|
Rainbow Knight posted:*excludes ancestors who were arrested for the crime of being black or were given a bad review during a fiscal year *or people from the Caribbean or Brazil because their slaveowners weren't 'Murican.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
have the chuds  been screaming for THEIR "REPARATIONS!" lately?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 01:35
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:You are a lot more optimistic than I am about how well "File a form (that nobody will ever see for social pressure), get a presumably non-insignificant check" would work as far as directing money to Black people specifically. Aiming at proxies like income, health, o geographical area would work better, or just give up on testing entirely and rely on a fixed check meaning more to poorer people (who are also more likely to be minorities) 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 01:56
|
|
|
lmao this couldn't be any more comedy, bloodlines/genetic based reparations
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 02:40
|
|
|
Is this means testing for reparations?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 02:48
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Is this means testing for reparations? ya
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 02:48
|
|
|
But also no, because even as discussed this is 100% not happening
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
God can you imagine if we gave this to a black person that doesn't have, like, the literal chains their ancestors wore in the garage along with meticulous ancestral information?! (Me, laughing, as I remember my paternal grandmother didn't even know how old she was exactly because her birth records never got from.her town to any kind of registrar).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 04:27
|
|
|
I imagine the decision to means test here is because they don't want blowback from other marginalized groups. The justification given by panel members voting for not requiring ancestry was basically there is a lot of systemic racism that affects all African Americans (which is true), but that is also just as true of latinos in California, who wouldn't be getting any money from the state.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 04:47
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:*or people from the Caribbean or Brazil because their slaveowners weren't 'Murican.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 07:15
|
|
|
the state should start with reparations to all the drug offenders who went down for an ounce of weed for 15 years or whatever in the 80s and not this ridiculous blood quantum poo poo. but we all know it's not happening either way lol, this is basically the Mormon lobby getting some advertising.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 08:05
|
|
|
CompeAnansi posted:I imagine the decision to means test here is because they don't want blowback from other marginalized groups. The justification given by panel members voting for not requiring ancestry was basically there is a lot of systemic racism that affects all African Americans (which is true), but that is also just as true of latinos in California, who wouldn't be getting any money from the state. There is an easy solution to that which is even less likely for the Democrats to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2022 14:55
|
|
|
As someone who doesn't know much about proposals on the subject: what would be an actually good way to do reparations? It seems like the thread opinion is roughly "just give money to historically discriminated-against minorities", which sounds great, but I don't really understand how you determine who counts as a historically discriminated-against minority in a way that's not a huge mess. I'd imagine there are also equal protection issues -- i.e. I'm not sure the government even could give you money based on race. I understand the issues with having to show that a direct ancestor was enslaved, but I don't really know what to advocate for instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 09:14
|
|
|
You should just give everyone money. The more pie in the sky but ideologically correct method would be to dissolve the existing structure of society and replace with something more democratic. Reparations become unnecessary if an exploited group now has direct access to resources and political autonomy. Larry Parrish fucked around with this message at 09:42 on Apr 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 09:39
|
|
|
basically reparations are good but I don't think many people take it seriously as a political goal because the only fair way to implement it is to basically just do UBI, at which point you aren't doing reparations. any other method besides forming the united workers councils of America pretty much will miss a bunch of people, introduce a bunch of blood quantum bullshit, etc, that I don't think anyone wants.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 09:45
|
|
|
Historically, reparations in the United States were issued as one-time payments to Japanese Americans who were interned during WWII and Native Americans. America still hasn't reconciled with the horrors of genocide and slavery, and reparations are an important step towards atoning for those atrocities. African Americans and Native Americans definitely should receive reparations, but I don't think that the state of California is truly equipped to accomplish this task. The amount of funding projected by scholars like William Darity and Darrick Hamilton estimate that reparations for African Americans would cost trillions of dollars. We're talking about huge structural reforms that are needed to promote a more equitable society. I feel like the best that the state would ever muster would be like a $100 check.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 11:31
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:As someone who doesn't know much about proposals on the subject: what would be an actually good way to do reparations? Lots of spending for programs that and in communities that primarily benefit people of color.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 18:02
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Lots of spending for programs that and in communities that primarily benefit people of color. Strangely, the two rarely meet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Right, there's the general $2,000 Check for Minorities model and then there's the Invest in Communities model. Comes down to the country not willing to face any sort of reckoning for it's injustices past and present. White people don't want to feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
I think a limited form of reparations for redlining would be the most politically feasible form of reparations, and even those are unlikely to pass anywhere in this country. Many of the victims of redlining are still alive, and it would be easier to calculate the amount of economic harm caused to their property values or lost opportunities for Black people to grow their wealth than it would be to calculate how much is owed to the descendants of slaves that died many decades ago. And to be clear, there is still good evidence that there is still a racial lending gap, so I do not want to suggest that redlining is over. State-enforced redlining may be over, but the practice still exists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
The hard thing about reparations like this is that we already squandered the wealth we stole. Making victims of all our abuses whole would cost more money than we have, not just in a "fiscal responsibility" sense, in a "there aren't 10 quadrillion dollars worth of stuff to redistribute to the victims even if we wanted to."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:The hard thing about reparations like this is that we already squandered the wealth we stole. Making victims of all our abuses whole would cost more money than we have, not just in a "fiscal responsibility" sense, in a "there aren't 10 quadrillion dollars worth of stuff to redistribute to the victims even if we wanted to." Who is “we”
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:The hard thing about reparations like this is that we already squandered the wealth we stole.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 21:35
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Who is “we” FilthyImp posted:Surely you could give the US Military a $200B haircut for a few years and use that for.... something. surely you don't expect us to end the currently ongoing exploitation?!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
We is the entire California/US population. A $200B haircut to the military to pay for reparations to 42 million black Americans is less than $5000 per person, it's insulting to imagine that pittance as enough to make anything right. $5000 a year every year would be an insult. $50,000 a year, every year, for 20 years, that comes closer to something that could pull (some) people out of poverty in the present, but doesn't even begin to address the past. We could probably figure out 2 trillion dollars a year for 20 years, but going an order of magnitude higher than that to 20 trillion would strain the imagination - we'd have to confiscate the entire NYSE and give it away as reparations, and there would barely be enough. You might say 'good' but that's pretty extreme if we don't instantly transition into full communism at that point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 22:26
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:We is the entire California/US population. A $200B haircut to the military to pay for reparations to 42 million black Americans is less than $5000 per person, it's insulting to imagine that pittance as enough to make anything right. $5000 a year every year would be an insult. $50,000 a year, every year, for 20 years, that comes closer to something that could pull (some) people out of poverty in the present, but doesn't even begin to address the past. We could probably figure out 2 trillion dollars a year for 20 years, but going an order of magnitude higher than that to 20 trillion would strain the imagination - we'd have to confiscate the entire NYSE and give it away as reparations, and there would barely be enough. I feel like we are mixing up two separate ideas here. Reparations as in payments to those who had been wronged are different than cash transfers purely on the basis of race to narrow various racial gaps. While it is not hard to make the argument that even recent immigrants should contribute to the payment of these reparations since we are benefiting from a country that was made rich by racism, it is much harder to make the argument that ALL Black Americans, including recent Black immigrants, should get such a cash transfer simply because they are Black. Basically, it is hard to call such a payment to Trevor Noah “reparations” since he wasn’t even in the US until the 21st century. Means-testing liberals would hate the idea. Snipee fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Apr 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
reparations which are useful as actual reparations are politically impossible in the existing United States. I don't even mean that it wouldn't be viable or our liberal parties wouldn't do it (and they won't), but straight up our political system does not allow any method for a wealth transfer like that lol. and if you're achieving it with liquid cash, what does it really change about society? the multinationals that are literally built on slave blood will still be there, organizing South American death squads etc. evening the score against the powerful in America cannot be achieved in this way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2022 05:14
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:As someone who doesn't know much about proposals on the subject: what would be an actually good way to do reparations? It seems like the thread opinion is roughly "just give money to historically discriminated-against minorities", which sounds great, but I don't really understand how you determine who counts as a historically discriminated-against minority in a way that's not a huge mess. I'd imagine there are also equal protection issues -- i.e. I'm not sure the government even could give you money based on race. I think there are three models, all three of which should be pursued and which are all feasible: 1. Direct reparations to survivors of those who were harmed. I think the best argument is looking at the failure of reconstruction to deliver what was promised to those who were released from slavery. At it's most basic level it would be "40 acres and a mule were promised. 4 million slaves were released following the civil war, so a fund that paid out to those descendants until the inflation adjusted-balance was paid off could be established. Germany is still paying off reparations from WWII and this would essentially be that model. This would be set-up and delivered by the state. People freak out about the cost, but the way it works is that the reparations are paid out over time and not all at once. The size of the payments and the interest of the fund are adjusted to keep the cost from being a burden to the country. The point, after all, is not punitive but healing and reintegrating. Those harmed wouldn't be benefited from a bankrupted country. It might take 150+ years, but so be it. 2. Denial of profits from genocide. In the 90's many Jews began legal action to reclaim stolen art and property that had been stolen from them. Negotiated settlements resulted in *some* of that going back to families, but a lot of it just became deeded over to the state or to museums for preservation rather than going to the profit of the family. In the case of african americans specific cases of documented land seizures by individuals and states could be pursued in courts to have that property either returned to descendants, or at the very least taken from those who profited off it to deny the continued accrual of harm. These are done one by one and usually pursued by descendants, but they need a legal framework to support the action. 3. Truth and reconciliation "reparations". This is funding to establish and tell the truth and ensure that everyone in the country knows what happened. Proper truth and reconciliation work also makes it crystal clear that the lies that allowed a country to get to the point of needing reparations will not be tolerated and actively combats that speech, not just by being louder but by dismantling the networks that promote lies. This needs a legal framework and funding for programs, but it's not a direct financial payment. A lot of people throw up their hands and go "ah that's too much work", but we've already spent enormous work and money avoiding these costs for 150 years. Reparations are about taking that money that we are spending on harm and instead choosing to spend it on healing. El Mero Mero fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Apr 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2022 06:15
|
|
|
That's a good post and some solid plans of action.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2022 07:16
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:I think there are three models, all three of which should be pursued and which are all feasible: This was a really good post, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2022 07:50
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:We could probably figure out 2 trillion dollars a year for 20 years That's like 1/2 of current US federal government spending! That is a huge amount of money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 11:25
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:That's like 1/2 of current US federal government spending! That is a huge amount of money. it's actually somewhere between 1/3rd and 1/5th depending on the year. The usaspending.gov website is super good. The estimated cost for reparations would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-15 trillion, which if you spread over 100 (and then added another 50 for interest accrued) years would be somewhere in the order of 80-150 billion per year at the high end. Basically it's 1% of the budget. I don't think a payout over 20 years would be reasonable. Some of the hairy legal cases around reparations could take half that time to resolve. El Mero Mero fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Apr 7, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 06:44
|
|
|
Guess what was really getting funded by all that "COVID relief" https://twitter.com/SamTLevin/status/1512109658432888840?s=20&t=R8hO92IBRpTSzng3U44Hxw No points if you got it right, it was painfully obvious
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
"the PD said they'd be administering the shots so what's the big deal guys lol"
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 18:44
|
|
|
Police and politicians won't be satisfied until 100% of all state and local funding is allocated to police and only the police, and even then they'll probably come at us every other year with a ballot prop to raise the sales tax or buy bonds to throw even more money at funding the police. Gotta tackle that violent crime! No federal funding unfortunately though, but it's understandable since they need to throw all their money at the military.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
Well, they were given too much money! they weren't able to spend it all on housing and food. If they didn't spend it all then they would get less next time. It's a classic case of Michael keeping the money instead of allowing Pam to buy new office chairs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
This instance is particularly great because they can't use the ol' "well there wasn't a lot of time and we have to spend it all fast!!!!" routine. They have until the end of 2026 to spend the money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
The point of government is safety (of the rich) and enforcing contracts (on the poor) so this is a pretty efficient use of government money. Thanks Nozick, you loving prick
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
Oh so now job creation is bad? loving libtards. That money allowed the various departments to hire as many as 0 new officers, and the
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 21:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:Guess what was really getting funded by all that "COVID relief" first guess was sports, because 2020/21 had some some about sports. cops would probably be a 3rd or 4th guess behind some generic corruption /pet project pork barrel stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2022 02:23
|
|