You can also give resources to those who aren't in privilege so they are able to succeed academically, and don't need to have their admission average artificially lowered.
Giving resources is also a zero-sum game. When you're giving more resources to those that aren't privileged, you are in effect denying those same resources for those that are.
For example, school admissions. We can provide more funding for underperforming schools, but that is also less funding going towards better performing schools. At a certain point you will have to accept that to help the poor it will mean cutting off certain benefits for more well-off. Then the discussion becomes around how much resources should be shifted around.
No. If I can afford to provide my own resources, I’m okay with this. Just like I’m okay paying for social security but not receiving any when I retire. Those that have more resources can afford to take less than those that don’t have enough resources themselves.
What I’m not okay with is adjusting scores and denying opportunity because of economic class warfare.
Those that have more resources have historically spent significant amounts of those resources to ensure that they pay in as little of them to anyone else as possible.
>Punishing those in privilege is how you achieve equality.
Tall poppy syndrome. Destroying things does not create things. You can drop a nuclear bomb on silicon valley and punish lots of privilege. It's not going to achieve any notion of equality.
So if you make $125k/yr and I make $75k/yr, equality can only exist if you give me 25k? Should America all just average our salaries and call it a day?
Do you donate your extra money to charity or do you save some for your future? If you have the privilege of being able to save some money for your future, shame on you! There are people starving and you’re amassing your wealth?
Wow punishing those in privilege creates equality. The logic “progressive” american politics is pursuing is truly scary and broken.
Hating the rich is hate.
If you really loved the poor you would think how to help them lift themselves up. Holding down the top both doesn’t work and is deeply unethical.
College board should provide free tutoring and review classes based of their adversity score instead.
I can’t image this scheme
won’t be challenged in courts. Especially the keeping secret the score, imagine if your credit score was kept secret and this will effect their lives more than credit score.
As I have said in other comments, next we need an Unattractiveness Score as we know physical traits have high correlation and causation to success and wealth, clearly a privilege and creating inequality.
Tax credits for the ugly. Mandatory minor face disfigurement for the overly beautiful or handsome.
Very scary developments. America is under true threat to its future with this politics.
I can kinda see why you say that, my best guess is if I delete references to politics and progressive, american etc, then you might see it as less an issue.
The comment I was replying to was pretty absurd wording of punishments.
Anyway it’s always a little hard to know exactly how to interpret the guidelines as there is quite a bit of subjectivity.
Does anyone honestly believe the only way to provide that advantage is to fake their score? That kind of lazy thinking is what needs an adversity score to be considered good.