The value of slavery?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into

What about them?

Nope. Please give us an honest reason. Not an emotional or heartfelt reason

Thats not an appropriate response to the declaration "you're wrong" is a weak argument.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
Thankfully the post is there for all to read.

I'm not a liberal and I post nothing that I have any qualms about being in the public domain so I'm not sure what you're attempting to imply.

Do you have a will so that when you die your family will inherit your assets or have made provisions for them to be the beneficiaries of an insurance policy? Those items have tangible value, no? So while your death ends certains rights for you, the deceased, it triggers other rights and transfers what wealth you have accumulated to whomever you have designated. Any wages earned even if they haven't yet been paid are still owed. Since they can't be paid to you, then by law they have to go to your beneificary or estate. Are you stating that this is not true or that the law I cited is incorrect?

 

[dave p]

What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into

What about them?

Nope. Please give us an honest reason. Not an emotional or heartfelt reason

Thats not an appropriate response to the declaration "you're wrong" is a weak argument.

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor. Pleas tell us all why.

 

[dave p]

The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?

Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.

No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not the one misinformed.

I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.

Stupid. You are stupid.

Then you’ve got something in common.

And how is that.please tell us all.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.

Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity

So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here? The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.

All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.

 

[dave p]

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.

Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.

No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.

Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.

No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.

Thank you for guessing as to my motives. I will announce the winner tomorrow morning.

Yes it is irrelevant. But, maybe you would like to explain how it would inform our choice or implementation of reparations form our government. And no, saying "foreign governments participated" is not an explanation. It is reiteration of your claim.

 

[dave p]

They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity

So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here? The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.

All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.

If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.

I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.

 

[dave p]

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.

Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.

No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.

Thank you for guessing as to my motives. I will announce the winner tomorrow morning.

Yes it is irrelevant. But, maybe you would like to explain how it would inform our choice or implementation of reparations form out government. And no, saying "foreign governments participated" is not an explanation. It is reiteration of your claim.

You originally said it wasn’t relevant. Please make up your mind. Your deflection is hollow.

 

[Coyote]

One may argue but one would

That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.

Not really. A very weak argument on your part since none of the oppressors are alive. You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.

That is a bit disingenuous. They profited but when the transatlantic slave trade ended slavery and the breeding and selling of human beings continued in America.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?

Apparently

How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.

Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.

But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
....
Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.

In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.

In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”

For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​

 

[Coyote]

My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.

Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.

Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets. For example...

Who gets reparations?
All blacks?
Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
Those who immigrated here post slavery?
What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
What is white?
What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?

What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into slavery?

They aren’t American so they are irrelevant.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money.

Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?

Holy double-counting Batman!!!

Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.

Considering he was counting what happened after slavery

Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.

Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.

Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.

His math is fine. And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.

His math is moronic. And pointless.
You will never ever get reparations.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You originally said it wasn’t relevant.

And i still do. And my invitation to you to describe how it is relevant and should inform our choice or degree of implementation of reparations still stands.

 

[Intolerant]

 

[Ridgerunner]

The same places the annual payments to Native American Tribes come from. Money paid because of what your ancestors did.

I'm Chinese...

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.

I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.

Wow, where to start, what questions have I refused to answer?

If a person kidnaps a child and either sells or gives them to you, does the fact that you didn't go out and abduct the child yourself absolve you of the crimes involved in human trafficking if you then in turn do anything with that child other than calling the authorities?

What is someone kidnapped one of your children? I would expect that you would call the police and expect them to do everything humanly and legally possible to not only return your child to you, preferably before any harm could come to her, but to also fully punish the person(s) who took her, Now imagine that because of your race in the event that someone does come along and steals one of your children with the full intent of doing unspeakable things to your child you have no rights under the law to have the police go after the person or even to go after the person yourself and if you do, then you will be the one arrested and/or killed for daring to attack a member of the "superior" race.

Can you imagine living in a world where this is how things are? The only reason for this being the case is because these were the laws that were drafted, legislated and enforced by the various governments in the U.S. The individuals who participated in the heinous institution of chattel slavery in the U.S. were only able to do so because of the laws, policies and procedures that were in place during the centuries of slavery and then replaced with the weaker but still racially discriminatory and inhumane in many cases laws of "separate but equal", Jim Crow laws, Black Codes, etc. all based on the premise of white superiority and black inferiority. Our governments created a society were this was the norm therefore they are the ones responsible for creating the harm, codifing it and enforcing it at the end of a whip and the barrel of a gun. This is best I can come up with this evening by way of an explanation.

 

[irosie91]

blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?

Apparently

How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.

Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.

But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
....
Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.

In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.

In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”

For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​

not the whole story-------in order to BENEFIT from the benefits----the veteran had to APPLY FOR THEM. I was navy-----not all that long ago------I had a HARD TIME convincing kids who were leaving to ------TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE GI BILL. So many just DID NOT WANT TO. ----THEY HAD OTHER PLANS.. I have no doubt that part of the problem was discrimination------but ANOTHER PART------was---JUST NOT
INTERESTED. I live in the north east------my perspective is flawed with regard to OPPORTUNITY. My dad did some nite school -----on the GI bill no degree----just a minor profession thing-------he was white -----served in the Navy during world war II. I cannot imagine that his little nite school classes were closed to blacks UP HERE

 

[irosie91]

One may argue but one would

That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.

Not really. A very weak argument on your part since none of the oppressors are alive. You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.

That is a bit disingenuous. They profited but when the transatlantic slave trade ended slavery and the breeding and selling of human beings continued in America.

the breeding and selling of human beings......??????