Law School Discussion

AA: More harm than good?

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #40 on: April 03, 2008, 10:39:27 AM »
I'm an Italian-American. My relatives have been/were discriminated against.

Question: Should I get an AA boost?

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #41 on: April 03, 2008, 10:50:06 AM »
I am 1/16 native american would it have been wrong to claim URM

LHL

  • ***
  • 83
  • V
    • View Profile
Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #42 on: April 03, 2008, 10:54:52 AM »
I'm an Italian-American. My relatives have been/were discriminated against.

Question: Should I get an AA boost?

I think a big part of AA includes present disadvantages, not discrimination that your parents/ancestors faced.  I could be wrong though.

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #43 on: April 03, 2008, 11:03:57 AM »
I'm an Italian-American. My relatives have been/were discriminated against.

Question: Should I get an AA boost?

I think a big part of AA includes present disadvantages, not discrimination that your parents/ancestors faced.  I could be wrong though.

You are right. But how are admissions committees able to judge who is encountering present disadvantages based off checking a box on the application?

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #44 on: April 03, 2008, 11:31:23 AM »
Clearly they are not mutually exclusive, but the point is that a wealthy URM certainly isn't disadvantaged in this process, at least to the extent that it would merit being advantaged over a disadvantaged ORM. If a socio economic system ends up being mainly race based than that is fine, but it seems that poor ORMs are getting the short end of the stick. Obviously there isnt the same history that URMs have, but that would explain why a socio economic system would help the latter group more so than the former.

Ghost

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #45 on: April 03, 2008, 11:34:35 AM »
I think you underestimate the relative "boosts" poor ORM's and rich URM's get.

At any rate, we are all just speculating just how prevalent and significant AA is in each individual admissions office. Most of you are basing it off of an LSN profile, many of which are flame anyway.

But it feels so good to harp on about this injustice, doesn't it?

Ghost

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #46 on: April 03, 2008, 11:43:18 AM »
Just visiting some old haunts...

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #47 on: April 03, 2008, 12:01:57 PM »
Ahh, the best way to offset one's own pure speculation is to accuse the other of pure speculation. Great argumentative style!

Ghost

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #48 on: April 03, 2008, 12:06:53 PM »
Ahh, the best way to offset one's own pure speculation is to accuse the other of pure speculation. Great argumentative style!

Ah, more empty rhetoric!

Have any proof? Anything substantive that you're relying upon?

Re: AA: More harm than good?
« Reply #49 on: April 03, 2008, 12:36:53 PM »
Whoa, you keep repeating what I say, and then trying to turn the tables. That doesnt work. I'll rewind here so you can understand what the issue is. 

The point was acknowledge that a wealthy URM has an advantage over a disadvantaged ORM. The gap between these two groups is irrelevant; if there is one, why should it exist, since clearly the wealthy URM will have an advantage already by their wealth, and hence why should an AA policy further increase that? You present a hypothetical exception, or make claims about flaming. There has been a reasoned debate until you entered with the rhetoric, and frankly that doesn't it (either here or in law school, as you probably should know). Feel free to respond to the issues, rather than just spewing whatever you feel like.

Also for the record, I am fairly neutral with regard to AA, so there is no need for you to just spew venom at someone you think is not going to listen.