Does being Asian hurt your chances?

[DermViser]

Yes there are poor Asians, but for the most part, they are not. Even then, you can list and talk about any difficulties you have faced throughout your life in your application. It isn't going to be simply ignored.

Wow, you couldn't be more wrong.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DermViser]

Man Dermie don't mess around, hitting on sexylotus in one thread and calling out fools in another

The latter always feel like a fumigation. It's any wonder Allo believes those in Pre-Allo are deluded when they don't even have the facts on their side -- always wrong, never in doubt.

 

[Lamel]

Wow, you couldn't be more wrong.

Actually, I'm not. We are talking averages here.


http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/asian-americans-lead-all-others-in-household-income/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-median-income-in-the-us-by-race-2013-9


If an Asian applicant is socioeconomically disadvantaged, they can talk about it on the designated areas in the AMCAS.

 

[DermViser]

Actually, I'm not. We are talking averages here.


http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/asian-americans-lead-all-others-in-household-income/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-median-income-in-the-us-by-race-2013-9


If an Asian applicant is socioeconomically disadvantaged, they can talk about it on the designated areas in the AMCAS.

Yes, bc wikipedia is such a wonderful primary source. I can't believe you actually pasted that, much less businessinsider which is analogous to Forbes clickbait. We're talking about the socioeconomic/class of the APPLICANT, not the entire race when it comes to admissions.

 

[gshocke]

but its at about to be 5pm and the weekend so im out on this note

I'm waiting for you to address my solution when you "dropped the mic".

was your solution the color blind admissions one? i mean i guess, but if there was a color blind admissions for the past 100s of years that didnt cut out blacks for the majority of time this country has been functioning, then maybe there wouldnt be a 'color aware' admissions.

but maybe you right, why try to alleviate the 100s of years of oppression that is so deep in this country that it has shut out blacks from most upper level areas in the country? desegregation 50 yrs ago should have been enough.

 

[aegistitan]

im not going to keep stating this.

why does everyone keep correlating economic security to equality and having escaped discrimination and disadvantages as black individual?

because those AA who drive their fancy BMWs are still stopped at a higher rate by police (being asked sly questions like who did you get this car from) as opposed to their white counterparts

You missed my point. Yes they may still be stopped by the police but they have access to better resources while growing up. This way the wealth stays in the hands of the wealthy and is not dispersed. The underprivileged AA kids have access to few resources, bad public education systems, etc. while still being stopped by the police officer. I am not arguing against Affirmative Action. I am arguing against the abuse of affirmative action. It's no wonder the wealthy kids are able to continue getting high standardized test scores when they can afford tutors or even study materials.

 

[Porkloins]

Lastly, yes there is a difference in white/asian stats, but it isn't THAT large, especially when taking into account the huge amount of asian applicants. When you have many applicants to choose from in a similar background, you will choose the best out of them all.

You can't just say that the gap "isn't that large" and think everything is fine and dandy. The message that favoring whites over Asians sends is frankly pretty horrible. Either it means you think Asians may have higher stats but don't have those "white" characteristics like leadership/creativity (ie, you're a racist), or it means that you just don't want your med school to look Asian simply because it wouldn't sit right with you (ie, you're still a racist). Can someone show me a study that proves Asian doctors don't treat white patients as well as white doctors?

 

[efle]

First to the bold, try to calm down.

No worries man I'm usually the one upsetting people I just like to be emphatic

You mentioned that your undergrad minority colleagues cast doubt on their ability/quality, to which I responded that they are not any less qualified and that your reasoning of one student being better than the other based on numbers isn't really applicable in that sense. That's it.

And yet when schools are race blinded the Asian population expands and other minorities contract, so clearly as it stands now there are some people less preferred by adcoms being admitted due to race. Therefor there is a nagging doubt that a student may have a spot only for that reason. And by the SAT/GPA metrics adcoms use (not saying I think they're good to use or useful measures) they are indeed less qualified on average.

Secondly, even though Asians may still face challenges as a minority group (though undoubtedly on a different scale than those of blacks/hispanics on average), there is no shortage of Asians going into medicine, so there is no need for an AA like mechanism to promote them into medicine.

Good point, thought it still sits wrong with me to practice discrimination in admissions to fight discrimination in healthcare access. Just seems like the solution is for people to stop being so damn racist (as in preferring doctors of one skin color, or conversely giving people a reason to)

Lastly, yes there is a difference in white/asian stats, but it isn't THAT large, especially when taking into account the huge amount of asian applicants. When you have many applicants to choose from in a similar background, you will choose the best out of them all.

True, it's just that it's there at all that bothers me not the magnitude of it

Yes there are poor Asians, but for the most part, they are not. Even then, you can list and talk about any difficulties you have faced throughout your life in your application. It isn't going to be simply ignored.

So just use SES instead for AA, then those few will get the needed helping hand

 

[efle]

You can't just say that the gap "isn't that large" and think everything is fine and dandy. The message that favoring whites over Asians sends is frankly pretty horrible. Either it means you think Asians may have higher stats but don't have those "white" characteristics like leadership/creativity (ie, you're a racist), or it means that you just don't want your med school to look Asian simply because it wouldn't sit right with you (ie, you're still a racist). Can someone show me a study that proves Asian doctors don't treat white patients as well as white doctors?

I think the argument is more that Asians will only want Asian doctors and whites only white doctors so each pool needs to be separately selected for the best.

 

[efle]

The latter always feel like a fumigation. It's any wonder Allo believes those in Pre-Allo are deluded when they don't even have the facts on their side -- always wrong, never in doubt.

ya we're pretty dumb huh

 

[Lamel]

Yes, bc wikipedia is such a wonderful primary source. I can't believe you actually pasted that, much less businessinsider which is analogous to Forbes clickbait. We're talking about the socioeconomic/class of the APPLICANT, not the entire race when it comes to admissions.

I had a feeling you would denounce Wikipedia, your reputation for twisting and nit-picking the argument precedes you. Are you going to deny pew research as well? Here is another source, there is no shortage Derm: http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p60-245.pdf

Do you have any data to back up your claim? Did I not say I was talking averages? Did I not say "for the most part" in my initial post? Do you want me to go over the economic history of every applicant individually? Even then, you can indicate disadvantaged status on AMCAS, which you seem to be ignoring conveniently.

If you don't have any data to back up your claim (or any info on applicant parental income - I can only find general data, not split by race), I don't see why the entire race's financials cant apply to the applicants from that race.

No worries man I'm usually the one upsetting people I just like to be emphatic

So just use SES instead for AA, then those few will get the needed helping hand

I agree, in an ideal world racism would be nil, but sadly there are realities to this country. Either way I can't really keep entertaining this argument, I have a final to study for. But to the bold, economic disadvantage is not the only one that exists; blacks especially face a lot of institutionalized racism and bias in society, and may have to go through some more intense sociological obstacles than perhaps Asians who are poor. That in no way denounces both of their struggles, just adds context to it.

You can't just say that the gap "isn't that large" and think everything is fine and dandy. The message that favoring whites over Asians sends is frankly pretty horrible. Either it means you think Asians may have higher stats but don't have those "white" characteristics like leadership/creativity (ie, you're a racist), or it means that you just don't want your med school to look Asian simply because it wouldn't sit right with you (ie, you're still a racist). Can someone show me a study that proves Asian doctors don't treat white patients as well as white doctors?

I guess that's where we differ; for below average white and asian applicants, it is an uphill struggle regardless of race. It was only a matter of time before I was called racist for defending AA, but I would like to clarify none of your assertions are true, thankfully.

 

[DermViser]

I had a feeling you would denounce Wikipedia, your reputation for twisting and nit-picking the argument precedes you. Are you going to deny pew research as well? Here is another source, there is no shortage Derm: http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p60-245.pdf

Yeah, most people with actual credibility do. It's why professors don't allow Wikipedia to be cited as a source in papers.

 

[sliceofbread136]

I know this Asian guy with a 3.5 who got into a top 25 school. So I'd say no.

This is a completely useless statement without further context.... Even with context it's just anecdotal evidence. I rate this post 0/10

 

[Lamel]

Yeah, most people with actual credibility do. It's why professors don't allow Wikipedia to be cited as a source in papers.

Lol.

 

[DermViser]

Lol.

Like I said professors with actual credibility, don't allow citing of Wikipedia as a direct source in term papers.

 

[Lamel]

Like I said professors with actual credibility, don't allow citing of Wikipedia as a direct source in term papers.

I linked it because I care about your time and wanted to make it convenient for you to see why you were wrong. If you want to delve deeper into why you were wrong, you can click on the primary links at the bottom of the page. If you want to explore even more reasons for why you were wrong, look at the other sources I provided.

Either way the result is the same.

 

[ratman7]

OP if you're scared being Asian will hurt, why don't you just check the "Prefer not to disclose" race box on AMCAS

 

[Mad Jack]

Wow, you couldn't be more wrong.

Statistically, there are far fewer poor Asians than any other race percentage wise. Indians fare particularly well, with average incomes of $88,000 per the last Pew report I read.

http://newamericamedia.org/2012/07/indian-americans-most-educated-richest-says-pew-report.php

Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States.

 

[reapplicanthelpme2014]

Wow, that's a stretch. For you to act as if a very affluent Nigerian immigrant family, both physicians or in healthcare, with children in private secondary schools who apply to undergrad and med school, should somehow be given a leg up over an Asian family that is middle class or lower is beyond the pale even for you.

But I don't understand why the thought process is that schools are looking for the poor URMs...why can't they just be looking to bring in AA for an added sense of diversity, regardless of whether they are rich or poor? In a field Dominated by Asians and Whites, I don't see the issues with providing a leg up so that Minorities, despite their income level, can add diversity to a class. And can we really say that the competition is between the AA and the asian? That AA isn't your real competition; it's the asian with 3.9/40 being compared to the Asian with 3.2/30...no? Like you're making it seem as if AA who "don't deserve the seat" because they are not poor are taking away the seat from a poor Asian...but wait, 6.7% of the admissions in medicine are AA. Really? Those pesky Rich AA are taking all the seats! They must be stopped!

 

[reapplicanthelpme2014]

And I don't why financial stability = privileged and undeserving. Having money doesn't make racism any less prominent, nor does it mean that social inequality stops existing. You can have all the money in the world and still have a patient tell you "I want a white doctor" or be stopped while driving black. Money doesn't automatically make struggles of Minorities disappear.

 

[aegistitan]

But I don't understand why the thought process is that schools are looking for the poor URMs...why can't they just be looking to bring in AA for an added sense of diversity, regardless of whether they are rich or poor? In a field Dominated by Asians and Whites, I don't see the issues with providing a leg up so that Minorities, despite their income level, can add diversity to a class. And can we really say that the competition is between the AA and the asian? That AA isn't your real competition; it's the asian with 3.9/40 being compared to the Asian with 3.2/30...no? Like you're making it seem as if AA who "don't deserve the seat" because they are not poor are taking away the seat from a poor Asian...but wait, 6.7% of the admissions in medicine are AA. Really? Those pesky Rich AA are taking all the seats! They must be stopped!

Diversity is not one dimensional, it is not just race based. Your socioeconomic status falls under the large umbrella of diversity too. Wealthy African immigrants are less likely to go serve the inner cities and urban poor that need help, after they become a physician.

This discussion got somewhat sidetracked, but neither Dermviser nor myself ever argued that the wealthy African Americans are "taking the spot" of the Asian.

 

[JogoBonito]

Statistically, there are far fewer poor Asians than any other race percentage wise. Indians fare particularly well, with average incomes of $88,000 per the last Pew report I read.

http://newamericamedia.org/2012/07/indian-americans-most-educated-richest-says-pew-report.php

Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States.

I'm not sure if the generalizations made based on this report is accurate. The first thing that we need to stop doing is trying to group the varying experiences and realities of all Asian ethnic groups into one category. The experiences of Indian Americans (who has a unique immigration history, and socio-economic status of the majority of those who came to the United States and make up the current Indian American population) vs that of Hmong Americans or the the Experiences of Chinese Americans (the only ethnic group in the history of the United States to be ever denied citizenship solely based on ethnicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) and that of Vietnamnese Americans (whose immigration pattern is profoundly different than that of Indian Americans, Chinese Americans or Hmong Americans: aka a significant portion of the population came to the United States as political refugees, aka are not *mostly professional class immigrants http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states): are to say the least, different.

The current socio-economic makeup, political and social realities and the makeup of each of these Asian ethnic populations differ as clear as night and day; often dictated by the political history and the immigration/population trend of each subsets.

If you really want to know more. I suggest google

Let's discuss the blanket statement that "Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States"

The reality is that higher median family incomes among Asians is based on at least two factors (http://books.google.com/books?id=R_t3yQiWKQEC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&source=bl&ots=sQdT_65mdW&sig=ia177EGAxQ5uThZ9GJcB2CwT2as&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aBr-U4C_EqL3igLJyIHAAQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&f=false)

1) Asian families include more wage earners, and 2) Asian Americans tend to be clustered in cities where median incomes are higher overall. The reality is that even with the wage per hour edge of being concentrated in high cost of living, high wage cities, per capita income among Asians is lower than for whites, as is family wealth, and the rate of homeownership.

Second, while Asian Americans as a whole are the most highly educated racial group, Asians are the least likely group (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...cc0b76-5151-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html) to be promoted into managerial positions in both the public and private sectors. So while we enjoy a lower rate of unemployment, it may just be because we’ll work for less.

Third, the Asian American experience demonstrates that the so-called “intact” family with two-parents at home is not by itself a causative factor in determining “success.” Asian Americans’ supposed edge in this area remains consistent across Asian ethnicities in the U.S. So it’s true of Japanese Americans, who, as an ethnic group, have among the highest rates of college graduation and per capita incomes among all Americans, and among the Hmong, Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian Asian ethnic minorities who all exceed the national average rate of adults without high school diplomas (http://www.racefiles.com/2014/03/20/segregation-in-education-reading-between-the-lines/) of 19.6%, with the Hmong and Cambodians on the extreme end of disadvantage at 59.6% and 53.3%. And, these same groups are among the most impoverished Americans, (http://napca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/AAJC-Community-of-Contrast.pdf) with Hmong average per capita income from 2007-09 being just $10,949, and the most successful of the Asian groups most affected by poverty that I’ve listed here, the Vietnamese, at just $21, 542.

I could go on to cite statistics that indicate that Asians suffer most from long-term unemployment, (http://www.epi.org/press/asian-americans-continue-suffer-long-term/) or that Asians are falling into poverty (http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2013-12/18/content_17182453.htm) at a faster rate than other racial groups. Asians do, as an aggregate, enjoy certain financial advantage over other racial minority groups, but that advantage is greatly exaggerated.

Median household income is calculated by combining the aggregate incomes of all residents into a single household pot, with the basic assumption that everyone’s household is the same size. Yet, this is simply not the case: Asian Americans have among the largest household size of all races with an average of nearly 4 adult members per household compared to Whites, who have the on average the smallest households at 2.55. (http://goldsea.com/AAD/households.html) So, Asian American median household incomes are approximately 20% higher than Whites’, but with nearly twice as many people contributing their incomes to the same pot, indicating that median household income statistics grossly overestimate Asian American earning. When one considers, instead, the per capita income of Whites vs. Asians — that is, the median income per person rather than per family — the stark gap in annual salary narrows to a mere $3,000 difference ($28,000 for Asians vs $25,000 for Whites).



In addition, calculations of either median household or median per capita income fail to take into consideration the geographic stratification of Asian Americans versus the larger White population. Whereas White Americans are found in all 50 states in America, Asian American populations are largely concentrated in specific states — roughly half of us live in California, New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii alone due predominantly to the impact of migration patterns related to this country’s immigration history. Yet, these four states also top the list as the most expensive states to live in,(http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/) which will skew the apparent income earned by households located here. Thus, a recent study of the Asian American community by AAPI Data and the Center for American Progress opines:

…accounting for regional costs of living [for Asian Americans] would lead to adjusted estimates of per-capita income that would be significantly lower for Asian Americans than for whites. Furthermore, the disadvantage faced by Pacific Islanders would be even starker than what we find in the case of per-capita income without cost-of-living adjustments.

This quote highlights the final problem with citing an aggregate median household income statistic to make monolithic (and monolithically wrong) pronouncements about the Asian American community: Asians Americans aren’t just generic “people from Asia” . I mean, Asia isn’t a country but a continent encompassing roughly one third of the world’s landmass

The Asian American and Pacific Islander political identity consists, in reality, of a diasporic coalition of people whose experiences are more varied and distinct than one homogenizing number could ever reveal. As Jon Stewart tries, and fails, to point out, the AAPI communities include not just Chinese Americans and Indian Americans — two groups whose median incomes are among the highest in the country (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)— but also a range of ethnic communities whose economic indices scarcely reach parity with the US average, including: Samoan Americans, Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans and Laotian Americans. Statistics reveal a broad spectrum of economic and educational outcomes across this range of ethnic groups, most of whom are at or below the national average even while not accounting for geographic stratification — remember, again, that most of these AAPIs are found in states with higher overall costs of living.


We are not all the same.
These ethnic differences in household or per capita income arise almost entirely related to a single factor: American immigration policy. Roughly two thirds of AAPI are foreign-born; thus, it’s not hard to agree that immigration policy has a prominent influence over the demographic makeup of our community. The vast majority of “high achieving” AAPIs are comprised of ethnic groups whose entry into America occur predominantly through work- or education-based visas (or as the immediate family of those entering through such visas); thus, the apparently high median income of these groups is largely a consequence of an immigration policy that selects for immigrants with high existing education or economic capital with which to invest into measures of achievement. Meanwhile, AAPI ethnic groups with below-average median income are overwhelmingly Southeast Asian Americans or Pacific Islanders, who arrive with limited access to educational or economic opportunities in their countries of origins, and may include a higher proportion of immigrants entering as refugees, and thus lack the same advantages selected for by America’s work- and education-based visa programs.

Meanwhile, Let's Not simply ignores a host of other factors that would contradict his argument regarding Asian and Asian American affluence. While overall poverty rates are low among AAPIs, senior poverty rates are twice as high among Asian Americans as Whites, and poverty rates are growing by as much as 36% in parts of the AAPI community including among women and children. Asian American unemployment rates are low, but our rates of chronic unemployment are second highest in the country. (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)And while Asian Americans are well-represented in a variety of tech industries, ongoing discrimination produces both a “bamboo ceiling” against professional promotion and depresses earned income relative to White and non-White peers.

Sources "Reappropriate"-http://reappropriate.co/?p=6969
Scott Nakagawa "http://www.racefiles.com/2014/08/27...can-take-on-oreilly-race-and-asian-americans/"

Lastly
"
Data Shows Duality of Asian America: High Income, High Poverty"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...sian-america-high-income-high-poverty-n190031

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm not sure if the generalizations made based on this report is accurate. The first thing that we need to stop doing is trying to group the varying experiences and realities of all Asian ethnic groups into one category. The experiences of Indian Americans (who has a unique immigration history, and socio-economic status of the majority of those who came to the United States and make up the current Indian American population) vs that of Hmong Americans or the the Experiences of Chinese Americans (the only ethnic group in the history of the United States to be ever denied citizenship solely based on ethnicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) and that of Vietnamnese Americans (whose immigration pattern is profoundly different than that of Indian Americans, Chinese Americans or Hmong Americans: aka a significant portion of the population came to the United States as political refugees, aka are not *mostly professional class immigrants http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states): are to say the least, different.

The current socio-economic makeup, political and social realities and the makeup of each of these Asian ethnic populations differ as clear as night and day; often dictated by the political history and the immigration/population trend of each subsets.

If you really want to know more. I suggest google

Let's discuss the blanket statement that "Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States"

The reality is that higher median family incomes among Asians is based on at least two factors (http://books.google.com/books?id=R_t3yQiWKQEC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&source=bl&ots=sQdT_65mdW&sig=ia177EGAxQ5uThZ9GJcB2CwT2as&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aBr-U4C_EqL3igLJyIHAAQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&f=false)

1) Asian families include more wage earners, and 2) Asian Americans tend to be clustered in cities where median incomes are higher overall. The reality is that even with the wage per hour edge of being concentrated in high cost of living, high wage cities, per capita income among Asians is lower than for whites, as is family wealth, and the rate of homeownership.

Second, while Asian Americans as a whole are the most highly educated racial group, Asians are the least likely group (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...cc0b76-5151-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html) to be promoted into managerial positions in both the public and private sectors. So while we enjoy a lower rate of unemployment, it may just be because we’ll work for less.

Third, the Asian American experience demonstrates that the so-called “intact” family with two-parents at home is not by itself a causative factor in determining “success.” Asian Americans’ supposed edge in this area remains consistent across Asian ethnicities in the U.S. So it’s true of Japanese Americans, who, as an ethnic group, have among the highest rates of college graduation and per capita incomes among all Americans, and among the Hmong, Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian Asian ethnic minorities who all exceed the national average rate of adults without high school diplomas (http://www.racefiles.com/2014/03/20/segregation-in-education-reading-between-the-lines/) of 19.6%, with the Hmong and Cambodians on the extreme end of disadvantage at 59.6% and 53.3%. And, these same groups are among the most impoverished Americans, (http://napca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/AAJC-Community-of-Contrast.pdf) with Hmong average per capita income from 2007-09 being just $10,949, and the most successful of the Asian groups most affected by poverty that I’ve listed here, the Vietnamese, at just $21, 542.

I could go on to cite statistics that indicate that Asians suffer most from long-term unemployment, (http://www.epi.org/press/asian-americans-continue-suffer-long-term/) or that Asians are falling into poverty (http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2013-12/18/content_17182453.htm) at a faster rate than other racial groups. Asians do, as an aggregate, enjoy certain financial advantage over other racial minority groups, but that advantage is greatly exaggerated.

Median household income is calculated by combining the aggregate incomes of all residents into a single household pot, with the basic assumption that everyone’s household is the same size. Yet, this is simply not the case: Asian Americans have among the largest household size of all races with an average of nearly 4 adult members per household compared to Whites, who have the on average the smallest households at 2.55. (http://goldsea.com/AAD/households.html) So, Asian American median household incomes are approximately 20% higher than Whites’, but with nearly twice as many people contributing their incomes to the same pot, indicating that median household income statistics grossly overestimate Asian American earning. When one considers, instead, the per capita income of Whites vs. Asians — that is, the median income per person rather than per family — the stark gap in annual salary narrows to a mere $3,000 difference ($28,000 for Asians vs $25,000 for Whites).



In addition, calculations of either median household or median per capita income fail to take into consideration the geographic stratification of Asian Americans versus the larger White population. Whereas White Americans are found in all 50 states in America, Asian American populations are largely concentrated in specific states — roughly half of us live in California, New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii alone due predominantly to the impact of migration patterns related to this country’s immigration history. Yet, these four states also top the list as the most expensive states to live in,(http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/) which will skew the apparent income earned by households located here. Thus, a recent study of the Asian American community by AAPI Data and the Center for American Progress opines:

…accounting for regional costs of living [for Asian Americans] would lead to adjusted estimates of per-capita income that would be significantly lower for Asian Americans than for whites. Furthermore, the disadvantage faced by Pacific Islanders would be even starker than what we find in the case of per-capita income without cost-of-living adjustments.

This quote highlights the final problem with citing an aggregate median household income statistic to make monolithic (and monolithically wrong) pronouncements about the Asian American community: Asians Americans aren’t just generic “people from Asia” . I mean, Asia isn’t a country but a continent encompassing roughly one third of the world’s landmass

The Asian American and Pacific Islander political identity consists, in reality, of a diasporic coalition of people whose experiences are more varied and distinct than one homogenizing number could ever reveal. As Jon Stewart tries, and fails, to point out, the AAPI communities include not just Chinese Americans and Indian Americans — two groups whose median incomes are among the highest in the country (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)— but also a range of ethnic communities whose economic indices scarcely reach parity with the US average, including: Samoan Americans, Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans and Laotian Americans. Statistics reveal a broad spectrum of economic and educational outcomes across this range of ethnic groups, most of whom are at or below the national average even while not accounting for geographic stratification — remember, again, that most of these AAPIs are found in states with higher overall costs of living.


We are not all the same.
These ethnic differences in household or per capita income arise almost entirely related to a single factor: American immigration policy. Roughly two thirds of AAPI are foreign-born; thus, it’s not hard to agree that immigration policy has a prominent influence over the demographic makeup of our community. The vast majority of “high achieving” AAPIs are comprised of ethnic groups whose entry into America occur predominantly through work- or education-based visas (or as the immediate family of those entering through such visas); thus, the apparently high median income of these groups is largely a consequence of an immigration policy that selects for immigrants with high existing education or economic capital with which to invest into measures of achievement. Meanwhile, AAPI ethnic groups with below-average median income are overwhelmingly Southeast Asian Americans or Pacific Islanders, who arrive with limited access to educational or economic opportunities in their countries of origins, and may include a higher proportion of immigrants entering as refugees, and thus lack the same advantages selected for by America’s work- and education-based visa programs.

Meanwhile, Let's Not simply ignores a host of other factors that would contradict his argument regarding Asian and Asian American affluence. While overall poverty rates are low among AAPIs, senior poverty rates are twice as high among Asian Americans as Whites, and poverty rates are growing by as much as 36% in parts of the AAPI community including among women and children. Asian American unemployment rates are low, but our rates of chronic unemployment are second highest in the country. (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)And while Asian Americans are well-represented in a variety of tech industries, ongoing discrimination produces both a “bamboo ceiling” against professional promotion and depresses earned income relative to White and non-White peers.

Sources "Reappropriate"-http://reappropriate.co/?p=6969
Scott Nakagawa "http://www.racefiles.com/2014/08/27...can-take-on-oreilly-race-and-asian-americans/"

Lastly
"
Data Shows Duality of Asian America: High Income, High Poverty"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...sian-america-high-income-high-poverty-n190031

 

[Porkloins]

I'm not sure if the generalizations made based on this report is accurate. The first thing that we need to stop doing is trying to group the varying experiences and realities of all Asian ethnic groups into one category. The experiences of Indian Americans (who has a unique immigration history, and socio-economic status of the majority of those who came to the United States and make up the current Indian American population) vs that of Hmong Americans or the the Experiences of Chinese Americans (the only ethnic group in the history of the United States to be ever denied citizenship solely based on ethnicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) and that of Vietnamnese Americans (whose immigration pattern is profoundly different than that of Indian Americans, Chinese Americans or Hmong Americans: aka a significant portion of the population came to the United States as political refugees, aka are not *mostly professional class immigrants http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states): are to say the least, different.

The current socio-economic makeup, political and social realities and the makeup of each of these Asian ethnic populations differ as clear as night and day; often dictated by the political history and the immigration/population trend of each subsets.

If you really want to know more. I suggest google

Let's discuss the blanket statement that "Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States"

The reality is that higher median family incomes among Asians is based on at least two factors (http://books.google.com/books?id=R_t3yQiWKQEC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&source=bl&ots=sQdT_65mdW&sig=ia177EGAxQ5uThZ9GJcB2CwT2as&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aBr-U4C_EqL3igLJyIHAAQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&f=false)

1) Asian families include more wage earners, and 2) Asian Americans tend to be clustered in cities where median incomes are higher overall. The reality is that even with the wage per hour edge of being concentrated in high cost of living, high wage cities, per capita income among Asians is lower than for whites, as is family wealth, and the rate of homeownership.

Second, while Asian Americans as a whole are the most highly educated racial group, Asians are the least likely group (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...cc0b76-5151-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html) to be promoted into managerial positions in both the public and private sectors. So while we enjoy a lower rate of unemployment, it may just be because we’ll work for less.

Third, the Asian American experience demonstrates that the so-called “intact” family with two-parents at home is not by itself a causative factor in determining “success.” Asian Americans’ supposed edge in this area remains consistent across Asian ethnicities in the U.S. So it’s true of Japanese Americans, who, as an ethnic group, have among the highest rates of college graduation and per capita incomes among all Americans, and among the Hmong, Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian Asian ethnic minorities who all exceed the national average rate of adults without high school diplomas (http://www.racefiles.com/2014/03/20/segregation-in-education-reading-between-the-lines/) of 19.6%, with the Hmong and Cambodians on the extreme end of disadvantage at 59.6% and 53.3%. And, these same groups are among the most impoverished Americans, (http://napca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/AAJC-Community-of-Contrast.pdf) with Hmong average per capita income from 2007-09 being just $10,949, and the most successful of the Asian groups most affected by poverty that I’ve listed here, the Vietnamese, at just $21, 542.

I could go on to cite statistics that indicate that Asians suffer most from long-term unemployment, (http://www.epi.org/press/asian-americans-continue-suffer-long-term/) or that Asians are falling into poverty (http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2013-12/18/content_17182453.htm) at a faster rate than other racial groups. Asians do, as an aggregate, enjoy certain financial advantage over other racial minority groups, but that advantage is greatly exaggerated.

Median household income is calculated by combining the aggregate incomes of all residents into a single household pot, with the basic assumption that everyone’s household is the same size. Yet, this is simply not the case: Asian Americans have among the largest household size of all races with an average of nearly 4 adult members per household compared to Whites, who have the on average the smallest households at 2.55. (http://goldsea.com/AAD/households.html) So, Asian American median household incomes are approximately 20% higher than Whites’, but with nearly twice as many people contributing their incomes to the same pot, indicating that median household income statistics grossly overestimate Asian American earning. When one considers, instead, the per capita income of Whites vs. Asians — that is, the median income per person rather than per family — the stark gap in annual salary narrows to a mere $3,000 difference ($28,000 for Asians vs $25,000 for Whites).



In addition, calculations of either median household or median per capita income fail to take into consideration the geographic stratification of Asian Americans versus the larger White population. Whereas White Americans are found in all 50 states in America, Asian American populations are largely concentrated in specific states — roughly half of us live in California, New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii alone due predominantly to the impact of migration patterns related to this country’s immigration history. Yet, these four states also top the list as the most expensive states to live in,(http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/) which will skew the apparent income earned by households located here. Thus, a recent study of the Asian American community by AAPI Data and the Center for American Progress opines:

…accounting for regional costs of living [for Asian Americans] would lead to adjusted estimates of per-capita income that would be significantly lower for Asian Americans than for whites. Furthermore, the disadvantage faced by Pacific Islanders would be even starker than what we find in the case of per-capita income without cost-of-living adjustments.

This quote highlights the final problem with citing an aggregate median household income statistic to make monolithic (and monolithically wrong) pronouncements about the Asian American community: Asians Americans aren’t just generic “people from Asia” . I mean, Asia isn’t a country but a continent encompassing roughly one third of the world’s landmass

The Asian American and Pacific Islander political identity consists, in reality, of a diasporic coalition of people whose experiences are more varied and distinct than one homogenizing number could ever reveal. As Jon Stewart tries, and fails, to point out, the AAPI communities include not just Chinese Americans and Indian Americans — two groups whose median incomes are among the highest in the country (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)— but also a range of ethnic communities whose economic indices scarcely reach parity with the US average, including: Samoan Americans, Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans and Laotian Americans. Statistics reveal a broad spectrum of economic and educational outcomes across this range of ethnic groups, most of whom are at or below the national average even while not accounting for geographic stratification — remember, again, that most of these AAPIs are found in states with higher overall costs of living.


We are not all the same.
These ethnic differences in household or per capita income arise almost entirely related to a single factor: American immigration policy. Roughly two thirds of AAPI are foreign-born; thus, it’s not hard to agree that immigration policy has a prominent influence over the demographic makeup of our community. The vast majority of “high achieving” AAPIs are comprised of ethnic groups whose entry into America occur predominantly through work- or education-based visas (or as the immediate family of those entering through such visas); thus, the apparently high median income of these groups is largely a consequence of an immigration policy that selects for immigrants with high existing education or economic capital with which to invest into measures of achievement. Meanwhile, AAPI ethnic groups with below-average median income are overwhelmingly Southeast Asian Americans or Pacific Islanders, who arrive with limited access to educational or economic opportunities in their countries of origins, and may include a higher proportion of immigrants entering as refugees, and thus lack the same advantages selected for by America’s work- and education-based visa programs.

Meanwhile, Let's Not simply ignores a host of other factors that would contradict his argument regarding Asian and Asian American affluence. While overall poverty rates are low among AAPIs, senior poverty rates are twice as high among Asian Americans as Whites, and poverty rates are growing by as much as 36% in parts of the AAPI community including among women and children. Asian American unemployment rates are low, but our rates of chronic unemployment are second highest in the country. (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)And while Asian Americans are well-represented in a variety of tech industries, ongoing discrimination produces both a “bamboo ceiling” against professional promotion and depresses earned income relative to White and non-White peers.

Sources "Reappropriate"-http://reappropriate.co/?p=6969
Scott Nakagawa "http://www.racefiles.com/2014/08/27...can-take-on-oreilly-race-and-asian-americans/"

Lastly
"
Data Shows Duality of Asian America: High Income, High Poverty"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...sian-america-high-income-high-poverty-n190031

Holy crap... great post (which took all of ~5 minutes to read, dude above...)

 

[Goro]

For the 1000th time, no. Asian-Americans are overrepresented in med school student demographics compared to their population numbers. They are among the most successful immigrant populations in our history.

I've read recently on a thread that being an ORM can dramatically reduce your chances, no matter how good your grades, MCAT, activities are. Is this true?

I can't do anything about my ethnicity! Unfair to still use affirmative action in today's world

Sincerely,
wondergirl3

 

[Mad Jack]

Holy crap... great post (which took all of ~5 minutes to read, dude above...)

In 5 minutes, I could have watched this video about just how much I didn't read his post four times.

5 minutes is a lot of time in med school bro.

 

[ciruji]

How sad it is to be a disadvantaged white or a disadvantaged asian.. but hey, Political Correctness has to be everywhere

 

[Aubrey Graham]

Wow thread blew up..good job OP.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[I'm not a cat]

Affirmative action is totally fair. If you stratify data based on SES, you will still see ORM tend to have a higher income as opposed to URM. Higher income leads to better neighborhoods, if in a better neighborhood you will probably, definitely, receive a better primary education.

Education is not the same in every neighborhood. Those who attend better schools get the better primary education, then those students have a better foundation for the rest of their academic career. The better schools, public and private, tend to be in more affluent neighborhoods. If an URM with a low SES is to compete with the ORM, you cannot directly compare them based on stats—it's unfair. GPA and MCAT tell you how much time a person is able to devote to a certain subject, also the foundation of your education, not your potential.

As someone who went to a school in a poorer neighborhood, I can say there are key differences, I took both physics and chemistry AP. However, in physics we didn't get much past fluids (didn't even cover E&M because the class could not handle the material). In chemistry, it was a complete joke—we never learned much other than acids and bases. I attended a university with many people who made 5s on those AP tests. Was it harder for me to compete with them in physics and on the physical sciences section on the MCAT? yes! But, thankfully, I saved a great deal of money working in high school. It allowed me to not work my first two years in college, and that allowed me to compete with my peers. I have the same stats as most ORM being accepted to medical school right now.

It was not easy but it could only happen because I had the foresight to work and save since my freshman year in high school. MOST people with a lower SES background do not have that luxury and must work the moment they enter college. Do not kid your self into saying those with a lower SES have the same opportunities as those with a stable financial background. If you had the luxury of working a very small part time job or no job, you had so much more time to devote to studying.

Nonetheless, I understand there are ORM who are in a low SES. They have a place to indicate that in medical school applications—be sure to use that in your app if you are an ORM with a low SES. However, there are differences in the ability of an URM to climb the social ladder. Racism is real. I won't go into detail. That's a big discussion, but here is a small example: Every day my premed peers judge me for the number of acceptances I have. Behind my back I have been told they assume it is because of my ethnicity. All of the hard work is discredited for no good reason. If I were an ORM, I would probably still get into medical school.

But for those who are less fortunate, it is very hard to compete with their peers. Money creates different experiences for people. The experiences and opportunities to succeed are not the same—yet again, affirmative action serves a purpose.

 

[DermViser]

but its at about to be 5pm and the weekend so im out on this note

was your solution the color blind admissions one? i mean i guess, but if there was a color blind admissions for the past 100s of years that didnt cut out blacks for the majority of time this country has been functioning, then maybe there wouldnt be a 'color aware' admissions.

but maybe you right, why try to alleviate the 100s of years of oppression that is so deep in this country that it has shut out blacks from most upper level areas in the country? desegregation 50 yrs ago should have been enough.

No. It was the socioeconomic status/class one. With a New York Times article explaining how it can also achieve race diversity as well.

 

[TeddyMeddy]

.

 

[DermViser]

How sad it is to be a disadvantaged white or a disadvantaged asian.. but hey, Political Correctness has to be everywhere

I'm sure the stats of the average white and asian person not being poor, gives the middle-class white/asian person real solace.

 

[Lucca]

I'm not sure if the generalizations made based on this report is accurate. The first thing that we need to stop doing is trying to group the varying experiences and realities of all Asian ethnic groups into one category. The experiences of Indian Americans (who has a unique immigration history, and socio-economic status of the majority of those who came to the United States and make up the current Indian American population) vs that of Hmong Americans or the the Experiences of Chinese Americans (the only ethnic group in the history of the United States to be ever denied citizenship solely based on ethnicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) and that of Vietnamnese Americans (whose immigration pattern is profoundly different than that of Indian Americans, Chinese Americans or Hmong Americans: aka a significant portion of the population came to the United States as political refugees, aka are not *mostly professional class immigrants http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states): are to say the least, different.

The current socio-economic makeup, political and social realities and the makeup of each of these Asian ethnic populations differ as clear as night and day; often dictated by the political history and the immigration/population trend of each subsets.

If you really want to know more. I suggest google

Let's discuss the blanket statement that "Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States"

The reality is that higher median family incomes among Asians is based on at least two factors (http://books.google.com/books?id=R_t3yQiWKQEC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&source=bl&ots=sQdT_65mdW&sig=ia177EGAxQ5uThZ9GJcB2CwT2as&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aBr-U4C_EqL3igLJyIHAAQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&f=false)

1) Asian families include more wage earners, and 2) Asian Americans tend to be clustered in cities where median incomes are higher overall. The reality is that even with the wage per hour edge of being concentrated in high cost of living, high wage cities, per capita income among Asians is lower than for whites, as is family wealth, and the rate of homeownership.

Second, while Asian Americans as a whole are the most highly educated racial group, Asians are the least likely group (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...cc0b76-5151-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html) to be promoted into managerial positions in both the public and private sectors. So while we enjoy a lower rate of unemployment, it may just be because we’ll work for less.

Third, the Asian American experience demonstrates that the so-called “intact” family with two-parents at home is not by itself a causative factor in determining “success.” Asian Americans’ supposed edge in this area remains consistent across Asian ethnicities in the U.S. So it’s true of Japanese Americans, who, as an ethnic group, have among the highest rates of college graduation and per capita incomes among all Americans, and among the Hmong, Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian Asian ethnic minorities who all exceed the national average rate of adults without high school diplomas (http://www.racefiles.com/2014/03/20/segregation-in-education-reading-between-the-lines/) of 19.6%, with the Hmong and Cambodians on the extreme end of disadvantage at 59.6% and 53.3%. And, these same groups are among the most impoverished Americans, (http://napca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/AAJC-Community-of-Contrast.pdf) with Hmong average per capita income from 2007-09 being just $10,949, and the most successful of the Asian groups most affected by poverty that I’ve listed here, the Vietnamese, at just $21, 542.

I could go on to cite statistics that indicate that Asians suffer most from long-term unemployment, (http://www.epi.org/press/asian-americans-continue-suffer-long-term/) or that Asians are falling into poverty (http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2013-12/18/content_17182453.htm) at a faster rate than other racial groups. Asians do, as an aggregate, enjoy certain financial advantage over other racial minority groups, but that advantage is greatly exaggerated.

Median household income is calculated by combining the aggregate incomes of all residents into a single household pot, with the basic assumption that everyone’s household is the same size. Yet, this is simply not the case: Asian Americans have among the largest household size of all races with an average of nearly 4 adult members per household compared to Whites, who have the on average the smallest households at 2.55. (http://goldsea.com/AAD/households.html) So, Asian American median household incomes are approximately 20% higher than Whites’, but with nearly twice as many people contributing their incomes to the same pot, indicating that median household income statistics grossly overestimate Asian American earning. When one considers, instead, the per capita income of Whites vs. Asians — that is, the median income per person rather than per family — the stark gap in annual salary narrows to a mere $3,000 difference ($28,000 for Asians vs $25,000 for Whites).



In addition, calculations of either median household or median per capita income fail to take into consideration the geographic stratification of Asian Americans versus the larger White population. Whereas White Americans are found in all 50 states in America, Asian American populations are largely concentrated in specific states — roughly half of us live in California, New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii alone due predominantly to the impact of migration patterns related to this country’s immigration history. Yet, these four states also top the list as the most expensive states to live in,(http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/) which will skew the apparent income earned by households located here. Thus, a recent study of the Asian American community by AAPI Data and the Center for American Progress opines:

…accounting for regional costs of living [for Asian Americans] would lead to adjusted estimates of per-capita income that would be significantly lower for Asian Americans than for whites. Furthermore, the disadvantage faced by Pacific Islanders would be even starker than what we find in the case of per-capita income without cost-of-living adjustments.

This quote highlights the final problem with citing an aggregate median household income statistic to make monolithic (and monolithically wrong) pronouncements about the Asian American community: Asians Americans aren’t just generic “people from Asia” . I mean, Asia isn’t a country but a continent encompassing roughly one third of the world’s landmass

The Asian American and Pacific Islander political identity consists, in reality, of a diasporic coalition of people whose experiences are more varied and distinct than one homogenizing number could ever reveal. As Jon Stewart tries, and fails, to point out, the AAPI communities include not just Chinese Americans and Indian Americans — two groups whose median incomes are among the highest in the country (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)— but also a range of ethnic communities whose economic indices scarcely reach parity with the US average, including: Samoan Americans, Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans and Laotian Americans. Statistics reveal a broad spectrum of economic and educational outcomes across this range of ethnic groups, most of whom are at or below the national average even while not accounting for geographic stratification — remember, again, that most of these AAPIs are found in states with higher overall costs of living.


We are not all the same.
These ethnic differences in household or per capita income arise almost entirely related to a single factor: American immigration policy. Roughly two thirds of AAPI are foreign-born; thus, it’s not hard to agree that immigration policy has a prominent influence over the demographic makeup of our community. The vast majority of “high achieving” AAPIs are comprised of ethnic groups whose entry into America occur predominantly through work- or education-based visas (or as the immediate family of those entering through such visas); thus, the apparently high median income of these groups is largely a consequence of an immigration policy that selects for immigrants with high existing education or economic capital with which to invest into measures of achievement. Meanwhile, AAPI ethnic groups with below-average median income are overwhelmingly Southeast Asian Americans or Pacific Islanders, who arrive with limited access to educational or economic opportunities in their countries of origins, and may include a higher proportion of immigrants entering as refugees, and thus lack the same advantages selected for by America’s work- and education-based visa programs.

Meanwhile, Let's Not simply ignores a host of other factors that would contradict his argument regarding Asian and Asian American affluence. While overall poverty rates are low among AAPIs, senior poverty rates are twice as high among Asian Americans as Whites, and poverty rates are growing by as much as 36% in parts of the AAPI community including among women and children. Asian American unemployment rates are low, but our rates of chronic unemployment are second highest in the country. (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)And while Asian Americans are well-represented in a variety of tech industries, ongoing discrimination produces both a “bamboo ceiling” against professional promotion and depresses earned income relative to White and non-White peers.

Sources "Reappropriate"-http://reappropriate.co/?p=6969
Scott Nakagawa "http://www.racefiles.com/2014/08/27...can-take-on-oreilly-race-and-asian-americans/"

Lastly
"
Data Shows Duality of Asian America: High Income, High Poverty"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...sian-america-high-income-high-poverty-n190031

10/10 best post against "most Asians are wealthy" argument on SDN, probably on whole of internet. Everyone just model your arguments off of this so my eyes can bleed less reading these threads.

Not air tight, however, in the context of medical school admissions. May or may not respond after final.

 

[Mad Jack]

10/10 best post against "most Asians are wealthy" argument on SDN, probably on whole of internet. Everyone just model your arguments off of this so my eyes can bleed less reading these threads.

Not air tight, however, in the context of medical school admissions. May or may not respond after final.

It's a complex argument that I'd need time to deconstruct. Needless to say, almost all of the Asian kids in my class have one or two physician parents, and are hardly hurting financially. The "Asian" designation is pretty broad, but is quite dichotomous, with a large group of "haves" and a smaller, but not insubstantial, group of "have nots."

 

[BlueCircle]

Why do people on here think that medical schools use URM progams for the benefit of the indivdual applicants to "right the wrongs" of racism against the applicants? Thats far from being the primary reason. They do so with the well being of PATIENTS in mind, to have a doctor population that closely mirrors that of the population to help end health disparities. Please drop the whole "but URMs encounter so much systematic racism" narcissitic cry. Its not about medical school applicants but patients!!!

 

[altblue]

Why do people on here think that medical schools use URM progams for the benefit of the indivdual applicants to "right the wrongs" of racism against the applicants? Thats far from being the primary reason. They do so with the well being of PATIENTS in mind, to have a doctor population that closely mirrors that of the population to help end health disparities. Please drop the whole "but URMs encounter so much systematic racism" narcissitic cry. Its not about medical school applicants but patients!!!

I agree with you here, but maybe succeeding despite subtle/pervasive racism should make an applicant look even stronger, especially if they were economically disadvantaged.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I'm not sure if the generalizations made based on this report is accurate. The first thing that we need to stop doing is trying to group the varying experiences and realities of all Asian ethnic groups into one category. The experiences of Indian Americans (who has a unique immigration history, and socio-economic status of the majority of those who came to the United States and make up the current Indian American population) vs that of Hmong Americans or the the Experiences of Chinese Americans (the only ethnic group in the history of the United States to be ever denied citizenship solely based on ethnicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) and that of Vietnamnese Americans (whose immigration pattern is profoundly different than that of Indian Americans, Chinese Americans or Hmong Americans: aka a significant portion of the population came to the United States as political refugees, aka are not *mostly professional class immigrants http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states): are to say the least, different.

The current socio-economic makeup, political and social realities and the makeup of each of these Asian ethnic populations differ as clear as night and day; often dictated by the political history and the immigration/population trend of each subsets.

If you really want to know more. I suggest google

Let's discuss the blanket statement that "Basically, Asians aren't exactly hurting financially, on average. There's poverty amongst all races, but Asians are less likely to be affected by it than any other group in the United States"

The reality is that higher median family incomes among Asians is based on at least two factors (http://books.google.com/books?id=R_t3yQiWKQEC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&source=bl&ots=sQdT_65mdW&sig=ia177EGAxQ5uThZ9GJcB2CwT2as&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aBr-U4C_EqL3igLJyIHAAQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=unemployment among non english speaking asian americans&f=false)

1) Asian families include more wage earners, and 2) Asian Americans tend to be clustered in cities where median incomes are higher overall. The reality is that even with the wage per hour edge of being concentrated in high cost of living, high wage cities, per capita income among Asians is lower than for whites, as is family wealth, and the rate of homeownership.

Second, while Asian Americans as a whole are the most highly educated racial group, Asians are the least likely group (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...cc0b76-5151-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html) to be promoted into managerial positions in both the public and private sectors. So while we enjoy a lower rate of unemployment, it may just be because we’ll work for less.

Third, the Asian American experience demonstrates that the so-called “intact” family with two-parents at home is not by itself a causative factor in determining “success.” Asian Americans’ supposed edge in this area remains consistent across Asian ethnicities in the U.S. So it’s true of Japanese Americans, who, as an ethnic group, have among the highest rates of college graduation and per capita incomes among all Americans, and among the Hmong, Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian Asian ethnic minorities who all exceed the national average rate of adults without high school diplomas (http://www.racefiles.com/2014/03/20/segregation-in-education-reading-between-the-lines/) of 19.6%, with the Hmong and Cambodians on the extreme end of disadvantage at 59.6% and 53.3%. And, these same groups are among the most impoverished Americans, (http://napca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/AAJC-Community-of-Contrast.pdf) with Hmong average per capita income from 2007-09 being just $10,949, and the most successful of the Asian groups most affected by poverty that I’ve listed here, the Vietnamese, at just $21, 542.

I could go on to cite statistics that indicate that Asians suffer most from long-term unemployment, (http://www.epi.org/press/asian-americans-continue-suffer-long-term/) or that Asians are falling into poverty (http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2013-12/18/content_17182453.htm) at a faster rate than other racial groups. Asians do, as an aggregate, enjoy certain financial advantage over other racial minority groups, but that advantage is greatly exaggerated.

Median household income is calculated by combining the aggregate incomes of all residents into a single household pot, with the basic assumption that everyone’s household is the same size. Yet, this is simply not the case: Asian Americans have among the largest household size of all races with an average of nearly 4 adult members per household compared to Whites, who have the on average the smallest households at 2.55. (http://goldsea.com/AAD/households.html) So, Asian American median household incomes are approximately 20% higher than Whites’, but with nearly twice as many people contributing their incomes to the same pot, indicating that median household income statistics grossly overestimate Asian American earning. When one considers, instead, the per capita income of Whites vs. Asians — that is, the median income per person rather than per family — the stark gap in annual salary narrows to a mere $3,000 difference ($28,000 for Asians vs $25,000 for Whites).



In addition, calculations of either median household or median per capita income fail to take into consideration the geographic stratification of Asian Americans versus the larger White population. Whereas White Americans are found in all 50 states in America, Asian American populations are largely concentrated in specific states — roughly half of us live in California, New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii alone due predominantly to the impact of migration patterns related to this country’s immigration history. Yet, these four states also top the list as the most expensive states to live in,(http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/) which will skew the apparent income earned by households located here. Thus, a recent study of the Asian American community by AAPI Data and the Center for American Progress opines:

…accounting for regional costs of living [for Asian Americans] would lead to adjusted estimates of per-capita income that would be significantly lower for Asian Americans than for whites. Furthermore, the disadvantage faced by Pacific Islanders would be even starker than what we find in the case of per-capita income without cost-of-living adjustments.

This quote highlights the final problem with citing an aggregate median household income statistic to make monolithic (and monolithically wrong) pronouncements about the Asian American community: Asians Americans aren’t just generic “people from Asia” . I mean, Asia isn’t a country but a continent encompassing roughly one third of the world’s landmass

The Asian American and Pacific Islander political identity consists, in reality, of a diasporic coalition of people whose experiences are more varied and distinct than one homogenizing number could ever reveal. As Jon Stewart tries, and fails, to point out, the AAPI communities include not just Chinese Americans and Indian Americans — two groups whose median incomes are among the highest in the country (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)— but also a range of ethnic communities whose economic indices scarcely reach parity with the US average, including: Samoan Americans, Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans and Laotian Americans. Statistics reveal a broad spectrum of economic and educational outcomes across this range of ethnic groups, most of whom are at or below the national average even while not accounting for geographic stratification — remember, again, that most of these AAPIs are found in states with higher overall costs of living.


We are not all the same.
These ethnic differences in household or per capita income arise almost entirely related to a single factor: American immigration policy. Roughly two thirds of AAPI are foreign-born; thus, it’s not hard to agree that immigration policy has a prominent influence over the demographic makeup of our community. The vast majority of “high achieving” AAPIs are comprised of ethnic groups whose entry into America occur predominantly through work- or education-based visas (or as the immediate family of those entering through such visas); thus, the apparently high median income of these groups is largely a consequence of an immigration policy that selects for immigrants with high existing education or economic capital with which to invest into measures of achievement. Meanwhile, AAPI ethnic groups with below-average median income are overwhelmingly Southeast Asian Americans or Pacific Islanders, who arrive with limited access to educational or economic opportunities in their countries of origins, and may include a higher proportion of immigrants entering as refugees, and thus lack the same advantages selected for by America’s work- and education-based visa programs.

Meanwhile, Let's Not simply ignores a host of other factors that would contradict his argument regarding Asian and Asian American affluence. While overall poverty rates are low among AAPIs, senior poverty rates are twice as high among Asian Americans as Whites, and poverty rates are growing by as much as 36% in parts of the AAPI community including among women and children. Asian American unemployment rates are low, but our rates of chronic unemployment are second highest in the country. (http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AAPIReport-comp.pdf)And while Asian Americans are well-represented in a variety of tech industries, ongoing discrimination produces both a “bamboo ceiling” against professional promotion and depresses earned income relative to White and non-White peers.

Sources "Reappropriate"-http://reappropriate.co/?p=6969
Scott Nakagawa "http://www.racefiles.com/2014/08/27...can-take-on-oreilly-race-and-asian-americans/"

Lastly
"
Data Shows Duality of Asian America: High Income, High Poverty"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...sian-america-high-income-high-poverty-n190031

I totally agree that it's wrong to view Asians as a homogenous group. And obviously, SE Asian refugees (and others) who arrived with lesser resources cannot be grouped with more privileged Asians.

Just a side note: It's refreshing to see that there are Asian doctors and healthcare workers in NYC (particularly in the Lower East Side and Chinatown areas of Manhattan) who help the poor Asian immigrants from those communities.

 

[Dentalogist]

in my opinion, yes. I believe in diversity. can you imagine if all health doctors were asians?lol

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Lol, is that you in the Darth Vader costume?!

 

[Mad Jack]

Lol, is that you in the Darth Vader costume?!

Only in spirit

 

[JogoBonito]

It's a complex argument that I'd need time to deconstruct. Needless to say, almost all of the Asian kids in my class have one or two physician parents, and are hardly hurting financially. The "Asian" designation is pretty broad, but is quite dichotomous, with a large group of "haves" and a smaller, but not insubstantial, group of "have nots."

Be-careful of anecdotal evidence. and a small sample size The people that are in your class (specific university) or that you meet/know can be a very self selecting and filtered portrayal of reality depending on your personal background, community and the type of school you go to. (Top 20?, Liberal Arts? Private? Public? The fact that they can afford to attend college at all?) For example Hmong Americans, Cambodian Americans are severely underrepresented at universities (especially considering socioeconomic and geographic factors), and you might not have met any or a lot in your lives. In fact depending on your geographic location, the chance that you meet a population very representative of the entire Asian population in the United States can be very low. Most of us are concentrated in cities, whilst the suburbs throughout America for example (presenting a pre-selecting wealth barrier of entry) contains mostly professional class Asians (which do not reflect the make up of the majority of the Asian American population: of course this statement can be further stratified by ethnicity)

Furthermore most of the Asian diasporic representatives in American universities are Indian American, Pakistani American, Filipino American, Chinese American, Korean American, Japanese American and plus few others including international asian students (whom the majority come from wealthy international families able to afford American university tuition as foreigners: aka for the most cases ineligible for financial aide or extensive scholarship). The majority of these cases are that students are further pre-selected by the socio-economic status of their parents when attending universities. College/school by itself is a very elitist representation of any group, and usually leaves students with a very biased perception of American societal makeup. Larger population trends are very important in assessing an entire racial group's social economic condition" which as I have discussed above but apparently you do believe is worth reading.

Considering the research and all the sources I outlined for you above. I am confused your continued belief that Asian Americans hardly hurt financially. If we take the white majority as normal (not hurting but not wining), Asian Americans do no better socio-economically than their comparative white counterparts as a population even considering that there is a higher percentage of Asian American populace with significantly more advanced professional and academic qualification (due to a immigration policy that sets such criteria for entry and citizenship for specific ethnicities), it would actually indicate that Asian America as a whole actually hurts from a lack of true meritocracy (language barrier, discrimination, things that will take months to discuss). The pervasive notion that Asian Americans are rich, all successful and as a population in general flourish in American Society is a myth tied to a social phenom called the model minority complex: which for further reference I suggest you take the 5 minutes to read what I wrote or do your own research. Asian Americans as a whole suffer from a phenom known as the bamboo ceiling (reference above) as well.

In conclusion, and to try to keep anything I say relatively short because you might not read long posts that I write, it is impossible and simply ignorant to talk about Asian America as a single or dichotomous phenom. Our experiences are as varied, substantial and complex as our ethnic differences. There are great deal of sources out there that discuss our population trends and socio-economic realities on a much truer level than personal stereotypes and anecdotes. If you do not find my posts engaging or interesting, or simply will not take my word for it, well there are plenty of other words on the internet that I hope you take the time to engage.

Only a sith deals with absolutes- Obi-Wan Kenobi (whom, mind you, I always thought should've been Asian)

 

[Mad Jack]

Be-careful of anecdotal evidence. and a small sample size The people that are in your class (specific university) or that you meet/know can be a very self selecting and filtered portrayal of reality depending on your personal background, community and the type of school you go to. (Top 20?, Liberal Arts? Private? Public? The fact that they can afford to attend college at all?) For example Hmong Americans, Cambodian Americans are severely underrepresented at universities (especially considering socioeconomic and geographic factors), and you might not have met any or a lot in your lives. In fact depending on your geographic location, the chance that you meet a population very representative of the entire Asian population in the United States can be very low. Most of us are concentrated in cities, whilst the suburbs throughout America for example (presenting a pre-selecting wealth barrier of entry) contains mostly professional class Asians (which do not reflect the make up of the majority of the Asian American population: of course this statement can be further stratified by ethnicity)

Furthermore most of the Asian diasporic representatives in American universities are Indian American, Pakistani American, Filipino American, Chinese American, Korean American, Japanese American and plus few others including international asian students (whom the majority come from wealthy international families able to afford American university tuition as foreigners: aka for the most cases ineligible for financial aide or extensive scholarship). The majority of these cases are that students are further pre-selected by the socio-economic status of their parents when attending universities. College/school by itself is a very elitist representation of any group, and usually leaves students with a very biased perception of American societal makeup. Larger population trends are very important in assessing an entire racial group's social economic condition" which as I have discussed above but apparently you do believe is worth reading.

Considering the research and all the sources I outlined for you above. I am confused your continued belief that Asian Americans hardly hurt financially. If we take the white majority as normal (not hurting but not wining), Asian Americans do no better socio-economically than their comparative white counterparts as a population even considering that there is a higher percentage of Asian American populace with significantly more advanced professional and academic qualification (due to a immigration policy that sets such criteria for entry and citizenship for specific ethnicities), it would actually indicate that Asian America as a whole actually hurts from a lack of true meritocracy (language barrier, discrimination, things that will take months to discuss). The pervasive notion that Asian Americans are rich, all successful and as a population in general flourish in American Society is a myth tied to a social phenom called the model minority complex: which for further reference I suggest you take the 5 minutes to read what I wrote or do your own research. Asian Americans as a whole suffer from a phenom known as the bamboo ceiling (reference above) as well.

In conclusion, and to try to keep anything I say relatively short because you might not read long posts that I write, it is impossible and simply ignorant to talk about Asian America as a single or dichotomous phenom. Our experiences are as varied, substantial and complex as our ethnic differences. There are great deal of sources out there that discuss our population trends and socio-economic realities on a much truer level than personal stereotypes and anecdotes. If you do not find my posts engaging or interesting, or simply will not take my word for it, well there are plenty of other words on the internet that I hope you take the time to engage.

Only a sith deals with absolutes- Obi-Wan Kenobi (whom, mind you, I always thought should've been Asian)

I clearly said most. And I don't care to sub-classify people. There are, for instance, more white people living in poverty in this country than the entire black population, but they generally don't get special treatment. I grew up poor, in a rural community, and with no family that had ever completed college (until my mother finished a bachelor's degree she hardly used when I was 13). I was a high school dropout. I worked minimum wage jobs. And you know what? I wasn't bitter at all the kids that had it better than me, because seriously, that wasn't their fault any more than it was my fault that I was born poor. I had a harder time getting admitted than a black or Hispanic kid, but to me, that's fine- their communities need providers that they can trust, and URM candidates are more likely to practice in URM communities, statistically. Asians aren't at a disadvantage in admissions, nor are whites- URMs get a boost, but there's so few of them at a given school that they don't really affect your chances of admission. I'm studying for an exam, so I really can't get too into depth on this, as I'd much rather pass my medical school courses than win an argument on the internet, but basically, when it comes to admissions, you have to work with averages and generalizations, because there's too many applications to be considered individually. Some schools make concessions for certain Asian communities that are underrepresented in medicine in their areas, but most schools simply don't have the time or resources to devote to carefully selecting Asians by splitting every last ethnic, religious, and community hair.

And the Indian community demonstrates that being a first generation immigrant isn't exactly sentencing them to poverty. 87% of the Indian population is 1st generation immigrants, and they do quite well for themselves, even with the language barriers and everything else factored in.

 

[Beargryllz]

If anything, being Asian is a great sign

Asians make up a relatively small part of the population but are very well-represented in medicine

I'd say you're good to go. Keep those grades up and rock the MCAT

 

[altblue]

Only a sith deals with absolutes- Obi-Wan Kenobi (whom, mind you, I always thought should've been Asian)

...really?

 

[Lamel]

Only a sith deals with absolutes- Obi-Wan Kenobi (whom, mind you, I always thought should've been Asian)

This is one of the dumbest lines from that movie, and that's saying something.

 

[deleted548851]

OP if you're scared being Asian will hurt, why don't you just check the "Prefer not to disclose" race box on AMCAS

that wouldnt work most of the time. a last name tells pretty much the entire story. Plus asian last names are usually pretty easily identifiable
ex. Li, Zhang, Xu, Wang, Kim, Kam, Jung, Tanaka, etc very easily identifable to an east asian

 

[Time Table]

I don't understand why med schools need diversity. Why would you want a URM who's 3.5, 28 over a guy who's 3.8, 34? Sure, if the URM had incredible ECs, let him in, but there's no reason for him to take the spot of the general 3.8, 34 white guy, just because his race faced ecosociopolitical challenges.

 

[Dentalogist]

[QUOTE="Time Table, post: 15985123, member: 622988"]I don't understand why med schools need diversity. Why would you want a URM who's 3.5, 28 over a guy who's 3.8, 34? Sure, if the URM had incredible ECs, let him in, but there's no reason for him to take the spot of the general 3.8, 34 white guy, just because his race faced ecosociopolitical challenges.[/QUOTE]
let me guess your asian?

 

[RedPhys]

I don't understand why med schools need diversity. Why would you want a URM who's 3.5, 28 over a guy who's 3.8, 34? Sure, if the URM had incredible ECs, let him in, but there's no reason for him to take the spot of the general 3.8, 34 white guy, just because his race faced ecosociopolitical challenges.

If statistics show that the 3.5,28 guy can be just as good of a doctor as the 3.8,34 guy, but the 3.5,28 guy has experience working with underserved patients (e.g. at a free clinic that helps people with language barriers), then the 3.5,28 guy will overall help contribute more as a doctor (I guess the 3.8,34 guy could be the guy that cures cancer, but it's more likely they will just be another doctor, and so, because it's important to create a [graduating] class that will not only expose each other to peers from diverse backgrounds, but also make sure that these students will go on to serve the diverse community of patients that make up the US, the 3.5,28 will be more important to accept).

 

[Time Table]

If statistics show that the 3.5,28 guy can be just as good of a doctor as the 3.8,34 guy, but the 3.5,28 guy has experience working with underserved patients (e.g. at a free clinic that helps people with language barriers), then the 3.5,28 guy will overall help contribute more as a doctor (I guess the 3.8,34 guy could be the guy that cures cancer, but it's more likely they will just be another doctor, and so, because it's important to create a [graduating] class that will not only expose each other to peers from diverse backgrounds, but also make sure that these students will go on to serve the diverse community of patients that make up the US, the 3.5,28 will be more important to accept).

Well, that's what I'm saying, aside from good ECs and assuming everything else is equal, I don't see why the lower GPA/MCAT deserve a spot in med school, regardless of race. Of course, if they served in underprivileged communities, give them an acceptance, otherwise, what contribution could they possibly have?