4 ms·

While this is very true, you cannot force all parents to become crackheads, so you will always have different outcomes. We have the same problem with wealth in

While this is very true, you cannot force all parents to become crackheads, so you will always have different outcomes. We have the same problem with wealth in that regard. You can only improve education in a way that is offers support for people in difficult homes. Perhaps their difficult childhood will ultimately hinder them from becoming the best. But then perhaps their children will fare better.

bradlys 5y ago
This is why we can do things to make up for the fact that society has failed these children. If you make it so that only “merit” is considered - you’re only gonna get rich kids. (And I see this already through SV - it’s nothing but rich or well educated parents for the children here) What is the argument against letting children who have had a rough lot in their life get a slight lessening of their handicap when applying for colleges or other life changing scenarios that could pull them out of their rut for future generations? If you don’t and are unwilling to address the root cause (and we aren’t willing to address that in the US - we don’t even have universal healthcare yet guys) then you’re gonna keep having this shit continue.
- notSupplied 5y ago
  The merit-based school such as Styuvesant in NYC and Lowell in SF are both filled with rather poor Asian kids. The demographic profile of these two schools are substantially lower income than the very expensive cities they reside in. Edit: Got the names of the schools wrong.
  - bradlys 5y ago
    You know that isn't an argument against what I said, right? Like, at all. It completely supports what I said.
    - fallingknife 5y ago
      You said: > If you make it so that only “merit” is considered - you’re only gonna get rich kids. He said: > The merit-based school such as Styuvesant in NYC and Lowell in SF are both filled with rather poor Asian kids. > The demographic profile of these two schools are substantially lower income than the very expensive cities they reside in. It couldn't possibly be further from supporting what you said.
      - bradlys 5y ago
        Since people here are often ESL. I'll put it this way: "English is a rich language." Please try to think about how the context of what I said could be interpreted. If you take literally everything at face value - you're truly not thinking critically about anything.
        shard 5y ago
        Not sure why you keep arguing against yourself. Many immigrant Asian families have households which are not English-fluent.
    - lelanthran 5y ago
      > You know that isn't an argument against what I said, right? Like, at all. It completely supports what I said. It's literally the opposite of what you said, unless you suddenly changed your mind and agree that the merit-based schools are the best option for poor kids.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  Agreed that there is a need of support system. Disagreed on making the denominator racial, religious or cultural. That is particularly evading the root causes in my opinion.
shadowgovt 5y ago
You can't force parents to do anything, but you can structure public policy to include recognition that some people get benefits of circumstance others don't. As analogy: we won't (and we shouldn't) stop billionaires from making money as fast as they (legally) can, but we can sure as hell tax them proportional to their success at it.

bradlys 5y ago

This is why we can do things to make up for the fact that society has failed these children. If you make it so that only “merit” is considered - you’re only gonna get rich kids. (And I see this already through SV - it’s nothing but rich or well educated parents for the children here) What is the argument against letting children who have had a rough lot in their life get a slight lessening of their handicap when applying for colleges or other life changing scenarios that could pull them out of their rut for future generations? If you don’t and are unwilling to address the root cause (and we aren’t willing to address that in the US - we don’t even have universal healthcare yet guys) then you’re gonna keep having this shit continue.

notSupplied 5y ago
The merit-based school such as Styuvesant in NYC and Lowell in SF are both filled with rather poor Asian kids. The demographic profile of these two schools are substantially lower income than the very expensive cities they reside in. Edit: Got the names of the schools wrong.
- bradlys 5y ago
  You know that isn't an argument against what I said, right? Like, at all. It completely supports what I said.
  - fallingknife 5y ago
    You said: > If you make it so that only “merit” is considered - you’re only gonna get rich kids. He said: > The merit-based school such as Styuvesant in NYC and Lowell in SF are both filled with rather poor Asian kids. > The demographic profile of these two schools are substantially lower income than the very expensive cities they reside in. It couldn't possibly be further from supporting what you said.
    - bradlys 5y ago
      Since people here are often ESL. I'll put it this way: "English is a rich language." Please try to think about how the context of what I said could be interpreted. If you take literally everything at face value - you're truly not thinking critically about anything.
      - shard 5y ago
        Not sure why you keep arguing against yourself. Many immigrant Asian families have households which are not English-fluent.
  - lelanthran 5y ago
    > You know that isn't an argument against what I said, right? Like, at all. It completely supports what I said. It's literally the opposite of what you said, unless you suddenly changed your mind and agree that the merit-based schools are the best option for poor kids.
raxxorrax 5y ago
Agreed that there is a need of support system. Disagreed on making the denominator racial, religious or cultural. That is particularly evading the root causes in my opinion.

shadowgovt 5y ago

You can't force parents to do anything, but you can structure public policy to include recognition that some people get benefits of circumstance others don't. As analogy: we won't (and we shouldn't) stop billionaires from making money as fast as they (legally) can, but we can sure as hell tax them proportional to their success at it.