Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

themessenger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 585 posts

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#331

Post by snotrockets »

slashdev wrote: post #123
pessimizer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affirmative action shouldn't ever have been a contest with prizes for the most unfortunate. It was sold as a way to fix the wrongs of slavery. Having been enslaved legally in the US is not a race, it's an atrocity. The reason we should be paying for foster kids' college is because the state is their parent, so it's our responsibility. In a country that wasn't shit, regular people would be jealous of how kids who were…

Do reparations for slavery even make logical sense? Please cut me some slack here, by the nature of the world we live in, I have not uttered these thoughts to another human being, and they might have obvious flaws. It's tough when you can't talk about ideas out of fear of the consequences. I think nobody argues that it's a vile, morally repugnant thing to enslave another human being. But that was a long time ago, and…

> The descendants of those slaves are now much wealthier and better off by pretty much any metric than their relatives who were not enslaved

This is such a loud dog whistle, even deaf dogs can hear it.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#332

Post by l33t233372 »

slashdev wrote: post #257
nomat wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the numbers tell a convincing story. The median net worth of Americans in 2019 was $121,760. In 2019, the median net worth of white Americans was $189,100. The median net worth of Black Americans was $24,100 I forget how to link on hn but it's from the motley fool.

Yes, that is true (I don't know about the exact numbers, but there's no question there's a difference.) Asian Americans are even better off, but why should they have to pay for reparations? Their ancestors weren't involved in slavery in the US. Hispanic Americans are also pretty poor (more so than African-Americas if memory serves), but they weren't disadvantaged by slavery, should they have to chip in for reparation…

I agree exactly. And what about people who’s families moved here in the last 140 years. They surely didn’t own slaves.

And who even gets reparations? If someone’s great great great grandmother was a black slave but every other relative was white, does this person get reparations?

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#333

Post by xmddmx »

hotpotamus wrote: post #34
Waterluvian wrote: post #12

64% of foster youth graduating high school is far far higher than I thought it would be. I’m beyond delighted by this. And if that 64% has free access to post-secondary… that’s a cycle breaking opportunity.

I wonder how many non-foster kids graduate high school?

The question to ask is "how many kids graduate high school vs. how many should".

Turns out the answer is interesting - about 50 years ago, the graduation rate for high school was around 50%. These days it's much higher (90% or more in some areas).

Does this mean the children is learning? Perhaps.

It also may represent a failure of our systems - in the past, not everyone needed a high school degree to be a functional member of society, and forcing those people to "graduate" may in fact be a net loss to society.

In other countries, this is explicit: people are tracked to "educational" vs. "vocational" career tracks earlier, and there is not the emphasis on graduation rates as a metric.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#334

Post by tomcam »

pessimizer wrote: post #21
getmeinrn wrote: post #13

This is what affirmative action should be... helping people out based on their individual situation, not because their skin color or gender.

Affirmative action shouldn't ever have been a contest with prizes for the most unfortunate. It was sold as a way to fix the wrongs of slavery. Having been enslaved legally in the US is not a race, it's an atrocity. The reason we should be paying for foster kids' college is because the state is their parent, so it's our responsibility. In a country that wasn't shit, regular people would be jealous of how kids who were…

One of the basic principles in Western law, stretching back 700 years or so, is that prosecuting people not involved in a crime is unacceptable. The slaves and the enslaved are long dead. No one has legally owned slaves for 150+ years.

How do you apportion the taxes? Do new immigrants owe the same as people here generations? Do the descendants of Irish immigrants owe the same as descendants of slave owners? What about the black descendants of black slave owners, of whom there were over a thousand?

And how far does this go back? The Comanches were extremely brutal. They killed and enslaved many people from many tribes, especially the Apache. Should they be responsible for reparations to the Apache and other tribes they crushed?

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#335

Post by snotrockets »

celu wrote: post #225
jmerz wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there's actually a lot of academic debate on the merits of reparations, and exactly what and how much reparations should be. A very oversimplified pro argument: if it wasn't for slavery, these families would have generational wealth and better social situations. African Americans in the US ARE disproportionately lower wealth/income and this has CLEAR historical origins. The oversimplified con argument: Okay, but i…

> A very oversimplified pro argument: if it wasn't for slavery, these families would have generational wealth and better social situations. African Americans in the US ARE disproportionately lower wealth/income and this has CLEAR historical origins. I'm confused by the pro argument. My known lineage was not enslaved, but my grandparents immigrated with 0$, and my family has no generational wealth and we don't receive…

> Isn't being freed from slavery the same as being freshly immigrated with 0$?

The US economy, and hence those immigrants, were better off, because of the gains made from slavery.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#336

Post by WalterBright »

pbjtime wrote: post #163
WalterBright wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's all free, it'll be just like the public school system.

A groundbreaking notion that contributed to America essentially dominating the world? Cool.

Yeah, the one where freshman physics in college blew threw 2 years of daily honors public school physics in 2 weeks. The one where the high school diploma is nigh worthless in the marketplace. The one where the students have no skin in the game and disrupt the classes and assault the teachers.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#337

Post by 999900000999 »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #275
soared wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Middle class families can pay for school: In 2019-20 in state tuition and fees in California averaged $9k. 100% of which you can take a federal loan and payback Rent/living cost is another matter, but tuition can be still be reasonable if you state in state and don’t attend expense universities. But I totally agree - there is a lower/lower middle class of people that attending college is vet challenging and free tuit…

UCLA's web site says an in-state student can expect to pay $34,667 per year for tuition, room, board and health insurance. If your parents earn $150k/year in California, their after-tax income will be about $100k/year.

Even if you live at home and stay on your parents plan in state tuition is 14k. Add another 2k for books and at a minimum your talking 16k. That's a pretty big chunk if your only at 150k for a family of 4.

If I was to propose something I'd make in state tuition fully free for residents, and if that cost too much maybe make people do the first 2 years at a community college. Honestly I credit community college with turning my life around. I ended up graduating from a state school and I'm very happy with my degree! It's not in computer science, but after a very long journey I feel it's something to be proud of.

The best part about college is your free to take time off and finish later.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#338

Post by confidantlake »

pessimizer wrote: post #60
torstenvl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a taxpayer who funds public schools, I find it acceptable to subsidize the food of those who are struggling, but I do not have any desire to subsidize the ruling elite (who, in many cases, intentionally keep working class pay low). They can pay for their own children's food.

You shouldn't be a sucker. For the ruling elite, it's an insignificant tax rebate. The overhead of a means-testing system to make sure that people who have been taxed for 50 free lunches don't get one is a waste that wouldn't be tolerated, except for the fact that we know the hurdles of bureaucracy will eliminate most of the people who qualify, bringing down costs by leaving children hungry. edit: The idea that your…

If you have kids yes. If you don't then you could still being paying for some rich kid's food. Still I would have no problem with this since the alternative is to means test which is just wasteful bureaucracy. Plus I am perfectly willing to subsidize the one rich kid so the 10 poor ones can eat.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#339

Post by tadfisher »

slashdev wrote: post #257
nomat wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the numbers tell a convincing story. The median net worth of Americans in 2019 was $121,760. In 2019, the median net worth of white Americans was $189,100. The median net worth of Black Americans was $24,100 I forget how to link on hn but it's from the motley fool.

Yes, that is true (I don't know about the exact numbers, but there's no question there's a difference.) Asian Americans are even better off, but why should they have to pay for reparations? Their ancestors weren't involved in slavery in the US. Hispanic Americans are also pretty poor (more so than African-Americas if memory serves), but they weren't disadvantaged by slavery, should they have to chip in for reparation…

Honestly, who gives a shit? We are a society, not a bunch of White people and Asian people and Black people and Hispanic people. A functioning society would work to fix those numbers, because it's absolutely a problem that needs to be fixed, not a punishment for being a member of a "successful" ethnicity.

Re: All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free

#340

Post by johnnyanmac »

lolinder wrote: post #282
johnnyanmac wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a hard question to answer because the two are entertwined. Hence the term socio-economics. Poverty is disproportionately in minorities' court due to historical discrimination based on skin color. That doesn't mean that there aren't poor white people. But it does mean that actions targeting minorities end up overlapping a lot with poverty. The main reason it's relatively easy to target skin color is, well, visual…

> actions targeting minorities end up overlapping a lot with poverty Yes, but they also have a false positive rate (rich minorities) and a false negative rate (poor white people) that is much higher than a properly administered means test. Given this, and given how controversial race-based affirmative action is, it's worth questioning whether attempting to sort based on race as a sort of shortcut to sorting based on…

> If we could implement a race-blind affirmative action program that got bipartisan support, could we not solve poverty faster than if we continue to alienate one side by insisting on excluding poor white people?

The issue is that it's hard to make something "race blind". Not without essentially making a lottery system in the process with how little data you're given. The moment you give high school data, you give approximate data on your area, which means your area's demographic and economonics. If we could have a world where standardize grades and national test scores it may be possible to pull it off (btw: national test scores also correlate with income levels, especially since they cost money/time to take and can be taken multiple times. IQ tests have also shown their bias). But as is it is a utopic dream.

>Why should a goal of an affirmative action system be to be able to make the accept/reject call based on a quick glance at the applicant's photo?

It's not just a photo. your race is considered a public statistic. You can opt to say "prefer not to answer" but I imagine 95%+ of applicants to report it.

It's the exact opposite of finances, and it's not as easy to grab that data even as a public institution. I don't think submissions offices even get that data to consider. Should they get that data? I don't know. I think we can imagine a dozen ways that can help and also be a complete catastrophe. That's a much larger topic of discussion.

Post reply on HN