Jump to content

Welcome to Ain't No God
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Using Race as a Tiebreaker

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1
The White Coyote

The White Coyote

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • 3,363 posts
  • LocationThe Great Northwest
Recently, the Seattle school district has once again used race as a tiebreaker for busing students out of their home district to other schools for the purpose of racial integration. Students living within walking distance of their schools are being bussed all over town just to create schools of a "balanced" racial profile. What do you think of this? Is this a good idea?

Personally, I think this is the worst case of racial bigotry that the government has ever sponsored. Fortunately, I don't have any kids in school anymore but if I did and moved into a specific location because I wanted good schools for my kids, then Seattle Schools says my kids are going to be bussed across town so they can equal up the Cherokees in that school, I am going on the warpath. As a citizen I am taxed according to my location and neighborhood. If I accept the fact that my taxes are going to be higher so that my child can be in better schools, then I have agreed to sacrifice that extra $$$ out of my familys budget for that priveledge. Why should I pay higher property taxes and additional school levys so that my child can be bussed to inferior districts just to satisfy some list? This has nothing to do with race. It's social idealism and I HATE idealism. It's fairy tale bullshit and totally unrealistic. I agree that it's not fair that one school has better equipment and buildings and teachers than another, but at the same time, the citizens of that district pay a lot higher taxes for those luxuries and I think you should get what you pay for. I am sorry that the poorer districts have schools that are not as adequate but at the same time, the citizens don't pay the high taxes and again, you get what you pay for. I don't expect my child to get the same quality of education as a private school, but I aint shoveling out the big $$$ it takes to send my kid to private school either.

I just really have a problem with this whole concept of integration. If I wanted my minority child to be integrated into a district just because there are more white folks there, then I would move to that district. But people live where they are comfortable and accepted no matter what flavor they are. Yes some folks have to live in poorer areas but that is the way of it. A choice is a choice and I don't hold to people standing around with their thumb up their ass crying about injustice. I don't care what color religion or race they are. If you look, there are very successful people of all tyoes in the world so that old crap about being held down or being oppressed is all bullshit.

It's more important that a child is raised seeing their folks do the best they can for them, than to have some school district shoving them across town away from their friends and neighbors just to satisfy some bar graph. It is racial profiling to it's highest degree. Am I making sense here?

#2
Ungodly

Ungodly

    Has Equal Rights

  • Administrators
  • 20,712 posts
  • LocationInland Empire, California
It is ridiculous to be bussing children that can walk to school. And if the less successful schools are failing their students because of budget problems, old facilities, or dumbass teachers - then bussing in kids from other neighborhoods obviously is not going to fix that problem.

I'm opposed to racism just as you are, and I'm opposed to using racism to cure racism. If we are saying that the root problem is that too many people of a certain ethnicity live in one area and this drags down the school system, then we are officially endorsing a racist view of that ethnic group.

I think the best way to fix underperforming schools is to use economic incentives to attract and keep good teachers, and to provide the troubled school with the necessary budget to increase counseling, discipline, or whatever else may be lacking.

Besides, there just are not enough Chinese schoolchildren to go around, so we can't rely on an injection of smart kids as our primary solution.

Whether the issue is bussing, funding for extra-curricular activities like sports, or dollars spent per child - I do not think any child should be treated differently because of their majority or minority ethnicity. Each child should be sent to the nearest school in their own municipality, except as may be required if a particular child has special needs.

If there are problems at a particular school those problems should be addressed by changing the nature of the school itself. If the problems are the result of too many poor families in the area served by a school, then the way to fix that is to bring wealth and economic opportunity into those neighborhoods.

Children should not be used as guinea pigs in social experiments.

There might be some legitimacy in government sponsored programs to help poor families find better housing in a new area in order to promote breaking out of the poverty cycle, but this is a far cry from school bussing programs.

#3
Ungodly

Ungodly

    Has Equal Rights

  • Administrators
  • 20,712 posts
  • LocationInland Empire, California
I just saw a news story that seems quite relevant to this thread.  It seems US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy does not favor race-based school bussing.

#4
Seti

Seti

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 122 posts
See, I'm a socialist, and I say move the money not the kids. If schools are failing in one area because they don't have enough income, you need to even out the income a little bit. Children didn't ask to get born to poor (ie un-rich, not inadequate) parents, so why should they have to suffer for it? And if people don't get a decent education, they're likely to grow up to be low-paid or unemployable and hence not to contribute so much to the economy - and to perpetuate the cycle with their own kids.

Maybe in the US it's easier for richer communities to insulate themselves from poor areas - the Yookay is smaller, we can't get away from each other so easily. When you have areas of poverty and lack of opportunity, it breeds all sorts of problems which spill over - crime, drugs, ill-health. So it becomes an issue not only of justice but also enlightened self-interest to share things out a little more fairly.
:farao: 

#5
The White Coyote

The White Coyote

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • 3,363 posts
  • LocationThe Great Northwest
Hmmmmm? When you suggest to even out the money are you suggesting the Robin Hood method, robbing the rich to pay the poor? What about those folks who worked hard and were able to move to more affluent neighborhood, so that their children might have better schools etc. Surely you wouldn't suggest taking their earned apprropriations from them? I too feel the playing field should be more leveled, but not at the expense of those that have worked hard to gain a better situation for their kids. In the US school system each child has a set value to the school district. Each school in that district receives that allocated sum per child. That is the base income of the school. Any extra money is obtained through levys (taxes) and building allocations (taxes) that is how rich schools become richer. It is a fair but uneven system for sure. those folks who put a premium on their kids education cough up the big bucks to assure that education where as folks who don,t have the bucks to begin with aren,t able too. Public education should be equal but no group should have to suffer unequal treatment to gain that equality. That sounds like an oxymoron but hopefully you can see the point I am trying to make.

#6
Ungodly

Ungodly

    Has Equal Rights

  • Administrators
  • 20,712 posts
  • LocationInland Empire, California
I must agree with Seti. I think the entire society benefits when those who are able to do so lend a helping hand to those stuck in a cycle of poverty.

Better educated kids are in a good position to be productive members of society. Productive members of society raise the GNP and build up the economy. Helping to educate kids that are otherwise deprived is not a handout, it is a wise investment in the future. The money that goes to improve skills now will be money that stays in the local economy when there are more skilled workers.

Instead of looking at the short term loss involved in increasing school funding, the midle class should be considering the long term benefits of a better educated populace.  Better education always helps a society. It helps the economy and it helps combat creeping Jeebustarian stupidity.

After all, how many well educated people vote for the Party of Jesus?

#7
Frozenwolf150

Frozenwolf150

    Formerly Silentknight

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDivided States of America
The practice you are referring to is known as "race-baiting", and is just as racist as racial discrimination.  What they are doing only serves to reinforce the idea that people should be treated differently on the basis of ethnicity.

#8
The White Coyote

The White Coyote

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • 3,363 posts
  • LocationThe Great Northwest
I agree with the principal that everyone benefits but at what expense? Is segragating a child because they are white, forcing them into a distant and possibly inferior school the right way to go about this? Isn't that just as racist as doing the same to a minority student? Schools are divided by different districts. While some are poorer than others they are not divided by race. The fact that the poorer districts have a larger population of minority students (Seattle) is a product of the social economy structure. Looking at it purely from a social viewpoint if all the moneys from all the taxes were divided up per student regardless of the area or district, an absolutely level playing field, would that change the forced integration? Would the protesters still be protesting? The idea is to mix up the schools population and diversify. I would agree that it is probably a good idea that all people become aquainted to peoples of all sorts and flavors, but I do not agree to forcing any child out away from his friends and neighborhood solely on the color of his skin and to satisfy some bar graph.

#9
Ungodly

Ungodly

    Has Equal Rights

  • Administrators
  • 20,712 posts
  • LocationInland Empire, California

I agree with the principal that everyone benefits but at what expense? Is segragating a child because they are white, forcing them into a distant and possibly inferior school the right way to go about this?


No.

Isn't that just as racist as doing the same to a minority student? Schools are divided by different districts.


Yes.

The fact that the poorer districts have a larger population of minority students (Seattle) is a product of the social economy structure.


Indeed, and that is the real issue that should be addressed, not where kids of color X go to school.

I would agree that it is probably a good idea that all people become aquainted to peoples of all sorts and flavors, but I do not agree to forcing any child out away from his friends and neighborhood solely on the color of his skin and to satisfy some bar graph.


Right.  I think you and I agree.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users