General discussion

Locked

Support Racism. Now and forever?

By jdclyde ·
Sunday, 4/30/2006, at Cobo Hall in Detroit Michigan, was held the 51st annual "Fight for Freedom".

The topic this year was to organize because "we are under attack in Michigan", said the Rev. Wendell Anthony, president of the Detroit branch of the NAACP.

There is a ballot inititative for Novermber in Michgan that will make it illegal to use race for admissions to a college or employment. (known as reverse discrimination)

It has been argued and asked, "how long" should there be affirmative action? Is this really the lifting up of people that had been "held down" till there is a level playing field, or is this a permenate intitlement?

Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick - "We ill affirm to the world that affirmative action will be here today, it will be here tomorrow and there will be affirmative action in the state forever."

Is it really any wonder that Michigan has higher unemployment than the national average?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

93 total posts (Page 1 of 10)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

yes

by Dr Dij In reply to Support Racism. Now and ...

affirmative action IS racism.

get over the victim thing. get over the congresswoman psycho who tries to walk past security and wonders why she is stopped, possible a staged event to claim racism. My ancestors never had slaves. This was generations ago. Strive to be better. Get more education. Save your money. Prove to your self and society you are better and you wont need to rant about affirmative action.

Collapse -

Race? Who cares?

by Peter Warren In reply to Support Racism. Now and ...

--Is it really any wonder that Michigan has higher unemployment than the national average?--

Don't overlook the US auto industry dinosaur.

Race is a touchy subject isn't it? Is there a level playing field in the US? Has there been historic repression and discrimination against non-white people? Do we owe anything to the descendents of millions of African slaves?

The evolution of a multi-racial, color blind society will be slow and not without pain. However, there is no other civilized choice.

I know that as a determinant factor in predicting human behavior, skin color is trivial. Therefore, race is a meaningless concept and all race discrimination is pointless and a waste of time and resources. For my money, education through the university level should be provided, as a matter of course, to all children. How else can we expect to thrive in this technological, global economy? For those who qualify academically, I also call for post graduate study at public expense. It?s time to get serious about educating all children because without equal access to education, America as we know it is doomed.

Collapse -

universal post secondary education

by JamesRL In reply to Race? Who cares?

I'm not so sure....

While I think we should make it easy/easier for those who qualify to get higher education (and I think that would go a long way to level the playing field), I'm not so sure free is a good thing.

What you don't want is a lot of students who are really motivated to be there clogging up the class rooms and adding to the workloads of the professors.

If you pay for something, you find the value in it. If you want to institute interest free loans, payable like a mortgage over 25 years, go ahead I would support that. That way people who go to more expensive schools and get nicer resumes pay more in the end. And people who take advantage of education have a strong potential to make more money and pay more taxes, so it is fair that they pay.

It was interesting that in Canada they appointed a former NDP (socialist) premier to do a study on education funding, and he recommended tuition fee hikes, but better loans, instead what many people expected, free tuition.

Not everyone will take full advantage of a post secondary education, and it should go to those who are motivated to be there, otherwise we mess it up for those that want to be there.

James

Collapse -

Here in Australia we used to have a system

by Deadly Ernest In reply to universal post secondary ...

where by the govt gave university scholarships to people with high marks. Businesses also gave millions in scholarships to unis for students, some based on marks, some based on involvement with the student - Internship programs and the like. People could also go to uni if they paid the full fees. the unis were full and had lots of money.

Then a Labour govt changed the system to have the federal govt paying the unis for every student who wanted to go to uni being able to go to uni - some subjects had minimum mark levels for entrance but you could go and study something even if you all but failed. Because of this the govt cut back on the allowance for corporate tax deductions for uni scholarships. This eventually lead to the unis getting less money while trying to teach more students. Later the Labour felderal govt had a big conference about the relevance and suitability of the entire education system. Recommendations for big changes in tertiary education came out of this - the biggest shock for the academics was the concept of competency based training where by the examines had to be totally objective and set standard levels for each subject etc. The unis did not want to do this as it took away a large amount of the professorial power over students amongst other things. So the govt linked tertiary funding levels to number of students in a subject AND the level to which that subject taught at that school was based on the new requirements. It took many years for the unis to eat up all the fat they had but eventually their budgets started hurting and they started complying.

The biggest problems that were noticed with the conversion from the simple scholarship / fee system to the govt funding system was the increased administration and paperwork, the added difficulty of NOT getting the money at the start of the semester, and the rate of first year drop outs quintupled in two years as people who were not able to self study went to uni and dropped out at the very first make or break exam in their educational experience - first year finals.

All this has meant increased educational costs, reduced quality of education provided due to stretched budgets, and a lower percentage of high school graduates finishing university.

So free tertiary education is not working here and I doubt it will work anywhere.

Collapse -

"free" college doesn't work well in most cases

by jdclyde In reply to Here in Australia we used ...

When something is just given away, it is seen as having little value.

I am currently going back to school for an additional degree, and I can within the first week of class tell the students that are working to pay their way vs getting a free ride from the government or mom/dad in the way they perform in the class.

The free riders are lucky to show up, don't do the assignments, and complain if class runs the full length.

A the end of class, they act surprised that the "jerk teacher" gave them a bad grade.

someone slap these people for me, please?

Collapse -

The Canadian System

by JamesRL In reply to Here in Australia we used ...

In Canada, tuition for a Bachelors is highly subsidized (about 2/3 of the cost) for Canadian citizens, but the fees are set by the university, and more popular/challenging universities set higher fees, so there is some level of market force at work. Foreign students pay full cost.

When I went to university, there were student loans and grants available to students who were accepted, based on need - parental income etc. Since then the costs have gone up and most of the grants have dissapeared.

Masters degrees - you pay the full cost. As it should be....

One of the best ways of organizing it in Canada are co-op degrees. In a co-op program, instead of school for 8 months and work for 4, you enrol in a program of 6 months in school and 6 months in a co-op job related to your degree where your work performance becomes part of your overall marks. You get paid a decent amount and that can usually mean few if any loans. And at the end of the day you have both a degree and some good experience. One of the companies I worked for hired lots of them, and many ended up being hired full time when they completed their degree. The co-op programs are very competitive to get into, especially computer science at Waterloo, as Microsoft does a lot of recruiting from there.

I'd have no problems with making loans easier, and maybe bringing back more grants but I would not favour throwing the doors open wide and making it free for everyone.

James

Collapse -

Michigan does the same

by jdclyde In reply to The Canadian System

for all State Colleges.

you only pay 1/3 of the costs.

Because the government has been so gleefully throwing so much money their way, the costs of tuition in Michigan have been about triple what inflation is EVERY YEAR.

When people pay for it themselves, all of a sudden it DOES matter how much this costs. until then, they cut state funding for our schools and then blame Bush for it. (federal funding for education is high, not low under Bush).

Collapse -

If you could determine who

by TonytheTiger In reply to universal post secondary ...

were both qualified, and motivated, then free wouldn't be a bad idea. Or at least interest free loans.

It would likely more than be paid back by the extra taxes the graduate would pay in over their career.

Collapse -

That would mean

by oneamazingwriter In reply to Race? Who cares?

That someone who lacked intellectual expertise would be paying taxes to increase the financial security of someone who was book smart.

No thanks. Secondary education needs to be optional and worked for if it's going to be of any use. Book bright without any hands on experience of life and struggle makes for spoiled rotten people.

What we work to achieve we appreciate more fully.

Edit:jardinier has pointed out that the word POST needs to be placed before secondary education for this reply to mean what I meant. I stand corrected.

Collapse -

One amazing blunder

by jardinier In reply to That would mean

The posts on which you are commenting refer to POST Secondary Education, that is Tertiary education.

Quite a different ball game.

In Australia our former Federal Minister for Education and Science, Dr Brendan Nelson, as a yes-man to very-right-wing Prime Minister John Howard, caused a ruckus by suggesting that additional university places should be made available to certain students who (that is their families presumably) could pay the fees up front.

I don't recall whether this was enacted into legislation, but it would mean that students with a lower secondary school score would be allocated places that should have been available on academic merit.

Back to Community Forum
93 total posts (Page 1 of 10)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Forums