Re: The logical case for caste-based reservations

by Idéfix Mon Apr 15, 2013 11:55 pm

Max, NFL and IPL are not supported with public funds so they are free to address any underrepresentation on their own terms. But in publicly funded higher education, a different social objective can drive policy.

by Idéfix Mon Apr 15, 2013 11:56 pm

And I don't know if you can make a case for underrepresentation of brahmins in the NFL.

by Idéfix Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:09 pm

The Economist magazine has an ongoing online debate on this topic.

http://economist.com/debate/days/view/967

Perhaps the biggest concern about AA is that it is seen as anti-merit and regressive, in that it replaces higher-ability and possibly poorer individuals from privileged groups (poor whites or upper castes) with less capable and richer individuals from disadvantaged groups. Studies show this to be more myth than reality. The average family income of displacing students is lower than that of the displaced students, and the extra benefit of new opportunities gained as a result of AA is tremendous.

Is AA at the higher-education level too little, too late? Should the focus not be on elementary education, safe drinking water, basic health and hygiene? These two approaches are not mutually exclusive. The second set of factors should be the basic right of all citizens. Are the benefits of AA worth the cost? Given that places in higher educational institutions are limited, a large number of aspirants would be excluded even in the absence of AA. Thus a reallocation of a small number of places in the larger interest of making the elite world more representative is definitely worth the cost. Is AA lowering institutional standards or affecting productivity or efficiency adversely? Evidence-based research shows this to be not true. Thus AA corrects some of the imbalances in higher education, jobs and electoral representation, and letting these imbalances persist is not a good idea.

by Idéfix Thu Apr 18, 2013 8:02 pm

If you are following the Economist debate, they have posted rebuttals of each other's opening statements.

http://economist.com/debate/days/view/971#pro_statement_anchor

Lastly, is race a good proxy for disadvantage? The same question is asked in India about caste. This is an empirical question. And to settle it, it would be wrong to compare a few rich blacks with a few poor whites, since both races have a distribution of incomes, ie, have both poor and rich members. The question is: is one group disproportionately poorer than another? Not randomly at one point in time, but is the disadvantage persistent?

On this, the evidence is unambiguous and compelling: race, or caste, is a good proxy. Also, the recent indignant uproar from the Indian middle class over reserving places on the basis of income (not caste) for poorer kids in elite private elementary schools in New Delhi demonstrates that the argument about "income-not-caste" and "early-intervention-not-higher-education" is a fig leaf. The crux of the opposition to AA is the resistance to sharing privilege. The status quo is always seen as meritocratic and any attempt to change it is challenged, whether the change is based on income/socio-economist status or social markers such as race, caste, ethnicity or gender, and whether the change comes early or late in the life span of individuals.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:09 am

Very logical!

by Guest Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:20 am

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:Very logical!

LOLu

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:21 am

I thought so too, guruvu gaaru.

by Mosquito Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:57 pm

Idéfix wrote:If you are following the Economist debate, they have posted rebuttals of each other's opening statements.

http://economist.com/debate/days/view/971#pro_statement_anchor

Lastly, is race a good proxy for disadvantage? The same question is asked in India about caste. This is an empirical question. And to settle it, it would be wrong to compare a few rich blacks with a few poor whites, since both races have a distribution of incomes, ie, have both poor and rich members. The question is: is one group disproportionately poorer than another? Not randomly at one point in time, but is the disadvantage persistent?

On this, the evidence is unambiguous and compelling: race, or caste, is a good proxy. Also, the recent indignant uproar from the Indian middle class over reserving places on the basis of income (not caste) for poorer kids in elite private elementary schools in New Delhi demonstrates that the argument about "income-not-caste" and "early-intervention-not-higher-education" is a fig leaf. The crux of the opposition to AA is the resistance to sharing privilege. The status quo is always seen as meritocratic and any attempt to change it is challenged, whether the change is based on income/socio-economist status or social markers such as race, caste, ethnicity or gender, and whether the change comes early or late in the life span of individuals.

I have 2 big beefs with current caste based reservation system in India. The quota is way too much & unnecessary. Most people who need reservation dont get them. Most children in my mom's school(low income families) have no/receive reservation. Many cant get any certificate from local city office. This itself shows that reservation system is a big failure.

I am for some affirmative action. It should be completely on basis of background of the student. It need not be economic conditions but a sum total of everything.

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:44 pm

Mosquito wrote:I have 2 big beefs with current caste based reservation system in India. The quota is way too much & unnecessary.

Is your argument that the percentage set aside is too high? On what basis do you make that argument?

Mosquito wrote:Most people who need reservation dont get them. Most children in my mom's school(low income families) have no/receive reservation. Many cant get any certificate from local city office. This itself shows that reservation system is a big failure.

No it does not show that. If you had income-based reservations, the same problem would apply to the low-income families, while middle- and high-income families could easily obtain false income certificates and use the seats reserved for the low-income families.

If you read my original post on this thread, the problem you are highlighting is one of false negatives: those who deserve the help not getting it. Changing from a caste-based system to an income-based system will not remove the need for obtaining a certificate; it will switch the certificate to a more easily falsifiable one!

Mosquito wrote:I am for some affirmative action. It should be completely on basis of background of the student. It need not be economic conditions but a sum total of everything.

Which factors would you consider in that sum total? Remember, policy needs to be designed keeping implementation in mind. So whatever factors you suggest need to be measurable in a reliable and cost-effective manner.

by Mosquito Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:51 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:I have 2 big beefs with current caste based reservation system in India. The quota is way too much & unnecessary.
Is your argument that the percentage set aside is too high? On what basis do you make that argument?

In most places quota well exceeds 50%. If that is not insane, I dont know what is.

Mosquito wrote:Most people who need reservation dont get them. Most children in my mom's school(low income families) have no/receive reservation. Many cant get any certificate from local city office. This itself shows that reservation system is a big failure.
No it does not show that. If you had income-based reservations, the same problem would apply to the low-income families, while middle- and high-income families could easily obtain false income certificates and use the seats reserved for the low-income families.

If you read my original post on this thread, the problem you are highlighting is one of false negatives: those who deserve the help not getting it. Changing from a caste-based system to an income-based system will not remove the need for obtaining a certificate; it will switch the certificate to a more easily falsifiable one!

Most people who really need & deserve reservation dont get it. I know this because my mother works with them. Ergo caste based reservation system IS a failure. What India needs is special emphasis on education at primary, middle & high school levels that helps students compete at the equal level in college. Most of the poor children cannot perform not because they are less intelligent than others. They are taught nothing. Nor are their parents keen on keeping them in schools. The solution is to educate both students and parents.

Mosquito wrote:I am for some affirmative action. It should be completely on basis of background of the student. It need not be economic conditions but a sum total of everything.
Which factors would you consider in that sum total? Remember, policy needs to be designed keeping implementation in mind. So whatever factors you suggest need to be measurable in a reliable and cost-effective manner.

It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:53 pm

Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.

And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

by Mosquito Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:58 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.
And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

If they cant do this, they should scrap this system altogether.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:02 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.
And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

i can turn that around and ask you how you prevent SC/ST students whose fathers are reserve bank chairmen from using the quota.

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:03 pm

Mosquito wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.
And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

If they cant do this, they should scrap this system altogether.

You can't make the perfect an enemy of the good. Any system that human beings can come up with will have its own imperfections. That doesn't mean we should scrap all systems altogether.

Consider the public transit system we have in the Bay Area. Ideally, it should cover all cities and towns, and provide access to everyone. Ideally it should be frequent and fast, and it should be cheap. It should take you from any place in the Bay Area to any other place without having to drive or walk too long. The reality is that it is very hard to do all this. And even the most perfect system you can come up with will have some imperfections in it. But you wouldn't advocate that public transit be scrapped entirely for that reason, would you?

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:05 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.
And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

i can turn that around and ask you how you prevent SC/ST students whose fathers are reserve bank chairmen from using the quota.

By applying the creamy layer exclusion to the SC/ST quotas as well. I think anybody with income above a certain threshold, or with a parent in a set of listed occupations, or with a parent who owns more than a certain level of assets, should be ineligible for quotas regardless of the caste they are born into.

by Mosquito Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:08 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
Mosquito wrote:It should be purely on basis of family history, level of education, occupation of their parents and role models, etc.
And how would the government assess those? How do you prevent false claims, and how would you assess something as complicated as "family history" and "role models"?

If they cant do this, they should scrap this system altogether.
You can't make the perfect an enemy of the good. Any system that human beings can come up with will have its own imperfections. That doesn't mean we should scrap all systems altogether.

Consider the public transit system we have in the Bay Area. Ideally, it should cover all cities and towns, and provide access to everyone. Ideally it should be frequent and fast, and it should be cheap. It should take you from any place in the Bay Area to any other place without having to drive or walk too long. The reality is that it is very hard to do all this. And even the most perfect system you can come up with will have some imperfections in it. But you wouldn't advocate that public transit be scrapped entirely for that reason, would you?

Prove that caste based reservations are working. My point is they are not. So they should be scrapped. I have also suggested an alternative to reservation system.

by Idéfix Fri Apr 19, 2013 10:18 pm

Mosquito wrote:Prove that caste based reservations are working.

They are working better than any alternative can, as I showed above. Also, they have increased the representation of "lower" castes in government substantially -- which was one of the objectives. I don't have my source (hard copy of a book) with me at the moment, but I will post statistics to prove this later. They have increased the representation of "lower" castes in universities; many thousands of those students have gone on to better lives for their families, and inspired others in their villages. I know many individuals who were the first from their entire tAnDa or their caste in the village to get a degree -- all from my generation. And they have lifted their own families out of poverty, and their stories inspire the people who know them.

Mosquito wrote:My point is they are not.

And how did you prove that they are not working? More importantly, how can you prove that they are working worse than the alternative you propose?

Mosquito wrote:So they should be scrapped.

There is a good reason they won't be: a majority of Indians believe that they are working. They may not be a majority of the "upper" castes, but they are a majority nonetheless.

Mosquito wrote: I have also suggested an alternative to reservation system.

As I said, the system you suggested is more complicated, and easier to "game" for people with resources, than the caste-based system.

by Sponsored content