• frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yesterday they made higher education less accessible to non-whites, today they made it harder for the poor…

    I wonder if there’s a pattern here.

    • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, higher education is now less accessible to non-whites. Which is good, because affirmative action was never a fair solution to the issue and was simply unfair in principle imo. We shouldn’t raise the eligibility of people based on their race, college admissions and race should have nothing to do with one another. Class-based affirmative action actually makes sense instead of deciding off race.

      • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree with you in theory, but striking down AA without a better solution in place is bad. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

        • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fair enough, I agree that in reality removing AA and not implementing a better system in it’s place will only lead to worse outcomes.

      • planetexpress@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your whole argument could have been just that last sentence and I’d bet you’d have significantly less downvotes.

        Although I’m disappointed by the courts decision I do believe class basis is a better measuring stick for AA. That said, I think there would be a pretty close correlation between the people who benefit now and the people who would benefit if the system was based on socioeconomic class.

        • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wholeheartedly agree that minorities are often at a disadvantage in our society, and that there is a correlation between race and socioeconomic status in the USA. I think that if true equality is to be achieved, we need to stop separating people (at least in important processes like legal proceedings, college admissions, etc.) by their race at all. It sets a bad precedent, and I hope for a future where no race has any connotation with any socioeconomic class.

          • planetexpress@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I appreciate your thoughtful response and for taking the time to write it.

            I don’t fully share your optimism, but it’s great this conversation didn’t devolve into a shouting match just because we are at odds.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We have class based affirmative action. Rich people buy their kids into school all the time.

      • withdrawn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, higher education is now less accessible to non-whites. Which is good,

        Jesus H. Christ. Either stop being a racist or learn to organize your thoughts.

        • whatsarefoogee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You literally cut his quote in the middle of the sentence. He says its good specifically because it was not a result of fair treatment, right after you cut him off.

          The world is upside down when you can someone saying “it’s unfair to judge people by race” a racist.

          • withdrawn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think you can call someone saying “it’s unfair to judge people by race” a racist when they’re using that line to applaud the removal of protections against institutional racism. We can argue the merits of AA as a form of protection, but it was protection nonetheless. To say that it was unfair is to entirely ignore the unfairness which necessitated its existence.

          • withdrawn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            How was it not? How is non-whites having less access good?

            You follow what I quoted by claiming it wasn’t fair (“imo”) because, as you say, “we shouldn’t raise the eligibility of people based on their race” which is great if you ignore the fact that nearly every institution in the US treats people differently based on race, whether intentional or not. It is exceedingly rare for that bias to swing in the favor of non-whites.

            With no meaningful alternative to AA, what exacxtly is the win here?

            • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Non-whites having less access is good in this context, because they were being unfairly given an advantage before. I agree with your premise about bias, but why should the solution to that be to artificially inflate the people being discriminated against, instead of trying to provide a system that doesn’t have room for discrimination?

              Class based alternative action, along with anonymizing applicant details pertinent to their race is a meaningful alternative to AA.

              • withdrawn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I agree on the last point, but there isn’t a class based system in place, nor is there a plan to implement one (that I can find).

                That, I shall continue to argue, makes this very not good.

                • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I agree with no proper replacement this will overall have a negative effect. I think the method race-based AA uses was very flawed.

    • mcc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why does this make it harder for the poor to access higher education? A debt forgiveness will make current debtors less burdened but will probably make it more expensive for new applicants. Isn’t it the other way around?

      • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        Relieving debt for the poor would allow them to spend their money on other things, or save it. Best case scenario, they’re able to support their kids’ educations and help break the generational cycle of poverty.

      • FinnFooted@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly, this decision wouldn’t probably impact future college attendees. But, there are other changes coming to federal borrowing that likely will. Income based repayment is being restructured and it’s looking pretty good.

        However, this will probably hurt the economy. A lot of people are about to hit repayment at a period of high inflation. It’s not a great economy. And, if a lot of people decide to ignore their student loan bills a la 2008 financial crisis, were in for a global economic doozy.

        • fuser@quex.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          The US has historically low unemployment, but real wages have stagnated for more than 50 years.

          The economy is actually pretty great – for those at the top. Not so much for those doing the real work:

          unemployment chart

          real wages chart

        • eric5949@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It will impact future college attendees insofar as being more poor impacts your chances of going to college. It won’t directly impact future college attendees, but there is a knock on effect which will to some extent.

      • Matt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Chances are loan forgiveness would push a conversation regarding tuition fees in general, and would ultimately make university free / affordable instead.

        Maybe.

          • pinwurm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, around 20 states right now offer free community college if you’re a resident through first/last dollar programs. Meaning, they will cover the costs after any other financial aid. Other qualifications vary.

            Some States schools offer debt relief if you hold a regional residency for X-years (usually 5) after graduation. So for example, if there’s an area of a State that needs more investment (like Upstate NY versus Downstate), these programs are designed to increase GDP and strengthen the talent pool.

            Of course, you can get a tuition waiver in like half the states if you’re over 60. 🙄

            I’m not saying any of this is ideal by any stretch if the imagination. Just saying there’s some headway here and there in terms of precedent for tuition-free college education.

        • hellskis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Support for Biden’s student loan cancellation is for most a political calculation, where people who would be for more robust measures to make college affordable support it as a partial measure, a step in the right direction. A common right wing tactic is to stymie left wing political priorities to the point where asking questions like this seems reasonable, even though the asker is often being disingenuous and would be against any affordable college plan that increased government spending or in which the government played an otherwise larger role. If this commenter wasn’t being disingenuous, they had the unfortunate plight of absorbing a lot of built-up frustration over this tactic haha