| Kasz216 said: It makes as much sense as having a Christian quota... also, chances are they DO have a much lower standard of living. At least that's how it seems to work in other Europeon countries. France for example. The point is, a 51% quota is largely meaningless, since statistically at least 51% of the school body would be majority Christian anyway... You don't "pick which spots" you run for or anything... so if the school is atleast 52% Christian, then you know the Quota was meaningless. The only way such a quota would be enforced would be if infact 49% of the school was non christian. Which like you said... he'd know. So such a quota is meanginless. It'd be like if the US had a quota that 10% of all college students must be white. 10% of all college students are going to be white anyway. It's dumb, but it's also meaningless. |
They may have a lower standard of living, nut by much lower I do mean MUCH lower :)
Here we have quotas on universities, pretty much all of them, and that's how it works. Someone who has a right for the quota will be running for that share as well as the universal share. If you hav eno rght to nay quota you only run for the universal share. Which means it's much easier for someone with quotas to get in, even when the percentage is low. At a high percentage and with small competition, it would get even easier. I'm supposing it works the same way as it does in these cases because that actually makes a difference and also fits better with his implication, thus making more sense instead of being completelly useless. I guess the only sure way to know is if he tells us which one it is.
