Should Blacks be paid "reparations" today because of slavery in the United States?

And they continue to add more and more laws as they become more and more corrupt and we need more and more lawyers to discern and twist the laws we have. God gave us ten, then summed them up in two. Guess your "enlightenment is a fraud!"

Yeah the enslavement and torture is just a fringe benefit.. Maybe our economy would improve if we cut all the talk of minimum wage, remove Union influence and employed slaves. I know you have an interest in that....I almost see it coming!

 

I like those two summations of the the law**.....expressed in Ayanna's Job Guarantee proposal:

**(but the OT needs to be heavily proscribed; Marcion was correct...)

(link)

Ayanna Pressley's Federal Job Guarantee - Ayanna Pressley for Congress

"A job that provides good wages, strong benefits, union protections & safe working conditions should be a legal right in America. The people deserve true economic justice, and that is why Ayanna Pressley filed an historic resolution calling for a federal job guarantee.

The idea that all people should have a right to employment that ensures a dignified standard of living has deep roots in American history and remains an unfulfilled demand of the civil rights movement. Amidst the unprecedented pandemic, the employment crisis and a resounding demand for a more equitable economy, the need to affirm the right to meaningful, dignified work and a livable wage has never been clearer."

Straight out of Jesus' rule book.

That's not Ayanna's proposal....

 

Notice how Libocrats want us to model our system after that of China? Not Singapore or Denmark but China! Again with the geographical ignorance. We have a more just economy and a higher standard of living.

So we need to treat minorities worse, have slave labor and fewer freedoms. Yep that is the democrat party in a nut shell.

 

Here is a question for anybody on this thread. If you got a $30,000 check from the government what would you do with that money? Would it improve your economic situation for the long term?

How many people would buy a car? Wait 6 months later you are strapped for cash so you sell it for $13500.

You can use that money for tuition. For what a sociology degree? A hate America studies degree?

How many of you know people that are too stupid to contribute to a 401K or IRA?

 

Refuted in post #152 above. Note: PF is not some twitter echo chamber where you are free to spout nonsense and ignore issues already covered.

"The idea that all people should have a right to employment that ensures a dignified standard of living has deep roots in American history and remains an unfulfilled demand of the civil rights movement. Amidst the unprecedented pandemic, the employment crisis and a resounding demand for a more equitable economy, the need to affirm the right to meaningful, dignified work and a livable wage has never been clearer."

Re China: many Chinese have a higher standard of living than many Americans, which is shocking in itself, given modern China was overwhelmingly an agrarian subsistence economy as little as 40 years ago.

Moreover, China has lifted more people out of poverty than any other nation in history in the last 40 years, while poverty rates in the US have remained stuck around 10%. China plans to double its middle class to 800 million people by 2030.

$30,000? Why would you do that? As you say, many people would not be capable of investing that amount of money wisely.

Whereas a means-tested $1400 'gift' at this time (Biden's package) will certainly likely be sensibly spent by parents and individuals who need it to avoid penury (to pay bills etc) at this difficult time of high unemployment.

Actually, the government should have locked the entire non-essential economy down hard last March, and kept it locked down until vaccines were available; by simply changing the digits in the bank accounts of idled workers, to cover food, housing and utility costs. Sovereign currency issuing government could be authorized to issue debt free money to itself if necessary, in a pandemic; and then reopen the economy with a Job Guarantee in place.

Here is Alan Greenspan trying to explain government money creation to Paul Ryan...(Paul is obviously completely bamboozled at the end...

 

Your link sent me to a economic web building site.

 

Seeing my kinfolk are from Appalachia I would say we do have a couple who would be hard pressed to hit 76. You could call them stupid if you wanted too but I wouldn't to their face unless you liked wrestling. They both had a couple nice homes down there and and their pick-ups were awesome. They did a little shine but seemed to be doing better with some grass seed they were selling.

 

I don’t think reparations will ever be a direct payment. They will be imbedded in legislation and through taxation. The recent “Covid relief” bill offers minority farmers a generous relief package while excluding the minority of white women and also white men.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/u-s-lawmakers-introduce-legislation-help-black-farmers-n1257273

 

So the parts that support your your thesis are valid, but any parts that contradict your point of view is, "a load of garbage?" OK; got it.

Doesn't that still make your opinion, at best, no more than a bunch of half-truths?

 

Where did I say anything was a load of garbage? I simply think that disenfranchising one group for another is wrong. This case, it happens to be farmers of color. What about the farmers of color who paid their bills? Do you think this is fair to them? What about struggling women farmers or white farmers? If we’re trying to stop “systematic racism“ why would you want to pass something like this? It’s doing to others what has been done to you. Do you really think that’s a good policy?

 

I think you hit it on the head. It's always more about hating whitey than actually helping anyone. Poverty, misery and crime have served the democrat party well.

 

Yes, let's ignore this part of the story..."Discriminatory lending practices, often at local USDA offices, have denied Black farmers access to funds needed to operate, maintain and purchase farmland, resulting in a loss of $120 billion in farmland value".

 

You are wrong, by the way. Were you unaware that you provided two links? The 1st one is the site, "flawlesslogic," which provides no information on the site itself: its purpose; who runs it; contact info; etc. It is just brief excerpts of two articles. The first comes from a book that appears to be a collection of DIFFERENT OPINIONS: A Question of Intelligence: The IQ Debate in America (New York: Birch Lane, 1992), 150-153. In other words, one might very likely find contesting opinions in that same book.

The second article appears to be excerpted from a book review, in the National Review. While that publication, at least, has an air of credibility, sociology & IQ testing are NOT its area of expertise. It is clear that the reason this book caught the attention of the National Review is that it talks about crime & other social ills that are found in the inner-city incubators of urban blacks. Again, this seems more one particular person's take on the subject, rather than a definitive scientific study, much less majority-accepted scientific thought on the matter.

So, neither of those articles have any official, "sponsorship," that is, no authoritative body vouching for the validity of their arguments.
One is the book review, by a non-scientific publication, of just one in a sea of books on sociology, blacks in America, poverty, etc. The other is merely one opinion from a book of differing opinions (with, "Debate," in its title). One contention that is made, that 1 in 5
blacks has an IQ under 75, is highly dubious, especially without giving any source for that statement; most people, if you are not aware of this, never get an IQ test, so there would need be, at least, a great deal of extrapolation & assumption involved.

If the author was limiting that statement to inner-city blacks, this would actually support an idea that is borne-out, based on cited information, in your second link, that DEMOGRAPHICS play a major role in how well children demonstrate the capacity to reason on standardized school tests. As the segregating of blacks into ghettos were a result, in no small part, of our government's practice of REDLINING-- using its sway over banks to keep blacks out of nicer, white neighborhoods, into areas of low property appreciation-- anyone who accepts this supposed statistic of urban blacks having lower IQs, should find it all the more reason that our country is responsible for rectifying this wrong.

From your first link (which could be run by the KKK, for all anyone knows) I am not disputing any of their statements; nor do I automatically accept them w/o question (which is a much different thing, btw, than going through & cherry-picking only the parts I "like" but rejecting the rest). The point being that, in any science, one is bound to find a diversity of opinions.

Your second link has much more the look of respectability, i.e., it is a magazine with a reputation to maintain, & it does not appear to be directed toward a White Nationalist audience. La Griffe du Lion, seems, in fact, to be a scholarly journal. It is from that link that I took my quotes, (including the author's documenting the source of his data). Your quote, above, comes from your first link, of unnamed sponsorship.

Lastly, as the testing used as the basis, in the second link, came from Baltimore (which would be considered an urban setting), but the differences between blacks' & whites' test scores were only half of the difference which is typically seen (the standard deviation), and this closing of the gap was not seen throughout the rest of (more suburban & rural) Maryland, there is strong evidence right here that the IQ statistic quoted in your first link (which might well have come from old, outdated, incorrect science) about there being such a great disparity in numbers, between very low IQ members of each race, could not be correct.

 

It looks as if, unless it was an amazing coincidence, you rec'd a false notification; I've heard that they occur. You didn't quote anyone, so I don't know which of us you got the notification from, but starcastle used that phrase initially, in post #143, talking about something I quoted; I reiterated his comment, in post #145, explaining that the supposed, load of garbage, had come from a link which HE had posted. (There was another post from each of us, #149 & #159, but I don't think either of us used that phrase again in our replies, only quoted it).

 

You don’t remedy the situation by doing the same to others.
The stimulus bill provides grants and loans to improve land access and address heirs’ property issues for those of color. That’s good. It also establishes a racial equity commission to address systemic racism at the USDA. Maybe good. Moving forward, will this commission begin to deny anyone who isn’t of color access claiming racial equality?

You don’t stop discriminatory practices by engaging in those same practices toward other minorities. While a small percentage of women are in agriculture, they’ve fallen victim to the same inequalities yet are denied in this bill.

 

(link)

Thursday, March 11, 2021 – Bill Mitchell – Modern Monetary Theory (economicoutlook.net)

This heterodox economic theory is also the basis of the Job Guarantee.

 

1) Whites are NOT a minority in the USA.
2) Special consideration should be given to Blacks to make up for all the years they faced discrimination.

 

Then that would be putting blacks in a special class. Black Supremacy? Do you think todays blacks are or where discriminated more than:

1. The American Indians who were driven off their lands and put on reservations.
2. Indentured whites who worked the fields before the blacks were brought here.
3. Mexicans who were driven out of the South West into Mexico and their lands confiscated.
4. Chinese Coolies who were chattel labor building the railroads.
5. The French who were driven into the bayous of Louisiana and the North into Canada.
6. The Japanese who were rounded up and put in concentration camps during World War II
7. Every other group of immigrant that was discriminated against because they talked and dressed different.
8. All woman of all colors who were treated with no respect or rights until 1920.
9. LBGT people who had to live in a underground society to keep from being beaten or killed.

Mans inhumanity towards his fellow man and woman has been going on for a long long time. Even today the people from the Middle East face more discrimination than blacks. Todays white class is not yesterdays white class. No one today is depriving blacks their freedoms and if any do blacks have recourse to remedy the injustice. Not to say that there are not times justice fails but it does for all groups.

My roots in America trace back to early 1900's on my fathers side as they were Austrian Gypsy Jews escaping persecution in Europe. On my mothers side we trace back to early 1800's as indentured servants to work as sharecroppers and the Appalachian coal mines. If you want 40 acres and a mule You think I can get 20 acres and a goat ? If you blacks don't get your reparations let me know. Us Gypsies are real good violin players and I'll play you a song.

 

1) Correct, whites are not in the minority in the USA. Women farmers
are.
2) It is.

 

When special consideration is given to Blacks there are always certain people who hate it.
They ignore the fact that Blacks have been intentionally left out of most programs for many years.

 

I guess you missed this part of my “hateful” post.

“The stimulus bill provides grants and loans to improve land access and addresses heirs’ property issues for those of color. That’s good.”

My issue was the deliberate omission of women, all women, not that people of color were receiving long overdue assistance.

According to the USDA, historically underserved farmers and ranchers include:

• Women
• African-Americans
• Alaskan Natives
• American Indians
• Hispanic
• Asian
• Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islander

https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-a...minority-and-women-farmers-and-ranchers/index

 

We are all supposed to be EQUAL before the Law, Moriah... EQUALITY between all people who are citizens of the United States of America was the admirable, noble goal of both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. "Special consideration" for anyone on the basis of race flies in the face of any concept of EQUALITY. Is it likely that anyone in a population as racially and ethnically diverse as ours in America would like or admire any viewpoint that puts the interests of one race above another?

Which "programs" were Blacks left out of, Moriah? Blacks have been those who profited most from "Affirmative Action" (also known as "reverse-discrimination"). Blacks have been given many different kinds of hiring 'preferences' by both government entities AND private companies and corporations. Blacks have been more prevalent among the recipients of government contracts that are reserved EXLCUSIVELY for "minority-owned businesses" -- meaning that any company not owned by "minorities" is not even allowed to compete for the contract, or even to submit a bid on government activities that represent many millions of dollars, every year....

If you are going to make claims like that, you really should provide some kind of proof or justification for what you're saying, or you will simply be dismissed and justifiably disregarded....

 

Whites have had a 300 year head start in all areas of American life (Especially economic and political). It's hypocritical to say "We are all equal now" after receiving a big head start. Don't you agree?

 

Your argument starts to fall apart when you stop to consider how many Whites didn't even arrive in this country until roughly 100 years ago, or less.

As an example, my people got here from Germany about 1905 and the family worked its way into 'middle-classness' within about 15 years after that, and was doing OK by the end of World War I, but certainly not anything like 'wealth'. Actually, it was regarded as something of a stigma to have come from Germany ("Krauts") during WWI, but not greatly more than the way that people from England ("Limeys"), Ireland ("Micks"), Poland ("Polacks"), Italy ("Dagos"), China ("*****s"), and Mexico ("*****") had been derided for decades. It's interesting to note how many of 'descriptors' are still censored, in the same way that the word, Black ("******") is censored -- look at all those asterisks!

Anyway, there was no great 'head start'. No matter where you came from, you had to "hit the ground running" and WORK for your place in life, and your success. Actually, it is arguable that no one had it more difficult in that regard than people with East-Asian heritage -- Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, etc.

And although World War II provided the first really good, economic breakthroughs in the way Black people were treated -- especially at first by labor unions -- it was not until some years later that the country banished and outlawed all the rotten "Jim Crow" laws and the 'separate-but-equal' conventions that segregated society in the United States. Doing that was a very necessary and wonderful thing -- surely we are agreed on that!

All Americans, of all races, became fully equal before the law, and the LAW itself is what governs everything else in America. But, no, there was no blanket "300 year head start" for Whites, and certainly nothing that justifies serious consideration for anything like "reparations" 156 years after slavery was abolished in the United States.

 

Pollycy, your family had one big advantage when they arrived in America: white skin.
I can guarantee you if they were from Nigeria with Black skin their lives would have been much more difficult. Of course, Black people weren't even allowed to migrate to America in 1905. The racist immigration laws only allowed White people to immigrate to America until 1952.
So, no matter how you look at it Blacks have faced racism and oppression.
P.S. All of those ethnic slurs against new immigrants were mean. But, I still think n***** is the worst though.