Of course I don’t think poor people pay no taxes. That would be silly. It’s silly you gathered that from my comment.

“...it’s the best school in Texas by a couple of leagues...” and “UT [is] the only shining beacon in Texas...”

Every teenager is an entitled asshole. But only white people are the problem.

Grades and tests are skewed in favor of white kids?

That’s the whole point of the top 10 percent rule; if you are in the top 10 percent of your individual school - regardless of how other schools operate or give out grades - you are in. That’s also the point of the SAT/ACT tests. You can’t get more “fair” than giving out the same exact test.

Maybe those districts are also diluting their funding per kid because they have more kids per property.

Probably not. But what else should a poor person get that I pay for? The dinner I’m making tonight? A fraction of the air travel I purchase? One of the flowers my fiance gave me last week?

And it’s not just education. I heard that kids from wealthier families have cooler clothes, bigger bedrooms, and go on better family vacations than less-wealthy students. That’s some unfair BS right there!

Maybe. If parents are paying more money to their kids’ schools why shouldn’t it go there? Shit, I pay a ton of property tax (and state sales tax) into schools and I don’t even have kids in school. Maybe poorer areas could pay a higher property tax rate to balance out the funding deficit?

I was replying to a comment about how the top 10% is more competitive in wealthier schools than less-wealthy ones. The “tutor” in this piece helped students who already missed the top 10% automatic admission. So I’m trying to understand why the rich schools/people would be more competitive academically (to get into…

So, being intelligent, hard-working, and educated is an unfair advantage... in education?

omg YES

The more I have to do and the less time I have to do it in, the more I get done. If that makes sense. When I have an entire workday and only a few to-dos on my list, I waste a helluva lot of time. When I’m swamped is when I’m straight up working it. I’m just going to put it out there: I have a fiance who recently…

All I can gather based on this piece and most of the dialogue is that white = bad and smart = unfair.

So are teachers in “wealthy” districts paid differently than others, or is there a lower student:teacher ratio, or both?

The most competitive students occupy more than their fair share of space in the top 10 percent of the class? Do smart students also receive unfair representation at the top of the class? What about quick learners — also over-represented?

Really? So schools in higher property tax areas pay higher teacher salaries, or they have a lower student:teacher ratio, or both?

So lower income districts are less competitive? I thought (judging by this piece) rich people just buy their way into college, but now you’re telling me that the wealthier districts are actually more competitive academically. How does that work?

I can’t even get past the first few paragraphs and the racist bullshit y’all publish. The Abigail Fisher case (or more accurately, the case by the activist behind her) was pathetic. So is this racist trash of a diatribe.

bo-ring