Are all the good scholarships becoming "indigenous only"? Discuss. (3 Viewers)

[Aerath]

I've made my position clear, if you don't want to listen that's your choice.

No, actually, you haven't posted anywhere to tell people whether you're actually financially disadvantaged. If you do specify one way or another, it would help others understand your predicament,

You also don't have to post in here if you think it is full of racist arrogant views.

God forbid, people should actually post in one of your threads only if they agree with you.

--

As a sweeping generalisation, I may think affirmative action is wrong, however, that doesn't mean that I won't call you out.

 

[Lolsmith]

Women or men shouldn't be disadvantaged for choosing what they enjoy.

They aren't disadvantaged in any way whatsoever, just because they are of a certain gender and saying so is a downright lie

That's a fair point. I guess in the partnership world of law, women are quite under-represented

That doesn't mean anything

As I mentioned in my other post, for some courses, there are mandatory extras, such as equipment (Optometry third years have to fork out $4000 for a piece of mandatory equipment), labcoats etc.

That's their decision for doing that course, though.

I agree with this point as well. At my uni, there are far fewer scholarships for current uni students as opposed to school leavers. People who have proven themselves at uni deserve a better shot at gaining scholarships.

why

Indigenous scholarships are based on 'racism' (a loaded term), but making generalizations and applying stereotypes is often a rational and effective policy for governance. If you have more poor and disadvantaged people in one demographic, targeting disproportionate resources to that demographic may produce the most utilitarian outcome. Should we put an equal number of career counselors per capita in both Mt Druitt and Double Bay? Discrimination based on demographic observations occurs all the time, there's no reason spatial and socio-economic discrimination is justified and racial discrimination isn't, what about the poor unemployed youth of Double Bay who can't access the same volume of services as the youth of cabramatta, so unfair.

Like I said, the debate (in my view) isn't about the availability of other scholarships, that's irrelevant, it's whether providing *public* moneys to those of a specific racial background is legitimate. Obviously some think it is and some think it isn't. I'd also posit that in an initiative such as this, it's more than funding that's necessary in order to give some form of positive outcome.

Some private school kiddies wouldn't have much problem paying 4 grand a semester. There are a LOT of rural only scholarships for unsw engineering as well, but no one in this thread seems to have an issue with that.

see my above point

trust me, i couldn't put words in your mouth - it's full of shit already.

youre just incredibly jealous that there are ppl getting scholarships that you think youre entitled to. trust me honey, with that sense of entitlement, youre likely not going to get anywhere in life

no wonder you want to go to macquarie instead of sydney - sydney has a higher % of aboriginals

as i said - from what ive read in this thread, others' problems with affirmative action has a lot to do with the inherently racist nature of policy (something that i agree with). but what you want out of this is not some form of discussion about policy, you just want to bitch and whine about how because youre not aboriginal, youre not entitled to a scholarship

your sense of entitlement and arrogance is 'disgusting'

So go read my post again and then address that in the same way

 

[Existential]

No, actually, you haven't posted anywhere to tell people whether you're actually financially disadvantaged. If you do specify one way or another, it would help others understand your predicament,

I made this a general thread about the broad issue, not a personal thing. This isn't a self-help thread for me - it's a thread to discuss the topic (which you should know). I made the assertion as a generalisation i.e. a broad scope of scholarships. So please don't accuse me of not providing information that I didn't need to from the start.

God forbid, people should actually post in one of your threads only if they agree with you.

If people want to attack me personally for a view I have then yes I'd rather they keep their overly-emotive, arrogant noses out of the thread. The responses I got were in no way proportional to the proposition I put to them.

As a sweeping generalisation, I may think affirmative action is wrong, however, that doesn't mean that I won't call you out.

I can't stop you from "taking sides", but it is clear that you don't agree with the affirmative action here. As for other accusations you've given me, it doesn't really strike my notice. Short of calling me racist also, I would advise you stop making this personal and stick to the thread topic - which you obviously have failed to recognise is broad and ambiguous.

P.S. Otherwise I will delete the thread.

 

[Bobbo1]

Im pretty sure after getting separated from families, and disrupting one's self, the least a government could do is give them scholarships
besides, they actually require descent marks to get it, not everyone who puts their names down gets it

 

[Dr_Fresh]

Im pretty sure after getting separated from families, and disrupting one's self, the least a government could do is give them scholarships
besides, they actually require descent marks to get it, not everyone who puts their names down gets it

and that doesnt happen to non-indigenous families?

 

[tambam]

and that doesnt happen to non-indigenous families?

I think he's referring to Stolen Generation etc.
Ie, government feels guilty for it and gives them free education

 

[Existential]

I think he's referring to Stolen Generation etc.
Ie, government feels guilty for it and gives them free education

Absolutely not. No wonder your argument is so ignorant - you have misinterpreted what you're attacking. I'm sorry but that's pathetic.

 

[michaeljennings]

Absolutely not. No wonder your argument is so ignorant - you have misinterpreted what you're attacking. I'm sorry but that's pathetic.

absolutely not? what else could Bobbo1 have been referring too...

 

[tambam]

Absolutely not. No wonder your argument is so ignorant - you have misinterpreted what you're attacking. I'm sorry but that's pathetic.

I'm not saying that's my view...its my interpretation of what Bobbo1 said...

But the purpose of indigenous only scholarships is an attempt to balance the statistical inequalities between the financial circumstances of indigenous families and their non-indigenous counterparts. And these inequalities have stemmed from years of mistreatment and disregard for indigenous Australians, (including the stolen generation) and is something the government is attempting to rectify. One way of doing this is to provide educational opportunities, and is something which I don't believe is wrong.

P.S why do you 'threaten' to delete this thread, noone could care less mate, I'd call that pretty pathetic..

&don't attack my argument when you actually have no valid arguments of your own, other than quoting others of greater intelligence who actually possess the ability to make valid comments, and writing 'THIS'

 

[michaeljennings]

I'm not saying that's my view...its my interpretation of what Bobbo1 said...

But the purpose of indigenous only scholarships is an attempt to balance the statistical inequalities between the financial circumstances of indigenous families and their non-indigenous counterparts. And these inequalities have stemmed from years of mistreatment and disregard for indigenous Australians, (including the stolen generation) and is something the government is attempting to rectify. One way of doing this is to provide educational opportunities, and is something which I don't believe is wrong.

P.S why do you 'threaten' to delete this thread, noone could care less mate, I'd call that pretty pathetic..

&don't attack my argument when you actually have no valid arguments of your own, other than quoting others of greater intelligence who actually possess the ability to make valid comments, and writing 'THIS'

This

 

[Existential]

I'm not saying that's my view...its my interpretation of what Bobbo1 said...

But the purpose of indigenous only scholarships is an attempt to balance the statistical inequalities between the financial circumstances of indigenous families and their non-indigenous counterparts. And these inequalities have stemmed from years of mistreatment and disregard for indigenous Australians, (including the stolen generation) and is something the government is attempting to rectify. One way of doing this is to provide educational opportunities, and is something which I don't believe is wrong.

P.S why do you 'threaten' to delete this thread, noone could care less mate, I'd call that pretty pathetic..

&don't attack my argument when you actually have no valid arguments of your own, other than quoting others of greater intelligence who actually possess the ability to make valid comments, and writing 'THIS'

theoretically your argument is sound, but practically it is not. i would say govts are providing a double standard here.

and i wouldnt call sprouting the same line of argument over and over 'valid'.

your the one who is making this personal. it should be about the collective arguments on each side (in the case of this thread your opposition is by no means the majority nor valid).

so basically i ask that you dont be so overly defensive and dismissive of the other side of the argument.

 

[boris]

lol this thread is full of assumptions and made up figures

 

[boris]

do you have a source for your claim that scholarships are predominately indigenous? or that indigenous scholarships are on the rise
etc

e t c

 

[Aerath]

(in the case of this thread your opposition is by no means the majority nor valid).

so basically i ask that you dont be so overly defensive and dismissive of the other side of the argument.

I'll interject and say that tambam hasn't been dismissive - he/she has been quite forthcoming in accepting what he/she sees as valid arguments, and acknowledging his/her acceptance of alternative points of view.

And majority is by no means an indicator of 'right'. If that were the case, there'd still be African-American slavery, women wouldn't have the right to vote, and gays would still be thrown in jail.*

 

[boris]

i dont think the majority wants any of those things
or else they would still happen
um

 

[Lolsmith]

why has no one argued with me

 

[Dr_Fresh]

why has no one argued with me

lol cuz nobody likes to argue against people who provide logical arguments and can remain calm.