What is the Benefit for Payment of Reparations

[Ramone45]

How would reparations be structured, and what would society receive in return? This is one of those issues that falls under the category od "be careful what you wish for". The unintended consequences are manifold.

 

[Champakian]

There can never be a rebuttal to repeated lies.

This is as stupid as an idea as the printing of Covid money...




... if we just throw money...



*sing it!*


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYYAv-QW38Q

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Reparations for what?

 

[Champakian]

Do I only get nothing?

I mean, the blacks were slaves, but my people were genocided and their lands taken.




What am I owed???

 

[Champakian]

Reparations for what?

Son of slave-owners...

 

[WillJ8787]

How would reparations be structured, and what would society receive in return? This is one of those issues that falls under the category od "be careful what you wish for". The unintended consequences are manifold.

Yes, a real acknowledgment with tangible consequences of enslaving an entire group of folks for over a century has real consequences.

This country was built on their backs...it is time to pay up. It actually is a paultry action when you consider how this has wrecked lives to the point that we still have an ongoing racial crisis in the USA..

But it would be a start.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I don't think reparations for slavery will happen. It's an interesting idea, but rapidly becomes way complex. That said, let me take an imaginary crack at it.

1. What form do the reparations take? I see two viable options. Option A is a "one time cash reparation" or a "structured cash reparation" to cover for the economic hardship incurred by slavery and generationally carried. Option B is a "set of structured policies to provide economic advantage to overcome the generational hardship and economic loss."

I think option A would, basically, be throwing a stack of money at the problem and would do very little in terms of generational hardship, so I would go with Option B.

Option B:

Who qualifies? Obviously, in the case of reparations for slavery, the target recipient are the descendants of enslaved persons. So, in order to qualify for the benefit, it would be the responsibility of the recipient or their agent(1) to establish eligibility. Eligibility would look something like this. Every enslaved person would be assigned a value of 1.0. If a slave married a slave, the family value at inception would be 1.0. If a slave married a free person, the family value would be .50. Then, for each generation of descendants there qualifying score would be recalculated. If the the descendant with a score of 1.0 married a descendant with a score of 1.0 the next generation would also receive a 1.0. If there was intermarriage the score would be recalculated per generation down to the current generation. This would result in individuals living now, passed the age of 18, to hold a benefit score of 1.0 (the straight linear descendants of slaves) to 0.0 (no slave lineage). There would also be an economic qualifier - if the generational income was at or above the midpoint of the fifth quintile eligibility would be suspended for a generation, This would be accompanied by an education attainment level qualifiers. If the education level of attainment was at or above a 4 year degree or equivalent training/eduction elibility would be suspended.

(1) This would create an entire industry of "for profit" genealogists to qualify potential beneficiaries. Once qualifications would be established the appropriate controlling documents would be issued.

What benefits would they receive? Since the purpose of the reparation plan would be to overcome the hardships of slavery and reduce/eliminate the generational impact, I would propose the following three benefits be made available.

1. Subsidized health care (all encompassing). When an eligible beneficiary had any medical expense, they would present their documented score and that percentage of the health care would be billed directly to the US Federal Government, which would than pay cash to the provider. (e.g. if you have a score of .25, 25% of the bill would be covered.)

2. Subsidized Education and Training (all ages) calculated as per the above. The provider would bill the government directly.

3. Subsidized Grants/Loan Guarantees to create/operate small businesses. Based upon their score, the US would provide funds to create and operate small businesses.

There would be an income/education threshold at which point benefits would taper off (starting at "income above the 1st Quintile" and ending at "income above the mid-point of the 3rd quintile". This would insure that the benefits encourage economic mobility without creating a poverty trap, where incentives exist to not move economically upward.

Additionally, the reparation eligibility would end at the end of the 3rd generation from inception of the reparation program measured by the youngest age cohort.

The funding for the program would be two fold. First, a general "reparation tax" in the form of a federal VAT, rate to be determined but no greater that 3%. Second, create of a tax free federal charity where individuals could donate to the fund and write it off on their income tax. Finally, a voluntary "White Guilt" contribution of 1% of all income, payable to the IRS by checking a box on your I-9. Finally, a tax on business income of 2% for all small business income generated from beneficiaries of the grant/loan program.

 

[Comshaw]

Yes, an real acknowledgment with tangible consequences of enslaving an entire group of folks for over a century has real consequences.

This country was built on their backs...it is time to pay up. It actually is a paultry action when you consider who this has wrecked lives to the point that we still have an ongoing racial crisis in the USA..

But it would be a start.

I agree we still have an ongoing racial crisis in this country.

Slavery ended 155 years ago in this country. We should have paid reparations back than; we didn't. Now is a long time too late.

If you're going to pay reparations to black people for something that happened to an ancestor 3 or 4 generations back, are you then going to do the same for everyone that was wronged sometime in this county's history? If that's the case the First Nations should be at the forefront. How about those of Mexican origin that got their lands and property confiscated in California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico? Are we going to compensate them for their loss?

Had it been done when it should have, directly to those who were held in slavery, it would be right and appropriate. Doing so now, 155 years later, 3, 4 or 5 generations later is neither appropriate nor warranted. All the energy and rhetoric used to push this agenda should be going into solving the racial crisis mentioned. All "reparations" does is side-track and dilute actions on the problem that is still real and present.

Comshaw

 

[RoryN]

The immediate benefit is that it gives Deplorables another distraction while the adults focus on repairing the country.

 

[siobhancan99]

The immediate benefit is that it gives Deplorables another distraction while the adults focus on repairing the country.

Unfortunately this is the largest problem with reparations.

The answer is to increase opportunities for all economically disadvantaged people and to include an expanded safety net. Removing the racial overtones allows a practical method of making life better for those affected by the horror of slavery while easing the path by eliminating the controversy over race.

 

[LLCox]

Screw a bunch of reparations unless I get some from Norway for the Vikings killing and making slaves of my English/Irish ancestors.

 

[WillJ8787]

Unfortunately this is the largest problem with reparations.

The answer is to increase opportunities for all economically disadvantaged people and to include an expanded safety net. Removing the racial overtones allows a practical method of making life better for those affected by the horror of slavery while easing the path by eliminating the controversy over race.

Yes and this was called affirmative action back in the day.

Anyone who supported it is called a racist by the right today as they throw around the "all lives matter" racial epitaph.

 

[siobhancan99]

Yes and this was called affirmative action back in the day.

Anyone who supported it is called a racist by the right today as they throw around the "all lives matter" racial epitaph.

No it wasn't. It's important to be honest about the fact that affirmative action policies were never race/gender blind policies aimed at raising economic opportunity based on social class. Affirmative action was designed to address racial and sexual inequality, not to provide economic movement regardless of identity. That doesn't necessarily make them wrong. It is possible to believe that inequal treatment is necessary to right past wrongs. You shouldn't claim they are something they weren't though.

 

[Lazaran]

No it wasn't. It's important to be honest about the fact that affirmative action policies were never race/gender blind policies aimed at raising economic opportunity based on social class. Affirmative action was designed to address racial and sexual inequality, not to provide economic movement regardless of identity. That doesn't necessarily make them wrong. It is possible to believe that inequal treatment is necessary to right past wrongs. You shouldn't claim they are something they weren't though.

When you're right, you're right, and boy oh boy were you right. You nailed it on the head. That was a textbook fact check. There's no arguing that you're right. Congratulations on being exactly right. You definitely put WillJ in his place for misappropriating the use of "affirmative action" in his comment. Between Creeping Charlie's dictionary definitions, and your textbook definitions, the board will soon be literally literal.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you........

 

[siobhancan99]

2 points

1) sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and

2) it's important to not pretend like affirmative action benefits all the poor when you're discussing whether to enact further programs that will leave some of the poor behind.

Focusing on helping all of the people who have been left behind economically is both just on an individual level as you don't participate in invidious discrimination, and also achieves greater results and greater equality for racial minorities who are disproportionately poor.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

If you can trace your family to a slave, and find the decedents of the owner of that slave, and the corporation, plantation, business, family wealth, etc... that the slave helped produce value for is still in existence then there is the avenue for reparations. Sue them for lost wages with 200 years of interest.

I'd think it could be individual cases or a class action.

Apart from some solution resembling that ... *shrug*

I am not writing a check.

 

[Lazaran]

2 points

1) sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and

2) it's important to not pretend like affirmative action benefits all the poor when you're discussing whether to enact further programs that will leave some of the poor behind.

Focusing on helping all of the people who have been left behind economically is both just on an individual level as you don't participate in invidious discrimination, and also achieves greater results and greater equality for racial minorities who are disproportionately poor.

There you go again.....

Please try to incorporate the reality of racial and gender disparities into your arguments.

Affirmative action DID disproportionately help minorities and women as it was INTENDED to, but it fell short.

Any future legislation to address the legacy effects of slavery, misogyny, Jim Crow, segregation, discrimination, etc, must contain a racial and gender corrective component, or the disparities will remain as they are.

That does not mean that ALL those in poverty shouldn't receive some form of assistance, but rather, that additional consideration be given to historically disadvantaged groups. In the context of "reparations", it's the only fair way to address the injuries and insults of the past.

 

[Paul_Chance]

If reparations are to stand any chance of passage (which I currently assess at slim to none on a national level) they would have to have the following elements.

Narrowly tailored to redress a specific wrong - the financial and social effects of slavery on the descendant of American slaves, specifically, the "last generation" held in slavery, with the passage of the 14th Amendment marking the cut-off line. (1865)

Deliberately and systemic exclusion of those African-Americans who a.) had entered the US as free persons prior to 1865 or had that status in 1865. This is approximately 4 million persons and b.) who entered the US of their own free will after 1865.

Since specific and individual damages can not be calculated, it would essentially be a class action.

Since the core of the argument for reparations is that via a variety of measures, primarily socio-economic, the designated class has suffered a statistically significant disparate impact (defacto or systemic racist impact) and any reparations would have to be targeted at the class and to restore the benefits to a level on par with non-class members.

Additionally, you'd have to have a measurement of "current impact" - meaning how has THIS individual suffered from the disparate impact of slavery. If you are successful (as defined through mutually agreed upon socio-economic indicators) today, they you would be excluded from the class. An individual may be a descendant of slaves but at the current time they have been unable to demonstrate any harm and so would be excluded from the class.

In regards to other groups claims for reparations, those would have to be addressed separately. From example, as a Native America (enrolled), I would potentially belong to the class, but would then be excluded on socio-economic measures (graduate degree, income and wealth in the top .90 percentile). In short, though I am born into a potential class I cannot demonstrate any real harm done because of it.

 

[siobhancan99]

There you go again.....

Please try to incorporate the reality of racial and gender disparities into your arguments.

Affirmative action DID disproportionately help minorities and women as it was INTENDED to, but it fell short.

.

When did i say it didn't?

 

[WillJ8787]

No it wasn't. It's important to be honest about the fact that affirmative action policies were never race/gender blind policies aimed at raising economic opportunity based on social class. Affirmative action was designed to address racial and sexual inequality, not to provide economic movement regardless of identity. That doesn't necessarily make them wrong. It is possible to believe that inequal treatment is necessary to right past wrongs. You shouldn't claim they are something they weren't though.

I agree with what you're saying...I don't believe it was wrong. We might be saying the same thing?

 

[WillJ8787]

When you're right, you're right, and boy oh boy were you right. You nailed it on the head. That was a textbook fact check. There's no arguing that you're right. Congratulations on being exactly right. You definitely put WillJ in his place for misappropriating the use of "affirmative action" in his comment. Between Creeping Charlie's dictionary definitions, and your textbook definitions, the board will soon be literally literal.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you........

Ah... possibly a troll here...I get it.

 

[siobhancan99]

I agree with what you're saying...I don't believe it was wrong. We might be saying the same thing?

I think we agree on a lot of things.