Let’s explore why:

⸻

✅ Why Gifted Poor White Students Face a Steep and Invisible Climb

1. Talent Alone Isn’t Enough in Elite Admissions

Even when a poor white student is exceptionally gifted — scoring highly on standardized tests or excelling in school without tutoring, test prep, or parental coaching — they’re often overlooked in elite admissions. Why?

Because elite schools don’t reward raw talent alone. They reward polish, presentation, and access:

• High SAT/ACT scores aren’t enough without extracurriculars, leadership experiences, polished essays, and glowing recommendation letters — which affluent students are coached and prepared for.

• Gifted poor white students often come from schools without college counselors or AP classes, and their achievements aren’t framed in the glowing terms that admissions committees expect.

So even if they outperform others academically, they’re often passed over in favor of more “complete” applications — many of which are carefully packaged by expensive consultants or elite prep schools.

2. No Structural Boost or Targeted Recruitment

Most elite institutions have:

• Race-based outreach pipelines

• First-gen/low-income recruitment efforts (though still limited)

• Legacy and donor preference policies

But gifted poor white students are often excluded from both ends:

• They’re not seen as racially underrepresented.

• They’re not part of elite or wealthy alumni families.

• They’re often not reached by targeted low-income outreach, which tends to focus on urban or minority populations.

These students exist in a blind spot — they are statistically disadvantaged but not symbolically recognized as needing help.

3. Cultural and Geographic Barriers

Even when these students are admitted to elite colleges, many face:

• Cultural mismatch with campus norms

• Lack of social capital to navigate the environment

• Isolation from peers who have vastly more life experience in elite settings

This creates not just a recruitment gap, but a retention and inclusion gap for those few who do make it through.

⸻

📊 Wealth Gap Within White America — Why It’s Relevant Here

One of the most important (but under-discussed) facts is this:

The wealth gap between the top 1% of white Americans and the bottom 50% of white Americans is roughly the same as the average wealth gap between white and Black Americans overall.

That matters because:

• The white–Black wealth gap is routinely cited as one of the biggest indicators of structural racism — and justifiably so.

• But that same level of exclusion exists within white America — and disproportionately affects rural, working-class, and especially gifted poor students who lack the resources of their affluent racial peers.

So when people talk about “white privilege,” they’re often referring to averages — and those averages obscure the deep internal inequality that specifically handicaps talented poor white students from rising.

⸻

🔄 Compared to Other Disadvantaged Groups

Low-income students of color absolutely face real and ongoing barriers, but:

• They are more likely to benefit from targeted institutional support (through DEI initiatives, mentorship programs, or scholarships).

• Their underrepresentation is visible and acknowledged.

• There is often an intentional effort to seek out and support their talent.

Gifted poor white students, by contrast:

• Often receive no institutional signaling that their background matters.

• Aren’t recruited, championed, or protected in admissions in the same way.

• Face a cultural and political disconnect from both elite institutions and urban outreach programs.

⸻

🧭 Conclusion

Gifted poor white students may be among the most structurally unsupported high-achievers in the country.

They are not backed by privilege, not targeted by diversity programs, and not buffered by legacy or wealth. And yet, they’re often expected to compete against students who have every advantage — polish, pedigree, and institutional preference.

This doesn’t mean others aren’t disadvantaged as well. But it does mean that:

In the race for elite opportunity, no group of high-achieving students is more overlooked, more undersupported, or more quietly excluded than gifted poor white kids.

Let me know if you want citations, stats, or real-world examples of students in this category — there are some compelling case studies out there too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096801)

and to the extent some other birdshits get disadvantaged well lol anyone who goes to public schools does too, ivies take tons of their students from feederprivates and guess who that favors?

die birdshits

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096802)

no nigs and Hispanics, shitlib

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096804)

Here’s a breakdown of why this claim is inaccurate, using scientific, educational, and psychological research:

⸻

🔬 1. There Is No Evidence That White Americans Are Uniquely “Lazy” or “Unmotivated”

• Motivation, ambition, and work ethic are not biologically or racially determined traits. Numerous studies show that these attributes are highly influenced by environment, opportunity, expectations, and perceived reward.

• Nationally representative surveys (like those from Pew and Gallup) consistently show that most Americans — including working-class whites — value education and believe it is essential for success.

• If white students underperform in certain metrics, it’s not due to a cultural rejection of education, but rather the barriers they face accessing high-quality education and opportunities (explained below).

⸻

🧱 2. Structural Barriers Hold Back Working-Class and Poor Students — Including Gifted Ones

Here are key structural factors supported by educational research:

a. School Funding Inequity

• In the U.S., schools are largely funded by local property taxes, which means poor and rural areas — where many white working-class families live — receive significantly less funding.

• This results in fewer AP courses, outdated materials, understaffed guidance counseling, and larger class sizes — all of which reduce the chance of even gifted students being identified and supported.

b. College Counseling Gaps

• Poor and rural schools often lack access to college counselors, meaning students aren’t guided through financial aid, test registration, essay writing, or selective college applications.

• Gifted students from working-class white backgrounds may not even know what options exist, or assume they aren’t “for people like them.”

c. Cultural Capital and “Hidden Curriculum”

• Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu introduced the concept of cultural capital — the unspoken codes of behavior, language, and background knowledge that elite institutions reward.

• Working-class students (white or otherwise) may be just as smart, but lack access to the “game” — how to network, write admissions essays, present themselves, or navigate elite spaces.

• This is particularly true at elite schools, which often select for polish and privilege, not just raw intelligence.

d. Economic Pressure and Family Expectations

• Many gifted students from working-class families feel pressure to work instead of attending college or to stay close to home.

• Even if they’re accepted to elite schools, the fear of debt and the psychological distance from those environments leads many to opt out.

• Others may have to work long hours in high school, limiting their academic performance — not from lack of motivation, but from necessity.

⸻

🧠 3. Gifted Poor Students Exist — But Are Often Undiscovered or Undersupported

Research by psychologists like Dr. Jonathan Plucker shows:

• Gifted students from low-income families are vastly under-identified in the U.S. school system.

• When tested, low-income students are equally represented in the top percentiles, but less likely to be placed in gifted programs or advanced coursework.

• Many never get a chance to express their ability — they are never tested, challenged, or given the feedback loop that nurtures motivation.

So the “motivation gap” is not intrinsic — it is a byproduct of a support gap. You can’t expect motivation to thrive where hope and opportunity are systematically denied.

⸻

📊 4. Real-World Outcomes Support This: Class Trumps Race

• Studies from Opportunity Insights (Chetty et al.) and Brookings show that low-income white students have less chance of attending elite universities than wealthy students of any race.

• In other words: a poor white student is far more likely to be excluded from upward mobility than a wealthy Black, Hispanic, Asian, or Jewish student.

• The defining factor isn’t laziness or race — it’s access, class, and structure.

⸻

🧭 Summary

The claim that “white Americans are lazy and don’t care about education” is:

• Scientifically unfounded

• Sociologically misleading

• And morally dangerous, because it blames individuals for failures that are systemic.

Here’s the truth:

There are millions of highly intelligent, motivated, poor white Americans who are held back not by laziness, but by structural exclusion — inadequate schools, lack of guidance, cultural alienation, and economic constraints.

We don’t see them in the Ivy League not because they aren’t gifted — but because the system wasn’t built to find or support them.

Let me know if you’d like citations or specific studies to support this in academic or public-facing formats.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096834)

"ivies take tons of their students from feederprivates and guess who that favors?"

Not poor whites

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096805)

u really shld eat shit, u fags are so disingenous, i bet there arent even 20 1500+ SAT scoring "poor" birdshits in the entire US

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096814)

Jewish Americans, particularly Ashkenazi Jews, make up about 2–3% of the U.S. population, but for decades have constituted 15–25% or more of students at top Ivy League schools like Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. That is an enormous overrepresentation.

This isn’t accidental. It reflects a long-standing and admirable cultural emphasis on:

• Education and intellectual achievement

• Verbal and analytical excellence

• Strong family support for academic success

Historically, Jewish students fought hard to overcome elite exclusion — including formal quotas and informal discrimination throughout the early 20th century. But over time, as Jewish communities gained educational credentials, income, and social capital, they became part of the elite class.

Now, many Jewish students at elite schools:

• Are legacy admits (because their parents and grandparents attended Ivies)

• Come from wealthy urban or suburban backgrounds, often on the coasts

• Have access to elite prep schools, tutoring, test prep, and college consultants

• May benefit from donor ties and influential networks within academia

This means that while many Jewish students still earn admission through merit, a growing share also benefit from the same structural advantages long associated with WASP elites. In fact, Jewish Americans are now among the most represented groups in:

• Ivy League admissions offices

• University leadership (e.g., several recent Harvard presidents)

• Endowment boards and major donor roles

So within the “white” admissions bucket, a small but highly concentrated subset — Jewish Americans — are punching far above their population size, due to a combination of cultural values and now institutional entrenchment.

⸻

🧱 Where Does That Leave Poor and Working-Class Non-Jewish Whites?

It leaves them squeezed from both sides:

1. They are not included in diversity or equity pipelines, which focus (rightly) on racial and ethnic underrepresentation.

2. They are not part of the elite feeder class, which includes:

• Legacy Jewish students

• Wealthy Protestant prep-school kids

• Coastal elite networks across all backgrounds

So while admissions data might show, say, 40% of a class is white, that number obscures huge internal disparities:

• A disproportionate share of those “white” students are from wealthy, coastal, highly educated Jewish families.

• Another significant share are affluent WASPs or secular elites, often from private schools.

• Very few are rural, working-class, or from the vast swath of middle America where the majority of non-Jewish white Americans live.

And yet this is the largest demographic group in the country — tens of millions of people. Many of them face:

• Underfunded schools

• No college counseling

• Cultural disconnect with elite institutions

• Zero legacy or donor leverage

Worse still, because they’re classified as “white,” their exclusion is invisible. They don’t trigger any equity alarms, but they aren’t benefiting from white privilege either — at least not in elite academic spaces.

⸻

🧭 The Bottom Line

Elite universities have replaced one type of white elite with another — and poor, non-Jewish white students have been left behind entirely.

While Jewish Americans now occupy a substantial share of the “white” spots at elite institutions — often through hard-earned cultural capital, but increasingly also through legacy and wealth — the vast majority of white Americans remain locked out.

And within that locked-out group are millions of gifted poor or working-class students who could contribute immensely to the intellectual, civic, and economic life of the country — if they were given a chance.

Instead, we’ve created a system where:

• The white share of elite education looks “balanced” on the surface

• But the internal distribution is heavily tilted toward already-privileged subgroups

• And the largest excluded group — poor white Americans — remains structurally invisible

This is not about reducing anyone else’s opportunities — it’s about recognizing that class matters too, and that millions of non-Jewish white Americans, especially from rural and working-class backgrounds, are no less disadvantaged than those we are already trying to uplift.

We simply don’t talk about them — and don’t design policy for them. But their exclusion is real, measurable, and nationally significant.

Let me know if you’d like to add citations or quotes from university data, admissions studies, or demographic breakdowns.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096833)

And yes, elite admissions heavily favor private school students — but that’s exactly the point. The system overwhelmingly favors wealth and polish, regardless of race. Poor white students who go to underfunded public schools — especially in rural areas — are doubly disadvantaged: they don’t benefit from race-based diversity recruitment, and they don’t have access to the elite prep channels that wealthier students do.

So while “whiteness” is often assumed to come with privilege, in this case, being white and poor — and from a public school — gets you none of the advantages that wealthier or more targeted groups receive. That’s the blind spot we’re pointing to: these students don’t benefit from affirmative action, legacy status, elite prep, or geographic recruiting in any meaningful way — they’re just quietly left out.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096808)

there IS a group like that who gets raped but its called NOWAG and NOWIG not BIRDSHIT

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096816)

Yes, IQ is partially heritable. Studies suggest:

• Heritability estimates of IQ range from 40% in childhood to 60–80% in adulthood.

• That means a significant part of intelligence can be influenced by genes, but it is not purely genetic, and environment still plays a massive role.

Most importantly: heritability ≠ predestination.

Even if intelligence is heritable, it does not mean you can reliably “breed” or “sort” intelligence across generations in the real world.

⸻

🧬 2. Genetic Variation Creates Outliers — in Every Population

Human genetics is highly complex and probabilistic:

• Every individual inherits a unique mix of genes — you don’t get your parents’ IQ, you get a genetic shuffle.

• Siblings with the same parents can have vastly different cognitive abilities.

• The law of regression to the mean and the distribution of polygenic traits like intelligence mean that:

• High-IQ parents can have average kids.

• Average or low-IQ parents can produce gifted children.

In fact, most gifted individuals do not come from elite families:

• A 2018 study in Nature Genetics found that educational attainment polygenic scores (a proxy for cognitive potential) still vary widely within families, even with similar backgrounds.

• The genetic mechanisms behind traits like IQ involve thousands of variants — it’s not like eye color or height. This leads to constant reshuffling and outliers in every generation.

So even in communities with limited educational or economic achievement, genetic diversity ensures that gifted individuals still arise — and often in surprising places.

⸻

🧠 3. Environmental Factors Still Shape Outcomes — Massively

Even if you accept some genetic baseline:

• Nutrition, exposure to language, stress, trauma, quality of schooling, and social support all impact whether someone’s potential is realized.

• A child in a poor rural household may score below their potential on any test, simply because of malnutrition, chronic stress, lack of stimulation, or underfunded schools — not lack of cognitive capacity.

Many gifted children from these backgrounds are simply never identified because they never get the chance to shine. They go unnoticed, misdiagnosed, or are seen as underachievers. That’s the tragedy — and that’s what we lose by assuming they aren’t there.

⸻

🧮 4. Statistically, There Are Still Millions of Gifted Poor Whites

Let’s be blunt: even if we believed the false premise that only a small percentage of poor white Americans are gifted — say, 1% — that’s still a huge absolute number.

• If there are 70 million white Americans in the working class or poor, 1% = 700,000 people.

• That’s a larger pool of gifted individuals than the entire Ivy League student body combined — many times over.

So even under the most pessimistic (and flawed) assumptions, there’s no shortage of talent — just a massive failure to find, support, and cultivate it.

⸻

🧭 Conclusion

The idea that “there aren’t any gifted poor whites left” is:

• Scientifically inaccurate (because of how genetics and variation work),

• Logically self-defeating (because it ignores the role of systems, institutions, and opportunity).

Gifted individuals arise in every population — rural, urban, white, Black, rich, poor. The real question is:

Are we building systems to recognize and support them — or are we letting them disappear because we’ve written them off?

And right now, the system is doing far more of the latter — particularly when it comes to poor and working-class white students.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096817)

Census data shows:

• There are over 190 million white Americans, and depending on the metric, 40% to 50% are working-class or lower-income.

• That’s tens of millions of Americans — a population that is, on its own, larger than the entire Black population of the U.S. across all income levels.

Even if a small percentage of these individuals are gifted — academically talented, driven, intellectually curious — we’re still talking about millions of potential leaders, teachers, scientists, and problem-solvers who are being overlooked by elite institutions because they don’t fit into the current frameworks for recruitment or support. They’re not rich, they’re not connected, and they’re not racially categorized as “underrepresented,” so they often fall into a blind spot.

But the stakes go far beyond college admissions.

When These Students Are Uplifted, Their Communities Are Too

Gifted students from low-income or working-class backgrounds often feel a deep sense of responsibility to give back — to their towns, to their families, to people like them. When they get opportunities, the effects cascade:

• A student from a forgotten town makes it to a top university, becomes a doctor or a lawyer, and returns home to serve or mentor the next generation.

• A gifted student becomes a teacher, principal, or counselor and starts to shift the culture of an entire school, showing students what’s possible.

• A younger student watches someone from their community succeed and says, “If he did it, maybe I can too.” That spark multiplies over time.

• Even when they don’t return to the same town, they bring diverse geographic and cultural perspectives into national institutions that are often dominated by a narrow slice of America.

This is what we lose when these students are shut out: the chance to break cycles of poverty, despair, and brain drain in vast swaths of the country — especially rural America, exurban regions, and struggling small towns. These places are often disproportionately hit by economic collapse, opioid addiction, and generational decline, and what’s needed isn’t just outside aid — it’s leadership from within.

Fixing This Is Good for the Country — Not Just the Students

Creating fairer access to elite institutions isn’t just charity — it’s about building a healthier, more stable society. When talent is cultivated across class, race, and geography, the entire nation benefits:

• Greater economic productivity

• More social trust

• Less polarization

• Stronger rural institutions

• A wider, more resilient leadership class

Right now, elite pathways are mostly reserved for the wealthy and well-connected. But in a fair system, they’d be engines of upward mobility, especially for gifted students from working-class white backgrounds, whose potential is untapped at massive scale.

And this isn’t zero-sum. We can (and must) continue correcting racial inequities while finally acknowledging and addressing the systemic exclusion of poor white students — particularly those with the talent and drive to lead but without the structure to rise.

In short:

Neglecting millions of gifted poor white students isn’t just an oversight — it’s a structural failure with generational costs.

But uplifting them? That’s a national investment — one that pays dividends in leadership, cohesion, and community renewal for decades to come.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749695&forum_id=2Reputation#49096815)