Slavery reparations?

[Meathead]

We all know you have no idea how to read comprehensively. Read my post slowly and maybe you can ask for help on the 2 syllable words. I never accused you of calling Black people apes. I called you a cave ape because you are a racist as exhibited by your retarded posts. If you dont like it show some respect and you will get some. Your grasp of history is astonishing. Your own historians like Herodotus spoke of the African civilization of Egypt and remarked "the people of Colchis must be Egyptians because like them they are black-skinned and wooly-haired."

You're being daft. The Romany (Gypsies) were labeled as "Egyptians", (get it?) were thus named because the were dark-skinned although they were certainly not black by your definition. Anyway, sub-Saharan Africans were, and still are, the most primitive people on earth.

They were never able to take advantage of diffusion and remained essentially stone-aged people which is why they were enslaved by not only those who would colonize their lands, but by others centuries before that.

You are either stupid or trolling. You need to be aware that the Egyptians are proven sub-saharan via DNA. Rameses III is E1B1A haploid group. Look up the DNA results for him and some of the other mummies including King Tut. Yes we are primitive. The primary man.

Sure, we've been through this before. Obviously, sub-Saharan blacks were enslaved for a thousand years because they were so advanced. Oddly, the irony is that slavery and colonization delivered sub-Saharan Africans from abject primitiveness. There is an old saying that you can take the boy out of the county, but you can't take the country out of the boy. There is perhaps no clearer example than the underachievement of American blacks.

 

[Asclepias]

You're being daft. The Romany (Gypsies) were labeled as "Egyptians", (get it?) were thus named because the were dark-skinned although they were certainly not black by your definition. Anyway, sub-Saharan Africans were, and still are, the most primitive people on earth.

They were never able to take advantage of diffusion and remained essentially stone-aged people which is why they were enslaved by not only those who would colonize their lands, but by others centuries before that.

You are either stupid or trolling. You need to be aware that the Egyptians are proven sub-saharan via DNA. Rameses III is E1B1A haploid group. Look up the DNA results for him and some of the other mummies including King Tut. Yes we are primitive. The primary man.

Sure, we've been through this before. Obviously, sub-Saharan blacks were enslaved for a thousand years because they were so advanced. Oddly, the irony is that slavery and colonization delivered sub-Saharan Africans from abject primitiveness. There is an old saying that you can take the boy out of the county, but you can't take the country out of the boy. There is perhaps no clearer example than the underachievement of American blacks.

Evidently being through this before did nothing to educate you. The Egyptians were sub-saharan. Stop running from that. They were blacker than I am. Educate yourself so you dont look like the fool you are.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no doubt that slavery was a horrific act committed by sick individuals, but, I dont think that this necessarily means we should have to financially repararend something that happened 100 years ago! Anyone who is still alive in our currently, had no direct hand in slavery, therefore, why should we have to be the ones paying? Also, only a small portion of people owned slaves, its not like the whole Eastern Seaboard had hundreds upon hundreds of slaves, I think that this topic is commonly over exaggerated, especially in regard to the amount of slaves there were.

It wasnt just committed by some sick individuals. It was condoned and supported by the US. Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims. For that the US owes. I doesnt matter if your ancestors never owned slaves. You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves hence your participation by paying your taxes. Of course the topic is over exaggerated to some. That just points to your lack of perspective to be honest.

Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims.

And they never will, unless someone invents a T.A.R.D.I.S.

You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves

Still waiting for you to quantify this claim. Show all your work.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thats not really true. Have you noticed all the mixed children? You need these genes. Yours are inferior according to studies.

The average Negro IQ in Africa is 70. The average Negro IQ in the United States is 85. The 15 point difference in favor of American Negroes is partly due to the benefits of living in a white dominated civilization. It is partly due to genetic contributions made by white slave owners and employers.

Wait...what? You expect me to lend credibility to a test inspired by a known eugenicist who admittedly, according to studies, has inferior genes? Dont make me laugh. Nobody believes that monkey boy.

Many standarized tests can be used to measure IQ, not just one inspired by an old supporter of the Democrat Party.

Most are in standard English, of course.

 

[Imperious]

It wasnt just committed by some sick individuals. It was condoned and supported by the US. Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims. For that the US owes. I doesnt matter if your ancestors never owned slaves. You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves hence your participation by paying your taxes. Of course the topic is over exaggerated to some. That just points to your lack of perspective to be honest.

You do understand that there were many politicians who stood against slavery right? Even in the 1700s there were many politicians who believed slavery was horrific, they just didn't have the means to oppose it. When slavery was prominent, slaves were mainly owned by the wealthy, and we all understand how hard it is to oppose the wealthy. John Adams is a perfect example of this, he was strongly opposed to the idea of slavery, but understood that if he wanted to get independence, he would have to compromise to some degree. There were many politicians and influential figures who strongly disagreed with slavery during this time period.

 

[freedombecki]

There is no doubt that slavery was a horrific act committed by sick individuals, but, I dont think that this necessarily means we should have to financially repararend something that happened 100 years ago! Anyone who is still alive in our currently, had no direct hand in slavery, therefore, why should we have to be the ones paying? Also, only a small portion of people owned slaves, its not like the whole Eastern Seaboard had hundreds upon hundreds of slaves, I think that this topic is commonly over exaggerated, especially in regard to the amount of slaves there were.

It wasnt just committed by some sick individuals. It was condoned and supported by the US. Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims. For that the US owes. I doesnt matter if your ancestors never owned slaves. You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves hence your participation by paying your taxes. Of course the topic is over exaggerated to some. That just points to your lack of perspective to be honest.

Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims.

And they never will, unless someone invents a T.A.R.D.I.S.

You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves

Still waiting for you to quantify this claim. Show all your work.

Scammers won't show their work. It ruins the impact of their fibbies.

 

[MaryL]

Seriously? I mean, really? I thought this thread was dead. Basically, it IS unrealistic to expect people that never did anything wrong to pay people they never met for something that they didn't have done to them. Did I say that right? It is as absurd as it sounds. Now come on now, get real here, kids. Slavery reparations. All the slaves are long dead, and it's a little past late to ask for money. How crass and dense can you get? NOBODY in million years is going to plunk down "reparations" for slavery and neither should anyone, in all honesty, accept reparations. It disrespects the past generations and just puts a monetary value on human suffering. Just something crass, disingenuous and exploitive about this topic.

 

[Montrovant]

People, this is getting more and more stupid and we seem to have racists of every color crawling out of the wood work on this one.

I think a sufficient case has been made that reparations for slavery that ended more than 150 years ago is idiotic and not really worth the time of any thinking person to bother with. Reparations are promoted and defended only by racist opportunists of all skin colors who are interested in keeping racism alive and well.

And I can't sit by and hear people actually suggest that black people are intellectually inferior to white people. Black children who are expected and required to learn and perform as all other children almost always will and certainly will on the same level as any other children. Some will excel; some won't. Skin color has nothing to do with it.

But those who are treated as inferior or that they won't be allowed opportunity or fair treatment or whatever will too often believe they are inferior and/or can't do it or there is no point in trying. Those who are discouraged from excelling or accomplishing academically for fear they will be accused of 'acting white' or some other idiotic characterization may very well sell themselves short and/or perform less competently on IQ tests or SATs or other means of measurement.

Before government meddling and racism became a national industry, black children in the segregated inner city schools of New York City and elsewhere were performing every bit as well as their counterparts in the area 'white' schools. Anybody who doesn't buy that should read up on it. A good place to start would be with Thomas Sowell's excellent book: Education: Assumptions vs History as well as some of his many essays on the subject.

But I would advise fellow members that we are in danger of having our IQ lowered simply reading some of the idiotic stuff posted on this thread both by black and white members here.

I would disagree on any case being made against reparations. So far all the excuses against have been shot down. Nothing offered so far can dispute that the ex-slaves were not paid reparations. Nothing offered so far has shown any rationality as to why the descendents of slavery should not be entitled to those reparations. Its idiotic to even argue those points in light of the precedents set by the paying of reparations to the Japanese and the victims of the Rosewood massacre.

Wasn't it Florida, rather than the federal government, that paid in the Rosewood case? And at least a good portion of that went to actual survivors, didn't it? It's not quite the same as reparations for slavery. It's the federal government compared to state, it's a much more massive undertaking, there is a lot more time involved and generations passed, and one is about a specific event while the other is about a practice that lasted many years across the nation.

With the Japanese internees, it is at least the federal government which paid. However, my understanding is that the reparations were paid to actual internees rather than family members, and again, it was more a particular event than a long-term practice being addressed.

Reparations for any ancestor of a slave is both impractical and, I think, past the time of much usefulness. With the multiple generations that will have been born since the end of slavery, it both means that the direct effects are no longer in play and that it would likely be simply too many people to pay.

 

[Pop23]

Seriously? I mean, really? I thought this thread was dead. Basically, it IS unrealistic to expect people that never did anything wrong to pay people they never met for something that they didn't have done to them. Did I say that right? It is as absurd as it sounds. Now come on now, get real here, kids. Slavery reparations. All the slaves are long dead, and it's a little past late to ask for money. How crass and dense can you get? NOBODY in million years is going to plunk down "reparations" for slavery and neither should anyone, in all honesty, accept reparations. It disrespects the past generations and just puts a monetary value on human suffering. Just something crass, disingenuous and exploitive about this topic.

See that dead horse? Let's beat it!

The poll is now

94 against reparations
9 for reparations

Against gained 2 since the last time I brought this fact up

For gained 0

Just sayin

 

[flacaltenn]

OK. The convict part was throwing me off as you are correct they are usually destitute. In this case Uncle Sam is hardly destitute, has never been sentenced, and never even convicted. I would describe Uncle Sam more like Bernie Madoff before he was caught.

It may be problematic to tell your new Russian immigrant that his taxes are going to pay for a 200 year old debt that was never paid but I think most rational people would understand a debt is a debt until its paid. I think they would be ok with part of the initiation fee they were going to be paying anyway is going to pay that debt. They dont seem to have a problem with paying for wars.

I didnt say thats all reparations would do. There would be some real economic benefit to not only the descendants of the ex-slaves but also the US itself would naturally recoup that money in the form of a better economy due to increased spending in the Black sector. The part that would be most valuable is the trust it would build in the Black community. Most Black people do not trust whites to do what is right to put it simply. That is a big source of contention. Looking at the excuses against reparations bears that out. To most Blacks its pretty simple. Our ancestors worked and made this nation a economic power. The money those ancestors should have been paid for just that aspect is glaringly obvious. The attempts to trivialize the subsequent effects of slavery on the Black condition also builds large barriers. You are correct in saying there really is no amount large enough but a good faith gesture of a reasonable amount would show an attempt to rectify the wrong.

+1 for the Bernie Madoff comparison.. The problem here is the specific form of settlement. You do not get to make suing for damages -- an on-going experiment with "relations and trust" in our justice factory. And I fear that a ONE-TERM payment -- would PROVOKE more bad faith than it creates. Within a year or two -- the stimulus from a one-time payout would dissipate and there would be same effect on the economy as when Uncle Same makes Temporary subsidies to states for programs that the states are then obliged to fund in perpetuity.

You need more of a "structured settlement" whereby for instance, folks disadvantaged by bad karma from the government (and that would include the failed treaties with Amer. Indians) would receive vouchers to ensure schools of their choice, or that only they could receive EITC tax credits for instance. Something that has a LASTING effect on the disadvantages that they have suffered. And then we get to focus on the whining and begging about WHO is in the receiving class and how many drops of blood it takes to be eligible for the settlement.. That's counterproductive if we ever want to get AWAY from being a society so LEGALLY and ADMINISTRATIVELY fixated on race and descendency.

In order to reach a specific settlement one would need to agree that there is merit to the idea of reparations. Anytime you sue you are able to set the terms of the settlement. Regardless, what I am saying is that as an additional benefit the good will generated by the pay out of reparations acknowledges and validates what happened. Why would a 1 time payment cause bad faith? You paid the debt and then there is nothing further left to be said at that point. The point of the reparations is not to stimulate the economy. It will be a natural reaction to more money being spent by the Black sector but is in no way designed to be an incentive for agreement to pay reparations. Its not a bribe so if the effects dissipate thats not an issue.

We decide what we need. That decision belongs to the recipients. Your suggestions may be noted but we need to let go of this inclination to try and decide whats best for people capable of determining that for themselves. Also this is not going to go like Affirmative Action where everyone is included. This is specifically for Black people that can prove descent from an ex-slave. Once reparations are paid their is no reason for racial politics. The debt is paid. People will sink or swim on their own.

I appoint YOU to be the messenger that explains reparations are only paid to those with provable slave ancestry.. You know better than most how bad and ambiguous those records are.. And there will literally be chaos and perennial bitching from the folks who got shut out of the process. You don't want to task them with carrying govt ID -- but you want them to focus on a genealogy project and produce an iron-clad record of 2 centuries of family history? You're gonna be a busy man... LOL.

And if a one-time payout is just a symbolic acknowledgement of guilt, what's to keep the aggrieved from coming back to the never-empty Treasury for more?

I can hear it now.. You've ADMITTED to heinous crimes and all I got was this one check for $XXXXX ??? If it's about trust and faith --- it's more of a formal treaty.. One that specifies some love for the gesture being made.

 

[bayoubill]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

I might be in favor of it if it hadn't already been paid in full...

600,000 killed in the fight to end slavery 150 years ago...

unimaginably huge property losses in the South as a result of the conflict...

and in the last 50 years, hundreds of billions of dollars spent on social programs specifically aimed to benefit the descends of slaves... with no end of the spending in sight...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

And they're all dead. Why?

 

[freedombecki]

Seriously? I mean, really? I thought this thread was dead. Basically, it IS unrealistic to expect people that never did anything wrong to pay people they never met for something that they didn't have done to them. Did I say that right? It is as absurd as it sounds. Now come on now, get real here, kids. Slavery reparations. All the slaves are long dead, and it's a little past late to ask for money. How crass and dense can you get? NOBODY in million years is going to plunk down "reparations" for slavery and neither should anyone, in all honesty, accept reparations. It disrespects the past generations and just puts a monetary value on human suffering. Just something crass, disingenuous and exploitive about this topic.

Maybe it gets the claimants sex?

 

[Meathead]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

And they're all dead. Why?

I'm guessing guilt. Guilt is a hard thing to sell, but I suppose it works on some.

 

[Asclepias]

It wasnt just committed by some sick individuals. It was condoned and supported by the US. Even after admitting slavery was wrong they never reimbursed the victims. For that the US owes. I doesnt matter if your ancestors never owned slaves. You are living in a country that derives its wealth directly from the labor of those slaves hence your participation by paying your taxes. Of course the topic is over exaggerated to some. That just points to your lack of perspective to be honest.

You do understand that there were many politicians who stood against slavery right? Even in the 1700s there were many politicians who believed slavery was horrific, they just didn't have the means to oppose it. When slavery was prominent, slaves were mainly owned by the wealthy, and we all understand how hard it is to oppose the wealthy. John Adams is a perfect example of this, he was strongly opposed to the idea of slavery, but understood that if he wanted to get independence, he would have to compromise to some degree. There were many politicians and influential figures who strongly disagreed with slavery during this time period.

I understand there were many who stood against it. That doesnt change the fact that it happened does it? The US evidently had more people that were for it. Slavery existed right? Blaming it on the wealthy is fine but lets not forget that these are the founding fathers who made this happen. To excuse it as merely politics shows the absurd lengths whites will go to deny the US is the reason. You have got to be kidding me! Politics is part of the country and how policies such as slavery were decided.

 

[Asclepias]

+1 for the Bernie Madoff comparison.. The problem here is the specific form of settlement. You do not get to make suing for damages -- an on-going experiment with "relations and trust" in our justice factory. And I fear that a ONE-TERM payment -- would PROVOKE more bad faith than it creates. Within a year or two -- the stimulus from a one-time payout would dissipate and there would be same effect on the economy as when Uncle Same makes Temporary subsidies to states for programs that the states are then obliged to fund in perpetuity.

You need more of a "structured settlement" whereby for instance, folks disadvantaged by bad karma from the government (and that would include the failed treaties with Amer. Indians) would receive vouchers to ensure schools of their choice, or that only they could receive EITC tax credits for instance. Something that has a LASTING effect on the disadvantages that they have suffered. And then we get to focus on the whining and begging about WHO is in the receiving class and how many drops of blood it takes to be eligible for the settlement.. That's counterproductive if we ever want to get AWAY from being a society so LEGALLY and ADMINISTRATIVELY fixated on race and descendency.

In order to reach a specific settlement one would need to agree that there is merit to the idea of reparations. Anytime you sue you are able to set the terms of the settlement. Regardless, what I am saying is that as an additional benefit the good will generated by the pay out of reparations acknowledges and validates what happened. Why would a 1 time payment cause bad faith? You paid the debt and then there is nothing further left to be said at that point. The point of the reparations is not to stimulate the economy. It will be a natural reaction to more money being spent by the Black sector but is in no way designed to be an incentive for agreement to pay reparations. Its not a bribe so if the effects dissipate thats not an issue.

We decide what we need. That decision belongs to the recipients. Your suggestions may be noted but we need to let go of this inclination to try and decide whats best for people capable of determining that for themselves. Also this is not going to go like Affirmative Action where everyone is included. This is specifically for Black people that can prove descent from an ex-slave. Once reparations are paid their is no reason for racial politics. The debt is paid. People will sink or swim on their own.

I appoint YOU to be the messenger that explains reparations are only paid to those with provable slave ancestry.. You know better than most how bad and ambiguous those records are.. And there will literally be chaos and perennial bitching from the folks who got shut out of the process. You don't want to task them with carrying govt ID -- but you want them to focus on a genealogy project and produce an iron-clad record of 2 centuries of family history? You're gonna be a busy man... LOL.

And if a one-time payout is just a symbolic acknowledgement of guilt, what's to keep the aggrieved from coming back to the never-empty Treasury for more?

I can hear it now.. You've ADMITTED to heinous crimes and all I got was this one check for $XXXXX ??? If it's about trust and faith --- it's more of a formal treaty.. One that specifies some love for the gesture being made.

I would gladly accept the challenge. That would be a great project to work on. I dont care about bitching and moaning and thats not a reason to not pay reparations to those that can prove it. Sounds more like another excuse not to. I dont get what tasking someone to carry around a government ID has to do with it..

They have these things called stipulations, fine print, contingencies etc that put a halt to any further actions. You get your money and you never bring up the issue again.

 

[Bumberclyde]

So Asc, how much dough you get so far?

 

[flacaltenn]

In order to reach a specific settlement one would need to agree that there is merit to the idea of reparations. Anytime you sue you are able to set the terms of the settlement. Regardless, what I am saying is that as an additional benefit the good will generated by the pay out of reparations acknowledges and validates what happened. Why would a 1 time payment cause bad faith? You paid the debt and then there is nothing further left to be said at that point. The point of the reparations is not to stimulate the economy. It will be a natural reaction to more money being spent by the Black sector but is in no way designed to be an incentive for agreement to pay reparations. Its not a bribe so if the effects dissipate thats not an issue.

We decide what we need. That decision belongs to the recipients. Your suggestions may be noted but we need to let go of this inclination to try and decide whats best for people capable of determining that for themselves. Also this is not going to go like Affirmative Action where everyone is included. This is specifically for Black people that can prove descent from an ex-slave. Once reparations are paid their is no reason for racial politics. The debt is paid. People will sink or swim on their own.

I appoint YOU to be the messenger that explains reparations are only paid to those with provable slave ancestry.. You know better than most how bad and ambiguous those records are.. And there will literally be chaos and perennial bitching from the folks who got shut out of the process. You don't want to task them with carrying govt ID -- but you want them to focus on a genealogy project and produce an iron-clad record of 2 centuries of family history? You're gonna be a busy man... LOL.

And if a one-time payout is just a symbolic acknowledgement of guilt, what's to keep the aggrieved from coming back to the never-empty Treasury for more?

I can hear it now.. You've ADMITTED to heinous crimes and all I got was this one check for $XXXXX ??? If it's about trust and faith --- it's more of a formal treaty.. One that specifies some love for the gesture being made.

I would gladly accept the challenge. That would be a great project to work on. I dont care about bitching and moaning and thats not a reason to not pay reparations to those that can prove it. Sounds more like another excuse not to. I dont get what tasking someone to carry around a government ID has to do with it..

They have these things called stipulations, fine print, contingencies etc that put a halt to any further actions. You get your money and you never bring up the issue again.

Oh I think you get the point about requiring Govt ID being too much of a burden to obtain.
But yet -- you're asking multi-MILLIONS of these same folks who are too feeble, infirmed, addicted or stupid to show an ID ---- to perform a 200 yr old certification of their ancestry.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I would have to say that I am against reparations. Like anything else, if I thought that it would be helpful, I would be for it.

At this point, though, whatever amount we awarded would not be enough, nor would people think that any amount could make up for slavery and the long lasting effects of it.

The time to have done this would have been within 50 years of the end of the civil war. Doing it now, would just encourage people to not take responsibility to move forward. I'm a huge proponent of letting go of the past and moving ahead.

Once we start "awarding" restitution to certain races of people, where will it end? Are blacks going to be forced to make up for the enormous amount of murders and hate crimes directed at whites? Whether we think it is necessary or not, someone will come along and say it needs to happen.

The sooner we stop thinking the we belong to any other race than the human race, the better.

 

[Asclepias]

I appoint YOU to be the messenger that explains reparations are only paid to those with provable slave ancestry.. You know better than most how bad and ambiguous those records are.. And there will literally be chaos and perennial bitching from the folks who got shut out of the process. You don't want to task them with carrying govt ID -- but you want them to focus on a genealogy project and produce an iron-clad record of 2 centuries of family history? You're gonna be a busy man... LOL.

And if a one-time payout is just a symbolic acknowledgement of guilt, what's to keep the aggrieved from coming back to the never-empty Treasury for more?

I can hear it now.. You've ADMITTED to heinous crimes and all I got was this one check for $XXXXX ??? If it's about trust and faith --- it's more of a formal treaty.. One that specifies some love for the gesture being made.

I would gladly accept the challenge. That would be a great project to work on. I dont care about bitching and moaning and thats not a reason to not pay reparations to those that can prove it. Sounds more like another excuse not to. I dont get what tasking someone to carry around a government ID has to do with it..

They have these things called stipulations, fine print, contingencies etc that put a halt to any further actions. You get your money and you never bring up the issue again.

Oh I think you get the point about requiring Govt ID being too much of a burden to obtain.
But yet -- you're asking multi-MILLIONS of these same folks who are too feeble, infirmed, addicted or stupid to show an ID ---- to perform a 200 yr old certification of their ancestry.

No I dont get your point. Goverment ID is not required to vote if thats what you are talking about. A birth certificate is pretty easy to get. I also dont know what you are talking about in regards to multi-millions of feeble, addicted, or slow people. If they cant prove it they dont get reparations. I dont get what is so hard about the concept?