Your kid's SAT score depends on your income and where you live

[WeToddDid2]

The data disagrees with you. So much so it seriously cast doubt on your alleged "rags to riches" story you are setting up to tell.

Even among the upper cohorts of the middle class mobility is very limited. Your relative success is probably woefully average when taken at the population level. You could argue some of the population statistics are a result of financial literacy but you have to also understand the systems put in place to keep people more broke than they should. To name a few: credit cards, bank loans, social media influencer selling, movies, television, etc. Before you claim "well those people are just stupid" again, the data disagrees. Careless spending is actually highest among the upper quartile of IQ contrary to popular belief. Even if you do make it and are the 99th percentile of your cohort you will, on average, fail to exceed a small multiple of the highest earner in your nuclear family. This is not surprising at all. People who come from wealth get more assistance in generating their own wealth by leveraging their parents. However, people who are given financial assistance (rather than life assistance) tend to do more poorly. This subject is very interesting because it implies that not only generational wealth is the only real wealth, but also the probability of escaping poverty or the middle class without assistance from your family early in life is vanishingly small.

The cases where a person who was broke on the street suddenly making enough money to retire inside of one generation is nearly unheard of. You should listen to The Millionaire Next Door. They expound on the issue of class mobility and how it's not as simple as "I did it, so can you". To make a major class change within one generation is an accomplishment less than 0.5% of Americans can do. Wealth has, and always will be, made generationally. Unfortunately for the progenators of familial wealth, they very rarely get to live long enough to enjoy any of it.

On topic: The SATs biasing their scores based on race and class has always been an unspoken but recognized subject for at least as long as I had been in the University circuit. The only surprising thing here is they are admitting it.

That is the complete opposite of my life experience. My grandfather migrated to this country when he 12 years old. His dad died when he was young and my grandfather was the head of the household. After my great grandfather died, they were homeless and lived on the streets. Women weren't allowed to do much with respect to earning a living where they lived. My grandfather was responsible for his mother and his sisters before he was a teenager. He had no education. After living in the US for years, he eventually spoke very broken English. I won't mention his specific race, but, I have seen many people refer to his race as brown. Despite the fact that he ended up initially living in a super racist town that was 90%+ white, he owned numerous businesses and he was highly successful for most of his life. I think the racism he experienced drove him. He ended up with by far the largest house in town. To this day, it is still the largest house in that city. I think that was his way of saying f off to everyone.

His son or my uncle didn't inherent a dime from my grandfather. My uncle founded and grew a business to the point where he personally was very close to being a billionaire. He spent one semester in college while working to pay for college. I have numerous other examples.

Your comments are completely foreign to me. That is the difference. You think that you can't.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

That's the precise definition of "equality of outcome". Basically, disregarding where everyone starts at and making everyone equally well off. It's the identical concept of saying that we pay everyone the same wage regardless of their skillset. Merit does not count anymore.

Otherwise I agree with you, it is very complex and intertwined.

The heart of the matter is compensation for factors surrounding an outcome that may not always appear to be fair to those involved. Since college admissions are already highly subjective, this is yet another set of parameters factored to admissions. I think your approach of explicitly excluding race and parental income as a factor may be ideal, but as we know, it's a tough and complicated issue.

 

[Diskreet]

That's the precise definition of "equality of outcome". Basically, disregarding where everyone starts at and making everyone equally well off. It's the identical concept of saying that we pay everyone the same wage regardless of their skillset. Merit does not count anymore.

Otherwise I agree with you, it is very complex and intertwined.

Success is a multi-staged process whose "next steps" are highly dependent on previous steps. Of course there are twists and turns and setbacks can be fuel for further success, but I think you get what I'm saying. Think of this as more of a boost to the starting line rather than a final medal given to every competitor. Freshman year in college is just the start, and even then previousexperience with advanced topics through high quality AP courses, inside connections to get internships, etc. play a huge part in subsequent outcomes.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

No, I don't quite get what you are aiming at. Getting a trailer park kid into Harvard does not boost that kid's prospects, neither does getting a kid from the projects into a top school. Either a human is driven or not. Either a young adult is motivated enough to prepare for a standardized test, regardless of environment, or not. Most are not and stay in a similar socioeconomic environment they were born into. Penalizing certain groups for something that they have no control over is highly unfair, undemocratic, and goes against the grain of merit based equality. It's funny how often those on the bottom scream the loudest for higher taxes but when being asked whether they are willing to start first paying higher taxes they say that what they meant was higher taxes for the rich. It's convenient to always burden those others as long as I am not affected.

I came from a very average family background, no advantages, no connections, no network nothing extraordinary. Had 3 part time jobs at the same time during college. I worked hard at everything that came my way and got into a great grad school after which doors opened. Nobody helped me to get there, no connections, no relationships, no adversity scores. Someone who is driven simply works hard and achieves. The fruits of hard labor are guaranteed unless one has mental limitations. No adversity score or scheming or networking will ever change that. If I worked my ass off and would have just made the cut into a great school but instead someone with a lower score (all else equal) took my seat just because he or she came from a poorer background or had that special skin color it would have destroyed my entire belief in the fairness of the system. Different payment for identical work. That is bullshit no matter how some twist and turn their rhetoric.

I volunteered and taught for 3 years at a high school with predominantly black students in an underprivileged neighborhood in a Midwestern city, back in college, nobody there was unable to study hard or prevented from using a textbook and acquire knowledge. A lot of students did not know how to study efficiently and lacked motivation. I showed them how to study efficiently. I tried to motivate them. Some were motivated, many were not. Nobody should be penalized for the lack of motivations in others. I despise all those liberals and those on the left who only do lip service: many just talk loud but actually don't support others in need, they don't donate a sizable portion of their income. They don't attack the root causes. They rather penalize others who do their best because in their limited world view everyone should be born into an equivalent environment.

Success is a multi-staged process whose "next steps" are highly dependent on previous steps. Of course there are twists and turns and setbacks can be fuel for further success, but I think you get what I'm saying. Think of this as more of a boost to the starting line rather than a final medal given to every competitor. Freshman year in college is just the start, and even then previousexperience with advanced topics through high quality AP courses, inside connections to get internships, etc. play a huge part in subsequent outcomes.

 

[Diskreet]

No, I don't quite get what you are aiming at. Getting a trailer park kid into Harvard does not boost that kid's prospects, neither does getting a kid from the projects into a top school. Either a human is driven or not. Either a young adult is motivated enough to prepare for a standardized test, regardless of environment, or not. Most are not and stay in a similar socioeconomic environment they were born into. Penalizing certain groups for something that they have no control over is highly unfair, undemocratic, and goes against the grain of merit based equality. It's funny how often those on the bottom scream the loudest for higher taxes but when being asked whether they are willing to start first paying higher taxes they say that what they meant was higher taxes for the rich. It's convenient to always burden those others as long as I am not affected.

I came from a very average family background, no advantages, no connections, no network nothing extraordinary. Had 3 part time jobs at the same time during college. I worked hard at everything that came my way and got into a great grad school after which doors opened. Nobody helped me to get there, no connections, no relationships, no adversity scores. Someone who is driven simply works hard and achieves. The fruits of hard labor are guaranteed unless one has mental limitations. No adversity score or scheming or networking will ever change that. If I worked my ass off and would have just made the cut into a great school but instead someone with a lower score (all else equal) took my seat just because he or she came from a poorer background or had that special skin color it would have destroyed my entire belief in the fairness of the system. Different payment for identical work. That is bullshit no matter how some twist and turn their rhetoric.

I volunteered and taught for 3 years at a high school with predominantly black students in an underprivileged neighborhood in a Midwestern city, back in college, nobody there was unable to study hard or prevented from using a textbook and acquire knowledge. A lot of students did not know how to study efficiently and lacked motivation. I showed them how to study efficiently. I tried to motivate them. Some were motivated, many were not. Nobody should be penalized for the lack of motivations in others. I despise all those liberals and those on the left who only do lip service: many just talk loud but actually don't support others in need, they don't donate a sizable portion of their income. They don't attack the root causes. They rather penalize others who do their best because in their limited world view everyone should be born into an equivalent environment.

I know this may be a hard pill to swallow, but even motivation and the ability to study for a test are highly influenced by one's background. I've seen children forced to take care of other children because of their parents forced to work all the time (of course one might question why they had children!), or otherwise bright kids forced to fend for themselves in the hood instead of more meaningful worries of how to learn better and acquire skills for college. You are right -there are definitely hypocrites on the left. The way I look at things is that as long as you actually give a sh* about people and want to see them do better, no matter whether you're on the left or right, you're doing your part to help out. You have encouraged kids to study efficiently, and I commend you on that. I would just not rule out those that weren't motivated to do so.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

I would never write off any child in need. But we have seen over the past 50 years that trying to make everyone equally well off does simply not work. Because it penalizes those who drive the locomotive and keep the train moving. When those lose motivation because they don't see a fair reward then what you have left is a train full of passengers who slow down the train and nobody willing to shovel the coal into the engine furnace.

We should work on eradicating violence from neighborhoods (it's inconceivable to me how there can exist any no go zones in America, if need be, move in with the military), prevent illegals and drugs from entering across porous borders, and most importantly, put education into federal hands and force all schools to be equally equipped with quality teachers and teaching material. That would make changes like we have never seen before. But that is of course too inconvenient for those who love to always talk but never take action.

And did I forget: Never ever ever make deals as prosecuter with corporations or criminal individuals. They have money so paying money to stay out of jail is exactly what suits them and does not deter anyone. Don't cut deals but put all those parents who paid bribes to get their rich stupid kids into college behind bars for many years. Use prison time as punitive damage not money. Jail time hurts much more than losing money. It's much better to lose a few cases in court than always letting criminals off the hook with money.

I know this may be a hard pill to swallow, but even motivation and the ability to study for a test are highly influenced by one's background. I've seen children forced to take care of other children because of their parents forced to work all the time (of course one might question why they had children!), or otherwise bright kids forced to fend for themselves in the hood instead of more meaningful worries of how to learn better and acquire skills for college. You are right -there are definitely hypocrites on the left. The way I look at things is that as long as you actually give a sh* about people and want to see them do better, no matter whether you're on the left or right, you're doing your part to help out. You have encouraged kids to study efficiently, and I commend you on that. I would just not rule out those that weren't motivated to do so.

 

[Diskreet]

I would never write off any child in need. But we have seen over the past 50 years that trying to make everyone equally well off does simply not work. Because it penalizes those who drive the locomotive and keep the train moving. When those lose motivation because they don't see a fair reward then what you have left is a train full of passengers who slow down the train and nobody willing to shovel the coal into the engine furnace.

We should work on eradicating violence from neighborhoods (it's inconceivable to me how there can exist any no go zones in America, if need be, move in with the military), prevent illegals and drugs from entering across porous borders, and most importantly, put education into federal hands and force all schools to be equally equipped with quality teachers and teaching material. That would make changes like we have never seen before. But that is of course too inconvenient for those who love to always talk but never take action.

And did I forget: Never ever ever make deals as prosecuter with corporations or criminal individuals. They have money so paying money to stay out of jail is exactly what suits them and does not deter anyone. Don't cut deals but put all those parents who paid bribes to get their rich stupid kids into college behind bars for many years. Use prison time as punitive damage not money. Jail time hurts much more than losing money. It's much better to lose a few cases in court than always letting criminals off the hook with money.

I do like your principled take on matters. Unlike many on the right, you are not making excuses for priveledged folk committing crimes. Simply applying the same rules toward everyone would send a strong message indeed. Instead of huge tax increases, simply disallow ridiculous loopholes that allow wealthy individuals from sheltering their winnings from taxation.

On your initial statements, I don't think the intent is to make everyone equal. That clearly would disincentivize any progress. And I think there are plenty of people motivated so long as capitalism exists.

 

[gaussian]

That is the complete opposite of my life experience

N = 1.

Your life doesn't mean the data is wrong. The data doesn't care about you. Stop taking it personally.

won't mention his specific race, but, I have seen many people refer to his race as brown. Despite the fact that he ended up initially living in a super racist town that was 90%+ white

But hey, by the way, your prejudices are showing.

Your comments are completely foreign to me. That is the difference. You think that you can't.

It's funny how you assume that I am projecting myself onto the data. It seems more likely you are severely projecting after reading your dissertation on a completely irrelevant tangent.

 

[GRULSTMRNN]

You might be surprised how many operators in the background are not interested in progress at all. When a university makes it a goal to have equal proportions of students of each race as are represented in society then that is exactly a strive for equal outcome not progress or equal opportunities.

I do like your principled take on matters. Unlike many on the right, you are not making excuses for priveledged folk committing crimes. Simply applying the same rules toward everyone would send a strong message indeed. Instead of huge tax increases, simply disallow ridiculous loopholes that allow wealthy individuals from sheltering their winnings from taxation.

On your initial statements, I don't think the intent is to make everyone equal. That clearly would disincentivize any progress. And I think there are plenty of people motivated so long as capitalism exists.

 

[Cuddles]

You might be surprised how many operators in the background are not interested in progress at all. When a university makes it a goal to have equal proportions of students of each race as are represented in society then that is exactly a strive for equal outcome not progress or equal opportunities.

Methinks you've been hitting the Peterson sauce a little too hard