What can we do instead of Affirmative Action?

<p>

This is an excuse that only accounts for some of the difference. Harvard’s legacy admit rate is 30%. Would you say that 30% of all students whose parents had a good college education will be getting in?</p>

<p>

Is like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. It does very little to solve the true problem the human race is facing; poverty. Without scrapping the current system and building it anew, socioeconomic AA will do little good in the big picture; with building a new system, there should be no need for socioeconomic AA, for the very idea of socioeconomic classes is an affront to human rights, dignity, and equality.</p>

<p>

This is true, and probably the best justification. Colleges didn’t make the system in which they need a lot of money to survive, they just have to deal with it.</p>

<p>

Speaking five languages is not a hook. The other two don’t have as big an impact as legacy, unless you’re one of the top athletic picks. But even the athlete gets in on his/her own merit for something.</p>

<p>

How do you lose legacy? Getting your parents to disown you? It is firmly in the “born with it” category.</p>

<p>

Yes it does… that group is “people whose parents went here, who we will admit because we want their money.” That is one group, a group distinguished only by birth, just not a racial group.</p>

<p>

College grads usually aren’t the ones with problems getting their kids into college.</p>

<p>

Which is a good reason for why legacy students shouldn’t even need the boost.</p>