Outrageous Discrimination in NYC

Anyone can succeed if they choose to succeed. The problem is we fill the so-called "underprivileged" with excuses rather than opportunities. No wonder so many fail. The are told from birth that if they are poor, or black, or Native American, or whatever, that they cannot make it. Why try?

The first thing that has to change is the attitude. You, and you alone are responsible for where you are in life. You can grow up believing the excuses, and blame the system for your failure, or you can decide that despite the obstacles, you will get where you want to be.

Yes, it may be easier for some than others, but it is impossible for nobody.

"Whatever the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve!" - Napoleon Hill Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yes, one has to get past the excuses and work hard. But not everyone gets to win. If everyone could succeed, each hospital would have 5000 doctors and no janitors. Somebody gets the short end of the stick, and it is not always a lack of effort or will.

But not everyone gets to win. Somebody gets the short end of the stick, and it is not always a lack of effort or will. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

winning is usually its one of three things, exclusive of being born rich

1. talent and applying the talent
2. not so much talent but a conscientious attitude
3. luck

Most Ivy Leaguers who enroll can't seem to flunk out! All you have to do is get in and you have it made! http://www.usnews.com/education/best...etention-rates Colleges With the Highest Freshman Retention Rates At two Ivy League schools, nearly 100 percent of first-year students returned for their second year.
So they can let in anybody and they will succeed. It is just a political spoils system. I'm surprised everyone thinks so highly of a college that everyone who shows up passes. Originally Posted by BJerk

You're an idiot. But we knew that already.

The Ivy leagues schools (and the near Ivies like MIT and Stanford) have high pass rates because the students admitted are already the best and brightest. The weeding out is done before they get in the door. They don't take applicants from average public schools unless those students have near perfect SAT scores and take advanced classes.

If you change that to admit unqualified applicants because of racial quotas, then the elite status of those schools will evaporate. Maybe not overnight, but soon enough.

The businesses that hire Ivy grads will stop doing so automatically and the "political spoils" system as you call it will cease to exist, but will be replaced by some other system that selects the best and brightest. And the unqualified minority quota hires will be right back where they started.

Also, despite what you think, the high pass rates do NOT mean the Ivy League schools are easy schools. They have high pass rates because the students really are that smart.

That is one reason why all of their sports teams suck. They cannot admit semi-literate jocks into the schools - they would all fail out.

So, if you admitted a bunch of less qualified minorities, the failure rate would be much higher - because most of those minorities would be failing out.

Is that your objective?

They made the numbers far worse, but we already know you people prefer them over us, because they are obsequious. Originally Posted by BJerk

Or maybe "WE" prefer "THEM" over "YOU" because they pass all the scholastic tests with no excuses.

Just saying.

You're an idiot. But we knew that already.

The Ivy leagues schools (and the near Ivies like MIT and Stanford) have high pass rates because the students admitted are already the best and brightest. The weeding out is done before they get in the door. They don't take applicants from average public schools unless those students have near perfect SAT scores and take advanced classes.

If you change that to admit unqualified applicants because of racial quotas, then the elite status of those schools will evaporate. Maybe not overnight, but soon enough.

Like Affirmative Action.

The businesses that hire Ivy grads will stop doing so automatically and the "political spoils" system as you call it will cease to exist, but will be replaced by some other system that selects the best and brightest. And the unqualified minority quota hires will be right back where they started.

Also, despite what you think, the high pass rates do NOT mean the Ivy League schools are easy schools. They have high pass rates because the students really are that smart.

not even their rich ass daddies can keep them in these schools if they don't make grades, even if they build them a new Library. and by the way it's that way at any good University, as it should be.

That is one reason why all of their sports teams suck. They cannot admit semi-literate jocks into the schools - they would all fail out.

LOL. but the chess team would be undefeated!

So, if you admitted a bunch of less qualified minorities, the failure rate would be much higher - because most of those minorities would be failing out.

Is that your objective?

Apparently so. Originally Posted by ExNYer

There's a reason why Jetho Bodine could only be a Brain Surgeon .. on TV. or a double knot spy, whatever that is.


Interestingly, Max Baer Jr is quite well educated and extremely successful in the real world.

his estimated net worth is 50 Million dollars.


How much is Max Baer Jr worth?

$50 Million

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/ric...-jr-net-worth/



Baer earned a bachelor's degree in business administration from Santa Clara University, with a minor in philosophy.

Jethro Bodine, philosopher. Who knew?

It's 'double naught spy'.

winning is usually its one of three things, exclusive of being born rich
[snip]
3. luck Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

I can't find the quote on the Web, and most of my library is boxed up at the moment.

In "Have Space Suit-Will Travel", Heinlein opined that luck was what happened when proper preparation met statistical inevitability. The example was that it was not luck when a batter hit a ball. Rather, sooner or later, the pitcher was going to put the ball somewhere that it could be hit, and the batter was expected to have practiced recognizing such opportunities and hitting them.

The idea was that, if you were prepared to take advantage of an opportunity when it came along, you would sooner or later get that opportunity.

I found my career one summer, when my Dad was doing refresher work while unemployed, and I tagged along because I was interested in the subject. I didn't know it at the time, but the CS Department and the Computation Center *LOVED* to see young people taking an interest in computing, and they very quietly did everything they could to encourage it. Call it luck if you like.

On second thought, I really do not give a flying fuck about your disappointment.

You're an idiot. But we knew that already.

The Ivy leagues schools (and the near Ivies like MIT and Stanford) have high pass rates because the students admitted are already the best and brightest. The weeding out is done before they get in the door. They don't take applicants from average public schools unless those students have near perfect SAT scores and take advanced classes.

If you change that to admit unqualified applicants because of racial quotas, then the elite status of those schools will evaporate. Maybe not overnight, but soon enough.

The businesses that hire Ivy grads will stop doing so automatically and the "political spoils" system as you call it will cease to exist, but will be replaced by some other system that selects the best and brightest. And the unqualified minority quota hires will be right back where they started.

Also, despite what you think, the high pass rates do NOT mean the Ivy League schools are easy schools. They have high pass rates because the students really are that smart.

That is one reason why all of their sports teams suck. They cannot admit semi-literate jocks into the schools - they would all fail out.

So, if you admitted a bunch of less qualified minorities, the failure rate would be much higher - because most of those minorities would be failing out.

Is that your objective? Originally Posted by ExNYer

My objective is that more minorities get into the Ivy League schools. They won't flunk out, because the Ivies don't flunk people out. To do so would be to admit they let the wrong people in, and they are too proud for that. The only thing difficult about the Ivies is getting in, because once you are in you and everyone else has a vested interest in perpetuating the myth.

Yes, one has to get past the excuses and work hard. But not everyone gets to win. If everyone could succeed, each hospital would have 5000 doctors and no janitors. Somebody gets the short end of the stick, and it is not always a lack of effort or will. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

You're buying into the excuse.

My objective is that more minorities get into the Ivy League schools. They won't flunk out, because the Ivies don't flunk people out. To do so would be to admit they let the wrong people in, and they are too proud for that. The only thing difficult about the Ivies is getting in, because once you are in you and everyone else has a vested interest in perpetuating the myth. Originally Posted by BJerk

More bullshit.

The Ivy League schools DO flunk people out, just not at a high rate. And that is because the admitted students are the top 1%.

So, the Ivies never have to admit they let the "wrong students" in. "Pride" has nothing to do with it. Where did you get such a bullshit idea?

And, contrary to what you keep saying, the Ivies DO flunk people out, just not a big percentage.

And there is a certain advantage to failing out at least some students. It keeps the other students on their toes and it signals to society - especially employers - that the school maintains high standards.

A 100% pass rate would undermine the creditability of any institution.

And when you state that "the only thing difficult about the Ivies is getting in" while simultaneously insisting that Bronx Science and Stuyvesant lower their test standards to make it easier for unqualified people to get into the Ivies, do you NOT see the contradiction?

The only reason to want to go to the Ivies is because they are elite schools that are difficult to get into. Once you make them easy to get into, their reputation will fall and they will be no more desirable to attend than TCU, A&M, or UT. At which point, there will be no advantage to attending the Ivies and no reason for government or employers to favor the graduates of Ivy League schools.

What is the point in doing that?

You can't have it both ways.

Either you develop and maintain an elite reputation by having high admission standards or you lower your admission standards and lose the elite reputation.

Those are your choices. Minority quotas are not compatible with high admission standards.

More bullshit.

The Ivy League schools DO flunk people out, just not at a high rate. And that is because the admitted students are the top 1%.

So, the Ivies never have to admit they let the "wrong students" in. "Pride" has nothing to do with it. Where did you get such a bullshit idea?

And, contrary to what you keep saying, the Ivies DO flunk people out, just not a big percentage.

And there is a certain advantage to failing out at least some students. It keeps the other students on their toes and it signals to society - especially employers - that the school maintains high standards.

A 100% pass rate would undermine the creditability of any institution.

And when you state that "the only thing difficult about the Ivies is getting in" while simultaneously insisting that Bronx Science and Stuyvesant lower their test standards to make it easier for unqualified people to get into the Ivies, do you NOT see the contradiction?

The only reason to want to go to the Ivies is because they are elite schools that are difficult to get into. Once you make them easy to get into, their reputation will fall and they will be no more desirable to attend than TCU, A&M, or UT. At which point, there will be no advantage to attending the Ivies and no reason for government or employers to favor the graduates of Ivy League schools.

What is the point in doing that?

You can't have it both ways.

Either you develop and maintain an elite reputation by having high admission standards or you lower your admission standards and lose the elite reputation.

Those are your choices. Minority quotas are not compatible with high admission standards. Originally Posted by ExNYer

How do you explain these extremely high Ivy and top school retention rates, which are very close to 100%?
You know they have more affirmative action admission % than that, else they wouldn't be left alone.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandre...-likely-return

How do you explain these extremely high Ivy and top school retention rates, which are very close to 100%? Originally Posted by BJerk

How many times have I already answered this fucking question? Can't you read?

They have a very low fail rate because they admit only the brightest students. These students have already developed good study habits, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

Also, in first year, many classes are mandatory classes, like basic math and English, some basic sciences. Those courses are not as hard as the advanced elective courses they take after they pick a major.

You know they have more affirmative action admission % than that, else they wouldn't be left alone. Originally Posted by BJerk

I have no idea what your point is - assuming there is one. I guess you ddin't have the smarts to make it into the Ivies, huh?

How many times have I already answered this fucking question? Can't you read?

They have a very low fail rate because they admit only the brightest students. These students have already developed good study habits, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

Also, in first year, many classes are mandatory classes, like basic math and English, some basic sciences. Those courses are not as hard as the advanced elective courses they take after they pick a major.


I have no idea what your point is - assuming there is one. I guess you ddin't have the smarts to make it into the Ivies, huh? Originally Posted by ExNYer

You said they would lose credibility with a 100% retention rate - well, I guess 99% is less than that, so that proves everyone of their students are real smart? The fact of the matter, and my point is this: If only 2% flunk out, and greater than 2% are admitted under affirmative action, it proves affirmative action does not cause a greater flunk rate, so more minority students should be admitted to even the score from past discrimination.

BJesus, how will we know when the score is even?