it, your initial comment seemed to defend the current system for non-rich people since it allows a few non-rich to take advantage of it (at the expense of other non-rich.)

TomVDB 7y ago

Congratulations on making it in. The problem with these kind of discussions is that you can always find examples where the system worked in ways that favored those who would in general not benefit from it. I think there is no question that rich people on average have a huge leg up compared those who are not. That’s fundamentally broken. The fact that you, as member of the non-rich, were able to use that to your advantage doesn’t change that overall conclusion.

ThrowawayR2 7y ago
> "I think there is no question that rich people on average have a huge leg up compared those who are not. That’s fundamentally broken." We already know that it's fundamentally broken but we also know that this action isn't going to change that. So what exactly are you trying to say here?
- TomVDB 7y ago
  The way I read it, your initial comment seemed to defend the current system for non-rich people since it allows a few non-rich to take advantage of it (at the expense of other non-rich.)