> Affirmative action sets up a zero-sum game where fixed resources like university admissions and employment offers are redistributed to people with the "correct" demographics.

I wish I could find the source, but the vast majority of universities don't have a fixed admissions quota. They are criteria based (if you meet the criteria, you get in). In principle, AA admissions did not prevent others from getting a seat.

Of course, it's possible the general admissions criteria is raised slightly to compensate, but again - for most universities, AA admissions wasn't a significant number, and however much the bar raised, it was likely minuscule.

I'll be blunt. Everyone I've personally known who didn't get admissions in a particular university and blamed AA for it was trying to get into a top school, and likely didn't earn his spot.

▲

verteu 14 hours ago | parent [-]

CA Prop 209 is a good natural experiment: https://reappropriate.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-UC...

▲

BeetleB 12 hours ago | parent [-]

This tells me only about a few universities, and there are too many confounding variables.

	▲	skibidithink 12 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's better data than the people in one person's life.
	▲	ls612 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		But you can look at trends in other comparable states compared to California both before and after CA outlawed AA at public California universities by referendum.
	▲	10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]