[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Black Privilege: Students Get SAT Bonus Points for Being Black or Hispanic – Asians Are Penalized
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201 ... hispanic-asians-are-penalized/
Published: Feb 28, 2015
Author: Jim Hoft
Post Date: 2015-02-28 04:55:57 by out damned spot
Keywords: students, black privilege, SAT
Views: 12189
Comments: 80

A report in the LA Times revealed that blacks and Hispanics get bonus SAT points at elite universities based on their race. Asian students however are penalized 50 points due to their race.

The LA Times reported, via DownTrend:

Lee’s next slide shows three columns of numbers from a Princeton University study that tried to measure how race and ethnicity affect admissions by using SAT scores as a benchmark. It uses the term “bonus” to describe how many extra SAT points an applicant’s race is worth. She points to the first column.

African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says.

She points to the second column.

“Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”

The last column draws gasps.

Asian Americans, Lee says, are penalized by 50 points — in other words, they had to do that much better to win admission.

“Do Asians need higher test scores? Is it harder for Asians to get into college? The answer is yes,” Lee says.

“Zenme keyi,” one mother hisses in Chinese. How can this be possible?

Downtrend also noted that college athletes also receive bonus points during the application process.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 76.

#29. To: out damned spot, *Hypocrisy and Hypocrites* (#0)

African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says.

She points to the second column.

“Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”

The last column draws gasps.

Asian Americans, Lee says, are penalized by 50 points — in other words, they had to do that much better to win admission.

Anybody else notice how it always seems like the people that work the hardest end up being the luckiest and most successful?

I think it must be some sort of conspiracy!

No juz-tize,no peas!

No juz-tize,no peas!

No juz-tize,no peas!

sneakypete  posted on  2015-02-28   12:50:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: sneakypete (#29)

Anybody else notice how it always seems like the people that work the hardest end up being the luckiest and most successful?

I have never observed that to be true.

The people I know who work the hardest are the Hispanic folks who cut the lawns and clean the buildings at night where I work. They have two or three jobs and work like slaves. I do not see them getting much reward.

By contrast, I see people who think they work very hard, but who do not - not relative to the way those service people do - earning in excess of a million a year each.

So no, I've never noticed the phenomenon you've described. I've noticed something altogether different.

Same was true in the Navy. I observed that the people who worked the hardest were the ones that had the shittiest and most menial jobs, and they were paid the least. The officers were paid the most and did not work nearly as hard as many of the enlisted.

It has been my general observation that the people who have the most have overwhelmingly been the sons and daughters, or grandchildren, of people who already had quite a lot. They got good educations, and therefore scored well on standardized tests, went to the right schools, and got high paying jobs. At those jobs, they work like other people in offices do. They don't work as hard as service people. But they get paid a lot more.

So, what I notice is that people who are the highest and the most successful and luckiest tend to have had their luck start with birth, as economic status at birth seems to be, in my experience, the greatest single indicator of economic status throughout life.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-02-28   23:09:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Vicomte13 (#46)

I have never observed that to be true.

Then you don't understand what you see.

The people I know who work the hardest are the Hispanic folks who cut the lawns and clean the buildings at night where I work. They have two or three jobs and work like slaves. I do not see them getting much reward.

Give me a freaking break! Are you really so confused that you think manual laborers are the only people that work hard?

More of your Catholic communist class consciousness at work?

sneakypete  posted on  2015-03-01   5:32:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: sneakypete (#52)

Give me a freaking break! Are you really so confused that you think manual laborers are the only people that work hard?

Manual laborers work much harder than office workers, yes. That is objectively true.

Office workers come in, sit down, read and write, then they go home. They are paid well for this. Their bodies don't hurt at the end of the day unless they abuse them.

Manual laborers are physically tired at the end of the day, often exhausted. They put in many more hours too, in order to earn the basics of living.

So yes, manual laborers do work harder, a lot harder, than office workers. They work longer, and their jobs take more out of them, and they are paid less. That is objective physical reality that has nothing to do with Catholicism.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-01   6:25:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: Vicomte13 (#54)

Manual laborers work much harder than office workers, yes.

You must have lived a sheltered life if you believe that manual laborers are the only ones that work hard.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-03-01   6:32:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: sneakypete (#56)

You must have lived a sheltered life if you believe that manual laborers are the only ones that work hard

You must be willfully blind if you think that manual labor, in multiple jobs at minimum wage, or picking beans, is not harder work than any office work anywhere.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-01   8:14:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#57)

You must have lived a sheltered life if you believe that manual laborers are the only ones that work hard

You must be willfully blind if you think that manual labor, in multiple jobs at minimum wage, or picking beans, is not harder work than any office work anywhere.

As usual vicomte13 continues to talk past the point. I can guarantee you that no manual laborer works harder or longer than my surgeon daughter and most of her peers - and this doesn't include the thousands of hours in medical school in which many rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and years of internship at de facto less than hourly minimum wage.

It is not unusal that she is on her feet in the OR for 4, 6, 8, 10 hours or more at a stretch. And when she's not doing that she has patient follow-up duties, clinical duties, administrative duties all on top of her research projects. How many times do you think she and her peers have accidentially cut themself or other wise been exposed to the blood of a patient during a procedure? Can you possible understand the stress of that on top of the normal pressures of the job has on a person over time?

When a manual laborer's job is done for the day it is done for the day. Laborers do not take work home with them. They do not take continuing professional education courses or training, most by choice but some by certification maintenance requirements.

And I can also guarantee you that few, if any, worked harded than my wife and I at our respective jobs and pursuit of higher educational degrees during the evenings. We sacrificed most of our evenings and even some summers to advance ourself during the first several years of our marraige. We consciously held off on starting a family until we achieved our goals.

Now these are personal decisions and I don't advocate that these are the right decisions for others. But I certainly would have liked the ability to go home after a days week have a few beers, procreate until the cows come home and not give a fig about my children's future, especially if I could pass the bill for doing so onto someone else - like my wife and myself and the rest of the 50% of the schmucks in the U.S. who actually pay Federal income taxes and have to have their kids score a few humdred points more on the SAT test to have an equal shot at admission into an elite university.

SOSO  posted on  2015-03-01   13:43:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: SOSO (#64)

As usual vicomte13 continues to talk past the point.

It's not possible to discuss anything of substance here. It always turns immediately into ad hominem. I'm tired of it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-02   10:24:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#70)

It always turns immediately into ad hominem.

It is not an ad hominem to comment on your actual action. You did talk past the point made to you. To did so by insisting on your narrow definition of work, even after it was pointed out to you. I have observed that you do this quite often. SOrry but that is a fact not an ad hominem. You may recall that I have asked you on more than one occasion for agreement on the definition of terms used in our discussion. There can be no fruitful dialogue on any issue if the sides are talking past each other usiing different means for the same words.

SOSO  posted on  2015-03-02   11:17:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: SOSO (#71)

It is not an ad hominem to comment on your actual action. You did talk past the point made to you. To did so by insisting on your narrow definition of work, even after it was pointed out to you. I have observed that you do this quite often. SOrry but that is a fact not an ad hominem. You may recall that I have asked you on more than one occasion for agreement on the definition of terms used in our discussion. There can be no fruitful dialogue on any issue if the sides are talking past each other usiing different means for the same words.

I agree with you on the need to define terms for there to be any discussion.

However, what was done in this thread, above, was not that. It was ad hominem. There wasn't an effort to define terms, or to find an agreement. What there was was a bald assertion by one party of what a word meant, and then an ad hominem response to my refusal to accept that definition.

And now it looks as though we're going to go spinning down the usual toilet of bickering over who said what. An actual exchange of ideas is no longer possible, because all of the interlocutors, myself included, are surly, pissed off, and not interested in really engaging with the other person at all.

Therefore, it's time to end this conversation. I'm done with it.

Maybe I'll try again on some other thread. Going back and forth over the definition of ad hominem is a stupid way to spend my afternoon, and I'm not going to bother with it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-02   17:21:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Vicomte13 (#72)

And now it looks as though we're going to go spinning down the usual toilet of bickering over who said what.

Not a chance. I will accept your version of events. However I will note that our past exchanges have be hampered by your lack of willingness to come to agreement on definition of words/terms.

SOSO  posted on  2015-03-02   20:04:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: SOSO (#73)

However I will note that our past exchanges have be hampered by your lack of willingness to come to agreement on definition of words/terms.

The definitions of terms are literally everything in most discussions.

We should start anew, clean slate, with a topic of mutual interest and make sure that we work through the terms so that we're on the same page. That could produce fruit.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-03   16:12:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: Vicomte13 (#74)

We should start anew, clean slate, with a topic of mutual interest and make sure that we work through the terms so that we're on the same page. That could produce fruit.

I would also like to try to come to mutual agreement on the topic of work if you are willing. Can we agree that the term work incorporates more than just manual labor to include things such as study, research, planning, concsulting, business and financial management, marketing, sales, campaigning, creative and business writing, honing/expanding professional skills, providing personal services (including medical services), in short anything that someone gets paid to do or does in the pursuit with the expectation of increasing one's income earning capacity and/or opportunities?

SOSO  posted on  2015-03-03   18:20:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: SOSO (#75)

I would also like to try to come to mutual agreement on the topic of work if you are willing. Can we agree that the term work incorporates more than just manual labor to include things such as study, research, planning, concsulting, business and financial management, marketing, sales, campaigning, creative and business writing, honing/expanding professional skills, providing personal services (including medical services), in short anything that someone gets paid to do or does in the pursuit with the expectation of increasing one's income earning capacity and/or opportunities?

Let's work on a definition on which we can agree.

I agree that the term "work" does indeed incorporate more than just manual labor, and includes things such as study, research, planning, consulting, business and financial management, marketing, sales, campaigning, business writing and SOME creative writing, SOME honing and expanding of professional skills, the provision of personal services (including medical services). All of those can things constitute work. I put in qualifiers for creative writing and expanding professional skills because people can also do those things as a hobby, because they enjoy it. Example: I write long essays here (such as this one) - this is not work. Some people love tracking the stock market and love reading about financial instruments. This certainly can give them the edge in the financial marketplace and make them a lot of money, but the fact that one's hobby ends up being lucrative does not convert all of that enjoyment one had into "work". Still, with those special-case caveats, I think your list of things that also comprise "work" is a good one.

However, I think that your shorthand summary "...in short, anything that someone gets paid to do or does in the pursuit with the expectation of increasing one's income earning capacity and/or opportunities" gets some of the way to the definition, but doesn't go far enough.

Example: what slaves do is definitely work, but they do not get paid for it, and there was no real prospect of rising at all. Slaves were not working in the hope of being free someday, maybe. They worked to avoid being beaten right then. Likewise, prisoners on chain gangs or in prison factories certainly work, and often have no choice in the matter. and they may or may not get paid a pittance for it.

A core component of what constitutes WORK is that it should be something that one would not normally do were one NOT compensated for it or otherwise forced to do it (either by slavedrivers or by harsh economic realities). Something that most people find pleasant becomes work - and generally far less pleasant - when one must do it for a living. A good example of this is sex. Recreational or procreational sex is not work, but what prostitutes do is work.

Sitting and idly planning out your perfect house and garden is not work, but the architect who sits and listens to your plans, and then draws them up for you benefit: that IS work, whether he gets paid for it does it as a favor.

Housework is unpaid, but washing clothes and cooking meals is definitely work.

How, then, can we close in on a good definition of "work" that will cover all such cases?

I think the best answer is to accept God's definition of it. Now, to be clear, we're Catholics, so we're not subject to the Law of Moses. That said, the Law of Moses WAS inspired by God, and God defined terms for it. So, although we don't have to keep the Saturday Sabbath and abstain from work on that day, what God defined as "work" that Hebrews had to abstain from IS the divine definition of what constitutes work. I don't think that we can get a better definition of the essence of "work", than those things which God forbade on the Sabbath, under penalty of death.

Now, once again, we don't have to obey the Sabbath law - we don't have to abstain from work on Saturday - but God's definition of what "work" IS, is the best definition.

In looking at this definition, we must look at what God said in Scripture, and NOT at all of the additional bells and whistles that Jewish rabbis added over time in an effort to control their societies through God's law.

So, what did God forbid on the Sabbath? He forbade everybody: men, women, children, slaves and domesticated animals, from being made to work. "Work" means, essentially, any labor or activity under direction. For example, women were "forbidden" from COOKING for their families. Saturday's cooking was to be done on Friday and held over. Lighting a fire, cooking and cleaning: these domestic activities certainly make life pleasant for everybody who partakes of the meals or relaxes, but they are WORK for the woman - and God essentially forbade husbands from making their wives do any of that on the Sabbath, under penalty of DEATH. So, the housekeeping tasks that women have always had to do, unpaid, is WORK under God's definition, and they were not only not to be required to do those things on the Sabbath, but were not PERMITTED to do either.

The lack of permission is, similarly important. Because if people are "allowed" to work on the rest day, some ambitious ones WILL work instead of taking the rest, and thereby have one-seventh more produce (such as spun cloth) than those who take the rest. This constitutes a real, unfair economic advantage to those who break the Sabbath over those who obeyed it. God's solution: DEATH to anybody who broke the Sabbath by working. DEATH. Not a fine. DEATH. Working - to get an advantage when everybody else was obeying God and not working - was a heinous crime equivalent to murder: the death penalty was the result. Otherwise, people would break the Sabbath, get an advantage, and move ahead. But God thought that the rest, for everybody, was important enough that he imposed the death penalty on those ambitious people who chose to work instead.

Case in point: gathering wood. Gathering wood is work. Men did it to light fires for cooking, perhaps for a little bit of heat. If you look at weather patterns in the Sinai desert, on winter nights it can get down into the high 50s (I just looked it up), which is chilly, but which can easily be warded off with a wool sweater or blanket. After God had ordained the Sabbath rule, he was displeased that people broke it. He prescribed death for it. He told the Israelites to not even light a fire. (To be clear: they were in the Sinai in their tents when he said this, and the Promised Land of the Jews was Israel, not Norway - this commandment not to light a fire was not a commandment to freeze to death in Norway. It was not a commandment to the world. It was a commandment to Hebrews in the desert. But it does show what God considers WORK.)

The purpose of a fire was cooking or labor. The Sinai desert in spring is not a place where Bedouins require fire heat for survival, ever.

So, a guy went out and gathered firewood on the Sabbath. Why would he do that? In part, to light a fire: "Cook my meal, woman!" No fire is necessary for heat to live in the Sinai. Fire was used to cook - which is work. Fire was used for smithing and for tanning and other labors. Men did not light fire for the sake of fire. So, the gathering of the wood was going out and doing work to accumulate the necessary materials to do more prohibited work. Further, the Israelis were living in a large camp. During the regular six days, they all needed firewood. There is only so much of it, and men needed to range far afield from the camp to get it. That takes time and energy - that can't be spent doing some other activity. And moreover, when they all go out, there is less wood per person, forcing them to go out further. So, a man going out to gather firewood on the Sabbath is working, and by his working doing that on that day, he was buying time for himself to do more gainful activity on the other 6 days, when men who obeyed the law and kept the Sabbath would have had to go and gather the wood. And he was avoiding the mass competition for wood. He had the pickings, out there alone. If the whole camp were looking, he would have to work harder to get the wood, to go farther.

To our way of thinking, the man who took his day off to go and get an advantage on his competitors was smart. He was the one who should win the game. God had him put to death. Because to God, obedience to the commandments, including the commandment to take a day of complete rest, was more important than permitting some single man or men to get ahead of their peers. The "profit" gained by the stolen work was illegitimate profit, and what is more, if allowed to stand it would establish the principle that getting ahead by disregarding God's commandments was alright, that practical realities of profit trumped commandments of holiness, that holiness was "optional", but economic activity was the real key.

God disagrees. He had the woodgatherer put to death.

The man who put his animals to work on the Sabbath, or who forced his slaves to do anything, was also a Sabbath-breaker, subject to being put to death.

Jesus made it clear that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath: to pull an animal out of a ditch, or to heal. However, to heal professionally for money: THAT is work, and prohibited on the Sabbath.

Note also that the Levites and Kohanites were active on the Sabbath, performing the various sacrifices. That was work, but it was permitted specifically by God.

With those details in mind, I think we can see a clearer outline of what "work" is. Animal labor for human masters is work. Housekeeping and cooking is work. Gathering wood and going about the business of provisioning is work. Anything at all that is commercial is work. Medicine is work (free miracle isn't). Religious rites are work - they were specifically exempted from the ban. What slaves have to do is work.

So, here is the definition of "work" that I use, and that I would ask you to consider using as well.

WORK (generally): mental or physical effort to achieve an economic purpose.

WORK (in Physics): the product of force times distance (e.g.: "foot-pounds")

So, for example, if you paint landscapes for pleasure on your time off, that's not "work" if you are not thinking that somebody, someday, might see your painting and pay for it. But it is work if you're preparing to hang it in a gallery for sale.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-03-05   9:48:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 76.

#77. To: Vicomte13 (#76)

However, I think that your shorthand summary "...in short, anything that someone gets paid to do or does in the pursuit with the expectation of increasing one's income earning capacity and/or opportunities" gets some of the way to the definition, but doesn't go far enough.

Example: what slaves do is definitely work, but they do not get paid for it, and there was no real prospect of rising at all. Slaves were not working in the hope of being free someday, maybe. They worked to avoid being beaten right then. Likewise, prisoners on chain gangs or in prison factories certainly work, and often have no choice in the matter. and they may or may not get paid a pittance for it.

For the purposes of our discussion let's change the definition to read "...anything voluntary that someone does in exchange for pay (in whatever form agreed upon) or does primarily in pursuit of the expectation of increasing one's income earning capacity and/or opportunities". This will keep the focus on what precipiated our exchanges to begin with, namely your contention that no-one works harder than those engaged in manual labor at more than one job.

This revised definition eliminates slave labor, involuntary servitude, and prison labor from the discussion. This definition also excludes things like housework around one's home, mowing ones lawn, work associate with hobbies, or any activity that is not done primarily for payment or the expectation of improving one's future income. However, if you wish to tweak the definition of pay to include these creature comfort, personal nicities and grooming type benefits derived by such activitis I would not object.

It does however include work that results in payment in the form of acquiring the necessities of life and the provision of creature comforts, such as felling trees to build a house, digging a latrine, chopping wood for fuel, hunting and/or trapping for one's food and clothing, farming and/or ranching for one's food, fetching water for one's survival and necessary conveniences, and the like. Those these may be necessities the choice on how one goes about obtaining them is for most people voluntary (I acknowledge that there may be exceptions in the remote areas of the world where there may not be any viable options other than to do the type of work to survive oneself or as a family effort- but these are clearly exceptions).

Let's leave out the Old Testament from consideration as it really is irrelevant to the discussion. One easy work around for a Jew in your examples of work that is prohibited on the Sabbeth is to pay a non-Jew to do the work for you on that particular day or have a neighbor voluntarily do the work for you. I did exactly the latter when I was a kid. I lived on a street that had a shul right smack in the middle of the block near the sewer cover we usually used as home plate for punch ball and stick ball. Every Friday at dusk the Rabbi would come out and ask one of the Catholic kids playing in the street to turn on the lights of the shul for him and such other prohibited things. We gladly obliged him. He appreciated that and didn't forget us when there were celebrations involving the passing out candy or apples to the children of his flock - he made sure that we goyim got a piece.

SOSO  posted on  2015-03-05 12:11:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 76.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com