The Seven-Per-Cent Solution

As reported in the 07-Nov SJ-R, the NAACP may sue if the school district doesn’t hire more black and minority teachers, based on statistics such as blacks comprising only 9% of the district’s teachers vs.  38% of students.  The minority recruitment advisory committee posits an 18.4% figure to be in “compliance” with a 40 year old consent decree.

Answer me this — if we actually were to do that, how will everyone else be able to fill their quotas?

The NAACP argument comparing the population of providers (teachers) to consumers (students) is completely flawed, albeit intentional.  The real question should be “are we discriminating against qualified teachers based on race?”

According to a 2011 National Center for Education Information report, only 7% of teachers in the USA are black.  Given the incredible pressure toward politically correct hiring across the entire educational establishment, 9% is amazing.  We’re  29% OVER the national average, folks.  We’d have to hire over twice the normal minority teacher distribution to hit that 18.4%.

Here’s an ominous sign from the same report for those of you who think that having a kid’s teacher be the same race is important (didn’t that used to be white people?) — while 22% of teachers are under 30, only 10% of black teachers are under 30.  Meaning not only that there aren’t nearly enough black teachers to meet NAACP quotas, but the numbers seem to be dropping.

The district should sue the NAACP to sign a consent decree agreeing to talk 18.4% of young, black, college-bound high school students into being teachers.

Do it for the children.

This entry was posted in Economics & Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The Seven-Per-Cent Solution

  1. eddie watts says:

    about time you updated :p
    i’d stopped checking your blog and only checked today because i saw your update on fathead blog.
    i hope this means you’ll be updating more in future :)
    incidentally i’ve tried to have similar conversations like this with people but they tend to jump to conclusions that i’m not actually talking about.
    equal ops merely becomes a box ticking exercise for employers in reality in my experience

  2. eddie watts says:

    Hey “Older Brother” just read this and as you seem to know about economics I wondered if you’d give your 5 cents on it?
    http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/moneyweek-and-their-end-of-britain.html

    Well, sorry to ignore my blog for so long (again!). If anyone is still out there, here goes…

    The author is complaining about a 10,000 word essay on Britain’s economic woes, which he addresses with it seems about a 15,000 word analysis.

    In a nutshell, his argument seems to be the report he’s disagreeing with is completely wrong concerning GB’s impending doom due to high spending because the spending is reported in raw money (pounds), whereas if the spending is presented as a percentage of GDP it’s not nearly so scary looking. He also proposes that since the period of economic growth corresponded with an increase in welfare and social spending, it follows that government spending is great for the economy.

    Without having read the original piece and assuming the author’s summary is accurate (unlikely), I’d go with “they’re both wrong.”

    Increased spending doesn’t necessarily mean doom, as the huge spike in government spending for World War II attests, and is pointed to by every huckster trying to justify endless government spending. The thing is, that money was all spent with the full intention of — and in fact, was — being “paid back.” It was a world-wide fight to the death, and most people backed it and also understood that it would have to be paid for. With THEIR OWN money, not put on a charge card to pass on three or four generations down the line. That has absolutely no relation to the current world economy adn the governments which inhabit/inhibit it.

    Anther key point is that spending isn’t the direct poison — it’s debt. Which, given again that no has any intention of not only not paying any of it back, but in fact continually adding to it, is truly past the point of ever being responsibly addressed through a political system. When U.S. debt on the books (another completely understated fabrication) is over 5 times one year’s receipts, there’s no possibility of repair.

    That leaves the only path for the current system as default and collapse. Which sounds kind of prepper/doomsday scary, and will be excruciatingly painful, but ultimately the best hope.

    Cheers