don’t know any percentage numbers, but it is a reality for some. We have an area if this popular destination city that is the homeless camp of choice. Probably 50-100 people at a time there. And it is year round, there are churches they can overnight in during the winter, and during winter days quite a few of the homeless take up a spot in the main branch of the library. So many had taken to going into the scenic sitting area and sleeping there that signs are now posted that sleeping is not allowed, and you will be woken and asked to leave if repeatedly doing it.
It is really interesting to read the comments of the “moral Christians” on FB and Nextdoor concerning the homeless in the area. It’s almost like they skipped the parts of the Bible that deal with compassion for the less well off, lol.
I’ve done a lot of car camping in my years, if you have a place in the woods and a tent to sleep in, it is somewhat fun as a diversion for a younger person with a home to go back to. But it would be a rough life as a full time gig, especially in the winter. Would age you quickly.
They might be legal. People enter the country as refugees which is legal but then disappear because court dates are many years in the future and there’s no way to track them or follow up. The number of immigration courts and monitoring ability is a tiny, tiny, fraction of what is required.
This is by design and unlikely to change because the MEGA wing is desperate to maintain the status quo. That’s why they focus on things like building a wall. Most undocumented migrants enter at legal checkpoints. Building a wall would do nothing. That’s why they want walls, not courts. They are terrified of the system changing.
Sorry. Disagree. This is simply a rhetorical assertion merely for effect. A “sthu” argument. Rights are not necessarilly universal. Rights here refers to membership benefits that accrue to members of the club.
While the club matters. The character of the club matters more. Rights denied is not a wise move.
Another mere assertion. That’s just you talking. We were talking about rights and you go and change the subject. Gee, I wonder what that could indicate…??
African Americans were not a part of the club. Women were not a part of the club.
They are now. Point irrelevant. Again we were talking about rights being offorded to non-members. Stop changing the subject.
White Europeans come illegally all the time. No one cares. When does bigotry and pettiness become a mistake for you?
Another Hate Whitey rant. Anybody coming illegally should be given the boot. Just because some… what? Irish fellow…? Slovenian family…? East End Cockney…? somehow manages to slip in and blend in (a truly miniscule number. C’mon. Illegal Euros? Really. ) does not mean “…and therefore we must afford house money to thousands/millions of illegals from any other place.” You can’t seem to establish a rational basis for your position or staying on topic. Otherwise, I still agree with you more than I disagree.
As it happens, this evening’s national news on NBC reported a sharp drop in the number of African Americans admitted to MIT this fall, following the SCOTUS ruling prohibiting affirmative action in college admissions. Michigan outlawed affirmative action several years ago, and African American admissions to U of M dropped significantly. I can’t help but wonder, of the African Americans still admitted to U of M, how many are there to play football or basketball, instead of obtaining an education?
FBS football teams have 85 scholarships and Division 1 basketball teams have 15 scholarships. Surely there are much more than 100 black students at Michigan and MSU.
I didn’t know there was a limit on “scholarships”. Looking over this year’s U of M football roster, I see 68 African Americans, 66 white kids, and 1 Arab, vs a student body that is half white, and 4.3% African American. 4.3% of 33,000 undergrad students is 1320.
And, the hoops roster: 9 African-American and 7 white, including one Russian.
U of M is one of the minority of universities whose athletic program actually turns a profit. I would be surprised if they endangered their profits by putting a legacy on the team who did not have any skill.
It bucks the percentages for African-Americans being only 4.3% of the undergrad population, but over 50% of the football and basketball teams.
Meanwhile, U of M’s baseball roster shows 4 African-Americans, 3 Hispanics, 2 Asians, and 29 white guys. But no-one cares about college baseball. The big money is in football and basketball, where the universities are subsidized farm systems for the NFL and NBA.
If you read the fine print, Michigan says that legacy status doesn’t determine admissions, but it can be considered in the overall picture of the student outside of the holistic process. No doubt, some students are more holistic than others {{ LOL }}
The University of Michigan is often cited as part of a very small list of top schools that don’t use legacy as a preference. They say on their admissions website, “Legacy status is not a preference in the admissions process.” They also say, however, say it “does serve as context - outside of the admissions review - in understanding a student’s interest. Most importantly, it helps us calculate the likelihood of enrollment.” This wording can be confusing. It seems like they are saying they both do and don’t consider legacy status.
It’s important to note, that other schools that state that they don’t use legacy status as a preference, such as UC Berkeley, often don’t track legacy status. Michigan, however, does. Students can self-report their parents’ and grandparents’ affiliation with the school. They do this because they say that “Information about a student’s status as a legacy can also be used to acknowledge their relationship to U-M in communications with families during both the application process and when it renders their admissions decisions.” }}
I remember that years ago, Yale did away with legacy admissions in the 1960’s and got a big decline in donations from wealthy alumni. It seems that schools with big endowments need legacy admissions to maintain that endowment.