Honestly as well meaning affirmative action is meant to be, it's arguably targeting the wrong thing, which rather than admitting based on race, it should be based on class. True diversity comes from people from different lifestyles, regardless of race, instead of all from the elite.
Listen I get it, plucky young upstart, who wants to get into college, that’s the story everyone loves to read about?
But think about the opportunity. Daughter A has everything, comes from a better school, every tutor, every computer, every summer camp, devotes her life to some subject.
Daughter B has nothing, ends up having to work at 15, misses school days because of sick family, doesn’t always have someone to help her with homework and so on.
Daughter A is likely to have higher grades, attendance, performance, ability and skill. More awards, recognition, accomplishments, and potential. She even might be slightly ahead in college courses just arriving at school.
So if you were the schools admission officer in what world do you think B is a better fit than A? A is probably more set on their dream of doing X and has the funds to reach it where B might have to leave school because of a lack of funds or a family obligation. And besides which is more likely to give more money to the school? (As much as they don’t want to say it, come on schools are businesses we know this)
Now I get it, we want B to have an opportunity and a chance, and she should, but rich people already have all the benefits in life, even if you remove their wealth, you literally would have to actively ignore a rich student to place a truly poor student above them. But when you take away all the other accomplishments, you likely won’t harm our A student , but you’ll harm versions of B who has gotten awards, recognition, accomplishments, did well on SAT, and so on
Let’s change it then, we want to only take in students who fit X or Y criteria. Maybe go to an inner city school, maybe X amount of community service, maybe has a hard luck story. The thing is… with in a full cycle (3-4 years). We’ll start seeing the rich students move towards those groups. Now B might not be in an inner city school but Daughter A would suddenly be there if that’s what it would take. She will still get tutored so she’s not as harmed by it, but she can also satisfy those requirements because her parents have enough money to make it happen.
The point I’m making is it’s near impossible to offset “being rich” in any meaningful way that would last long enough to be worth it. What you’d end up hammering is the Upper middle class who has just enough money to be seen as rich, but not enough money to truly use it the way the “True rich” does.
You raise some valid problems (that the rich have advantages throughout their lifes long before the college admission phase) but come to the right conclusion.
The way to fix it is that everyone, no matter their social status, should have the same opportunities. So go to any school they want, no need to work, making tutors affordable to everyone,…
This requires a massive reform of the economic system though.
So you want to make it so if you ever save up wealth you can never transfer it to another human, ever, aside from giving it to the government which is run by humans to hand out to other humans outside of your control?
I don’t see any other possible solution that will not create a level playing field for others. I think it would have to go a lot further to fix the ‘problem’ you describe. No one could hold any position of authority since after all humans are corrupt and it will be abused to create scenarios where someone gets an unfair advantage.
When you keep going down this path as a thought experiment there’s basically no semblance of human society that would work. Separate children at birth from their parents and randomize who raises who - congratulations, randomized genetic diversity gets more or less opportunity at random. That doesn’t really work either though, since factors outside of your control determine your fate and opportunities. There’s no winning. It’s a zero sum problem.
I thought it was nigh impossible to trademark a letter?
I saw a tweet from the founder of xe.com who literally used the same logo in the 90s and he discussed the challenges in globally trademarking a single letter.
Both aspects were giant cans of worms for El Musky.
I thought you couldn’t take a trademark that already exists. At least in my country when I applied my trademark I had to use a portal to check it didn’t exist and the service writes that they check too. Not sure about that but at least it’s supposed to be checked and blocked if already taken.
From the article, it seems like the largest problem was dumping of wastewater overflow that was beyond processing plants’ capacities. As part of this push to clean up the Seine (as part of a PR for the upcoming Olympics), they’ve built a large reservoir to temporarily store waste water overflow until things level off and the treatment plants can treat the water normally.
It sounds like a great step forwards in infrastructural improvements that will make a huge difference to the ongoing cleanliness of the water. I share many of your feelings, having seen the Seine myself a few years ago, but this article genuinely makes me feel hopeful
Could be lead/other heavy metals or asbestos which are both common in older plumbing. Oil could be possible as well as other bacterias simply due to poor treatment.
Last week Country Music Television, which initially aired the video, pulled it from rotation. But after Aldean defended the music video by stating that “there isn’t a single video clip that isn’t real news footage,” Stark said it was easy to prove him wrong
In a TikTok video that’s gotten at least 1.5 million views, Stark found that two of the clips in the video came from stock footage. One showed a woman flipping off police at at labor day event in Germany and another was a commercial stock clip of a molotov cocktail.
Lying about it and then getting caught.
Stark shared screenshots with NBC News of hateful messages she’s received since posting her videos about Aldean’s song, which included racist slurs, fatphobic remarks and death threats.
That's a very bias comment, there are hateful people on both sides. And calling a whole group of people terrorists isn't going to do anything but divide people more.
The public actions taken by right-wing activists include showing up a events heavily armed, attempting to abduct politicians, and militia-style parading
Last I checked only one side wrote a super racist song about killing the other side of they “come to our small town and try that”.
I don’t see left wing terror attacks in this country do you? Because I see a lot of right wing ones, at pride, at power stations, at events with people reading books to children…
You have an incredibly stupid take and the “it will only divide us further” narrative is just pleading with one side to accept the terrorism of the other as not to make it worse. It’s like saying that the abused in an abusive relationship is also at fault, “They are both good people, she just makes him so mad sometimes that he hits her, she should stop making him mad” .
Also love that this is your only comment on lemmy….
I had to look that up because I wasn’t sure what you’re talking about. I agree, that was a shitty thing Kathy Griffin did in 2017. She shouldn’t have done that.
Still doesn’t change the fact that the republican president literally attempted to overturn a free and fair election via a violent insurrection. Still doesn’t change that republican politicians and pundits use violent rhetoric while attempting to take away human rights from everyone who isn’t a wealthy white male.
And tens of thousands of people looted and burned down businesses and vehicles and several people died across the country when some cops killed a guy outside a convenience store.
Those people weren’t trying to overturn a “free and fair” election. They were trying to overturn an election they believed to be fraudulent. Now I don’t think it was fraudulent, but also you and everyone else are intentionally misrepresenting the situation. And I would hope you would do the same if you believed that to be true.
It’s really not at this point. And claiming both sides are hateful is completely disingenuous at this point. One side is making death threats, talking about holy wars against Jews and intimidating the other side. It’s like saying your raving gun toting uncle is the same as his brother who said some bad stuff 20 years ago. Sure what was said 20 years ago is awful, but the other uncle is planning to shoot up a school because it won’t teach kids that slavery was good.
Looks at people on the other side of the divide, ranting about the latest conspiracy theory, very against abortion (to the point of stoning women who want an abortion), saying that slavery was beneficial towards slave's skill sets, wanting to expand child labor because "No oNe Wants to woRk aNYmoRe" (rather than no one paying enough, which seems to be the real reason):
The right wingers and their former president literally attempted a coup. Yes, they are idiots and did a shit job of planning and preparing and trump lost his nerve but they still tried it.
Or they live in a healthier democracy and their right wing isn’t as debased as yours. Not everyone is American and not every conservative party is advocating fascism.
If they don’t understand American politics they shouldn’t be lecturing Americans about it. I don’t go around telling people in other countries what their political parties stand for.
One side is literally trying to erase the rights of people like me and my friends, while the other isn’t. So what I think is that you should shut the fuck up.
Want to know the difference between people who vote Democrat and people who vote Republican? Most people either vote for Republicans or against them. There isn’t a “both sides” it’s “these people scare me because they stand for violence, hate speech, less rights for anyone who isn’t a wealthy white male, and they attempted a literal insurrection when their guy lost an election”
Ayo remind me real quick which political party is forcing women to give birth to babies that won’t live and putting their lives in danger? Also, which one put up barbed wire in a river to try and drown people/children legally seeking asylum? Which political party was it again that had a shit-fit about being “forced” to make a website for gay people and it turned out that never happened but legislature was made anyway because your right to discriminate matters more than treating people like human beings?
If these are the people that you willingly affiliate with then you’re one of them. At least own it.
Yeah that two sides shit isn’t going to fly anymore. There is nothing more to divide. They are literally terrorists at this point and defending it puts you right with them.
The new regulations, which still need to go through a public comment period, would require insurers to study whether their customers have equal access to medical and mental health benefits and to take remedial action, if necessary. The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act requires that insurers provide the same level of coverage for both mental and physical health care — though the administration and advocates argue insurers’ policies restrict patient access.
So? He chose to record it. Pretty sure he understands English at at least a rudimentary level, and the choice of setting for the video was NOT a coincidence. He deserves all the derision he’s getting.
I agree, I’m just a bit baffled as to why he would choose to do this song. I mean, it would be bad enough if he composed it, but to hear it and think “yes, I want to say that” is just beyond understanding for me. It’s almost like setting a trump speech to music. So. Weird.
Recent polling indicates that something like 20% of the country still think the election was stolen, so it’s not that surprising. All that Aldean did was to confirm to the world beyond a shadow of doubt who exactly he is as a person.
But you can “cancel” the Dixie Chicks for criticizing Bush Jr. Weird that that is what contemporary country fans can’t handle and implied threats of violence are just fine.
Small towns do enough to "cancel" themselves lmao. Keep voting for that corporate boot that turns small towns into barren shitholes full of meth and bigotry.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.