However, my main issue with AA or any similar system which determines entry in whole or in part on race is that it doesn't really address the issue.
The issue is that some people don't have the same opportunity access that others do - due to financial situation, location, and (possibly?) race/sex, in descending order of affect.
If you grant one of these disadvantaged persons entry into a position they would otherwise not get, due to their background, you had better provide remedial/catch up training.
Better IMO to eliminate the disadvantage entirely.
This is one reason that I am vehemently opposed to property taxes for school funding, not to mention property taxes in general. Actually, any location/area-based funding for education, unless it is a large area (like a state, or even a country).
Some of the disparity in education quality can be assigned to environment (family situation, location, financial situation, etc.), and some to low-quality school staff (both teachers and administrators), yet in the end if the money is not there, the quality will not be there either.
So I think that one way to address the disparity would be to fund public schools differently.
Actually, are public schools always funded via property taxes? I know they are in PA...
Damn I went a bit off track there...sorry, pet topic.
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
you think affirmative action was designed to allow blacks with 4.0 and a 99th percentile LSAT to get into Michigan law school ahead of a white guy with a 3.7 and a 95th percentile?
in reality its about blacks with inferior credentials jumping over whites an asians with superior credentials
In 1981, the top black accepted into yale law school had lower scores than over 2000 white males who were turned down
are you trying to divert from the FACT that AA means blacks with inferior numbers are getting into schools or jobs ahead of whites/Asians with better scores