For or against reparations?

[fattyflattie 4,638]

3 hours ago, Fastbreak said:

Fucking Tapatalk has been down for me since yesterday.  

“Lady, I just bought this truck. Me and my family going to smoke for life!”

I’d consider reparations for anyone who was not able to get student loans (greatest/silent generation?).  My parents and their siblings (boomers) were the first to be able to not be dirt poor due to student loans/working thru school. They didn’t inherit land and wealth, they inherited debt.    If education was available to you, then you are pretty much on par with a huge subset of the American population, of any color.  This would allow the generation pre-boomer to receive reparations, and pass along to their boomer kids and millennial grandkids, very similar to the vast majority of whites in the country.   

I wouldn’t shed a tear if the top 20%  of slave owning families had to kick in a 5% tax or something. I don’t know how you’d go about fairly assessing that, but I’m sure someone could figure it out. 

There will obviously always been the few families that made it big on the backs of slaves and were then able to parlay that into generational wealth.  Thems just the breaks. 

[bad_teammate 13,221]

8 hours ago, TexArcher said:

Sigh.  Interest on the debt is very close to passing defense spending in our annual budget for third-highest expenditure.  Think about that.  We have the largest and most powerful military in the history of the planet, and just the interest on the debt will cost us more, every year, forever.  And you want to throw a few trillion more on top of that debt?

If the return outweighs the investment, yes. Of course. I answered this already, but you're so incapable of articulating the problem (because you don't know what it is, you're just regurgitating the shit you've been spoonfed for decades by conservatives) that you just repeat the same question and think you're getting somewhere.

You're not.

Quote

And even if you were correct that spending an extra two trillion dollars isn't a problem, where does it come from?

Printing another two trillion is a really bad idea for obvious reasons. 

Like what? Do you have any idea what those reasons are? Any specifics? The fear is hyperinflation, which we aren't even vaguely near the risk of starting.

And, if the reparations policy is handled properly (metered rates of payout, on-demand payouts, price controls (and other inflation-fighting tools)), then we are at no risk of hyperinflation, even if the overall pricetag is in the trillions.

Quote

Issuing another two trillion in treasuries and selling them to China is a really bad idea for obvious reasons.

You should try articulating your arguments. You might learn something.

 

 

[NowThis 931]

on super liberal Surly, 80% against so far. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

Ultimately, yes, it does come to the idea that you saw in that old Dinesh clip where he is telling the undergrads that if they feel so strongly about minorities not getting a fair chance to get into a good college, they should give up their seats for them.  We're a nation of minorities and the details of everyone's individual hard scrabble past is going to make everyone feel like they deserve a cut. 

Plus, slorch should get a bootstrap exemption.

The best way to address disparities in economic opportunity is to have government agencies address the here and now and to in essence grant general amnesty for all the past fuckovers in the past.* 

We should have strong, and even radical affirmative action based on economic disparity in education.  We should have strong government contracts provisions that cater to companies that can establish their own bona fides for hiring disadvantaged candidates or who provide educational loan forgiveness.  We should have housing policies that help the economically disadvantaged, etc.

*I don't have any problem with passing laws that create extended statute of limitations for individuals to bring suit to right particular wrongs that occurred in the past, but those matters will require particular individualized proof, and not just establishing that you are part of some traditionally abused group.

 

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

13 hours ago, EuroHorn said:

 

This hearing was hilarious.  On side you had academics, noted economists, and people who have spent their entire career researching this topic.  To counter all that the Republicans brought out a football player,  a 3rd year undergraduate,  and Candace Owens.  

[DixonHur 11,346]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

fighting tooth and nail to continue to screw them by gutting the VRA and allowing Republicans to enact voter suppression to keep them from having a voice? 

This right here is the most salient point, IMO.  We need to focus on the future instead of trying to fix the unfixable past.

I just don't believe in punishing the descendants of  slaveholders (and many more non-slaveholders) for the "sins of their fathers", no matter how egregious those past sins may seem to us today.  I know that from a modern perspective, it's hard to fathom slavery was an accepted/legal enterprise, but it was.

Like Mojo, my family immigrated from Europe (Italy/Germany) in the 20th century, so we certainly were not slave holders, but I recognize that as a person of European descent, I have advantages in America because of my race.  That said, I don't have any guilt about it, because I know the history of the world is all about conquest and subjugation.   Should the children of wealthy parents feel guilty about their trust funds/inheritance "leg up"?  Of course not. Life is unfair, and always will be.

Yes, black Americans have also had a pretty though run since slavery ended, but you know who's had had it worse during that same stretch of time?  Blacks in Africa.  Yes, I'm aware of the geopolitical reasons, but the only things that matter are the facts on the ground.  I've traveled extensively in sub-Saharan Africa, and I can tell you with 100% certainty that I would rather be a black man in America than in Africa.  Our homeless have it better than probably 90% of the population of SSA.

[American Swindle 102]

I'm against reparations.  Slavery was as Robert E. Lee put it, "a Political and Moral Evil." Calhoun also described it as an "inherited misfortune."

Slavery STILL EXISTS IN AFRICA AND LYBIA but it seems politically inconvenient to focus on actual real world slavery for some folks so they want to focus on a period of time when most of the planet bought and sold slaves of all colors and creeds.  

 

As Thomas Sowell puts it:

"Blacks were not enslaved because they were black but because they were available. Slavery has existed in the world for thousands of years. Whites enslaved other whites in Europe for centuries before the first black was brought to the Western hemisphere. Asians enslaved Europeans. Asians enslaved other Asians. Africans enslaved other Africans, and indeed even today in North Africa, blacks continue to enslave blacks."

The government has made most of the population dependent on giveaways and many have fallen in a state of complacency and contentment with no real incentive to become responsible for their own lives.  Reparations only exacerbates this state of being.  

 

This is just more political theater in a desperate attempt to get votes IMHO.  You want to help African Americans?  End the war on drugs for starters.  

[David Dennison 18,941]

13 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

This right here is the most salient point, IMO.  We need to focus on the future instead of trying to fix the unfixable past.

I just don't believe in punishing the descendants of  slaveholders (and many more non-slaveholders) for the "sins of their fathers", no matter how egregious those past sins may seem to us today.  I know that from a modern perspective, it's hard to fathom slavery was an accepted/legal enterprise, but it was.

Like Mojo, my family immigrated from Europe (Italy/Germany) in the 20th century, so we certainly were not slave holders, but I recognize that as a person of European descent, I have advantages in America because of my race.  That said, I don't have any guilt about it, because I know the history of the world is all about conquest and subjugation.   Should the children of wealthy parents feel guilty about their trust funds/inheritance "leg up"?  Of course not. Life is unfair, and always will be.

Yes, black Americans have also had a pretty though run since slavery ended, but you know who's had had it worse during that same stretch of time?  Blacks in Africa.  Yes, I'm aware of the geopolitical reasons, but the only things that matter are the facts on the ground.  I've traveled extensively in sub-Saharan Africa, and I can tell you with 100% certainty that I would rather be a black man in America than in Africa.  Our homeless have it better than probably 90% of the population of SSA.

True, but trust funds and inheritance are only available to individuals because of protection afforded to wealth by the state. Moreover, instruments of wealth are subject to laws which can be adjusted in an effort to establish a more egalitarian society.

[David Dennison 18,941]

3 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

I'm against reparations.  Slavery was as Robert E. Lee put it, "a Political and Moral Evil." Calhoun also described it as an "inherited misfortune."

Slavery STILL EXISTS IN AFRICA AND LYBIA but it seems politically inconvenient to focus on actual real world slavery for some folks so they want to focus on a period of time when most of the planet bought and sold slaves of all colors and creeds.  

 

As Thomas Sowell puts it:

"Blacks were not enslaved because they were black but because they were available. Slavery has existed in the world for thousands of years. Whites enslaved other whites in Europe for centuries before the first black was brought to the Western hemisphere. Asians enslaved Europeans. Asians enslaved other Asians. Africans enslaved other Africans, and indeed even today in North Africa, blacks continue to enslave blacks."

The government has made most of the population dependent on giveaways and many have fallen in a state of complacency and contentment with no real incentive to become responsible for their own lives.  Reparations only exacerbates this state of being.  

This is just more political theater in a desperate attempt to get votes IMHO.  You want to help African Americans?  End the war on drugs for starters.  

This is a wonderful argument for a 100% estate tax. After all, the truly wealthy in this country got that way with a huge assist from the government. No reason to keep their heirs dependent on the government teat. They need to fend for themselves.

[American Swindle 102]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

This is a wonderful argument for a 100% estate tax. After all, the truly wealthy in this country got that way with a huge assist from the government. No reason to keep their heirs dependent on the government teat. They need to fend for themselves.

Works for the crony capitalists that use the levers of government to enrich themselves personally, but what about the small businesses that are run by common, middle class folks that didn't earn their keep by using the force of government to enable or protect their personal corporate interests?  

So I agree with you in the vein of cronyism, but for the honest good folks out there that just want to work and make an honest living, then nah, that doesn't work and why I'm against a 100% estate tax. 

The bailouts are a prime example of ultimate cronyism, did you support those?

[David Dennison 18,941]

2 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Works for the crony capitalists that use the levers of government to enrich themselves personally, but what about the small businesses that are run by common, middle class folks that didn't earn their keep by using the force of government to enable or protect their personal corporate interests?  

So I agree with you in the vein of cronyism, but for the honest good folks out there that just want to work and make an honest living, then nah, that doesn't work and why I'm against a 100% estate tax. 

The bailouts are a prime example of ultimate cronyism, did you support those?

No. But I understand why they were necessary.

[American Swindle 102]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

No. But I understand why they were necessary.

Why were they necessary?  The reality is this undeniable crony move fucked many over in the form of inflation and devaluing of the dollar.  Who does that hurt?  The poor and the middle class. 

We were told they were necessary by the same establishment that had the biggest stake in keeping the house of cards together.  

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

25 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

I've traveled extensively in sub-Saharan Africa, and I can tell you with 100% certainty that I would rather be a black man in America than in Africa.  Our homeless have it better than probably 90% of the population of SSA.

That's great. But you have to admit that you'd much rather be a white man in America than a black man in America. 'It could be worse' isn't a good excuse for inequality in America (or anywhere else).

I don't think you meant it that way, and I'm not arguing for reparations. I just don't think that 'how things are in Africa' is particularly relevant. 

[DixonHur 11,346]

15 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

True, but trust funds and inheritance are only available to individuals because of protection afforded to wealth by the state. Moreover, instruments of wealth are subject to laws which can be adjusted in an effort to establish a more egalitarian society.

I don't mean this in a snarky way, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. 

Don't we also have laws intended to make racial inequality more egalitarian?

[David Dennison 18,941]

3 minutes ago, Axiom of Choice said:

I think the causes of the problems for many in the African American community are numerous & varied, and of course discrimination is a significant contributing factor.  But assigning it all to slavery and cutting a check to fix the problem is a silly approach.  If the problems are mostly attributable to slavery, then why did slavery have a roughly one century latent effect on illegitimacy and unemployment rates in the African American community? Also, since the mid 1960s, the US government has spent trillions of dollars addressing poverty, and the illegitimacy and unemployment rates for African Americans has continuously increased during this time; in fact, it has increased at the highest rate it ever has during this period, leading some to conclude that these programs play a contributing role in the phenomenon.  My point is that we need to better understand the problems first and then proceed with reasonable and well thought out solutions, or otherwise our good intentions may just make the problem worse.  

 

What kind of jobs did most black people, particularly in the south, have before the civil rights era began in the middle of the 20th century? 

[DixonHur 11,346]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

That's great. But you have to admit that you'd much rather be a white man in America than a black man in America. 'It could be worse' isn't a good excuse for inequality in America (or anywhere else).

I don't think you meant it that way, and I'm not arguing for reparations. I just don't think that 'how things are in Africa' is particularly relevant. 

But I'd rather be a rich black man in America than a poor white man.

The reason the prosperity of black Americans as opposed to black Africans is relevant is that it could be argued that while slavery was horrible for the slaves, it has worked out comparatively well for descendants of slaves.  

[DixonHur 11,346]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What kind of jobs did most black people, particularly in the south, have before the civil rights era began in the middle of the 20th century? 

Ooh, ooh, I know this one... sharecropping...and domestic work.  Basically they did the same things they did as slaves, but as "free" men and women.

Edited July 10, 2019 by DixonHur

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

27 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What kind of jobs did most black people, particularly in the south, have before the civil rights era began in the middle of the 20th century? 

Dude doesn't realize he's actually making the opposite case of the one he intends to.  Blacks were almost totally exempt from the new deal proposals of the 1930s and onwards. In fact, the black/white wealth gap was essentially nonexistent immediately following the Great Depression, so most of the wealth gap we see today stems from discriminatory policy actions that began in the 30s. So there's an argument that reparations shouldn't come as a result of slavery but as a result of discriminatory policy actions on the federal,  state, and local level against people presumably alive today.  The abhorrent conditions people live in can effect their behavior as we're beginning to finally admit with the rising opiod crisis in middle America. So the idea that illegitimacy rates started to increase as blacks were exempted from recovery efforts following the great depression makes perfect fucking sense to me.  

Edited July 10, 2019 by Catdaddyhorn

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

11 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

But I'd rather be a rich black man in America than a poor white man.

The reason the prosperity of black Americans as opposed to black Africans is relevant is that it could be argued that while slavery was horrible for the slaves, it has worked out comparatively well for descendants of slaves.  

You'd rather be a rich black man in America than a poor white man? Are you sure about that? What about when the cops pull you over? Chris Rock had a good bit on that topic. Chris was probably right. But don't try to obfuscate the question by injecting wealth disparity. Rich, poor, or in between, it's better to be white with that income in this country than it is to be black with that same income. And it's harder to achieve the same income if you're black. 

Maybe I was wrong. You're treading close to arguing that we did them a favor by enslaving them. Do you think a history of white colonialism may have contributed a little bit to how things are in Africa today?

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

Also, didn't we get most of our slaves from Northern Africa? I can't remember but I think I recall that. I could be wrong. 

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

Also, didn't we get most of our slaves from Northern Africa? I can't remember but I think I recall that. I could be wrong. 

Western Africa

[bolverk 29,705]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Also, didn't we get most of our slaves from Northern Africa? I can't remember but I think I recall that. I could be wrong. 

Subsaharan West Africa.

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

8 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

Western Africa

 

8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Subsaharan West Africa.

Right. Sometimes I forget how much of the continent is Sub-Saharan. 

[DixonHur 11,346]

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Maybe I was wrong. You're treading close to arguing that we did them a favor by enslaving them.

Certainly no one, including the African slave traders who sold them to the Europeans, was doing them any favors.  Nobody is arguing that slavery was good for slaves.  But I would argue that being a descendant of slaves who were brought to the US would definitely be a net positive compared to the alternatives.  

The point of recognizing relativism is that some people keep talking about a leg up.  I'm saying having a "leg up" is relative.  Some one always has it better than you and there are always people who have it worse.  I wish we lived in an egalitarian dream world, but we don't and never will.  Fact of life...people with power like to keep power.  It's not always about racism.  

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Do you think a history of white colonialism may have contributed a little bit to how things are in Africa today?

Already mentioned understanding the reasons why Africa is in it's crappy situation.  But understanding the reasons doesn't change the facts on the ground.  Colonialism was a huge factor in the accumulation of European wealth and power.  But so what?  Lots of civilizations throughout history colonized.  Just because the Europeans were the most recent example doesn't make it worse.  We can't change the past, we can only live in the present and try to set up a better tomorrow.  

[Sbbruin 21,865]

This is the stupidest concept ever proposed.  Who gets reparations?  And who bears the cost?  Do we propose a special levy on those whose ancestry can be directly linked to slave ownership?  If your family arrived here in the late 1800's/early 1900's from Europe (as my ancestors did), are you supposed to bear the burden of reparations owned by generations you had nothing to do with?  If you are black and your family arrived here after the abolishment of slavery, do you receive money?  There is absolutely no practical way to apply this in either direction.  It is, for lack of a better descriptor, retarded.

[Fozzz 152]

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

1 hour ago, Axiom of Choice said:

When the discussion of the higher rates of poverty in the African American community comes up, it is almost never accompanied by any facts or figures.  Slavery and Jim Crow are mentioned and then we move along.  But if we look at the numbers, two of the most important contributing trends - illegitimacy and unemployment rates - began & continued in the 2nd half of the 20th century.  

https://people.ucsc.edu/~rfairlie/papers/published/ilrr 1999 - racial unemployment.pdf

"Nearly all of the widening of the gap from the 1940s to the 1950s can be attributed to regional shifts of workers and declining demand in markets where black workers were concentrated."  - from linked study.  

 

From economist Walter E.Williams:

"The Census Bureau pegs the poverty rate among blacks at 35 percent and among whites at 13 percent. The illegitimacy rate among blacks is 72 percent, and among whites it's 30 percent. A statistic that one doesn't hear much about is that the poverty rate among black married families has been in the single digits for more than two decades, currently at 8 percent. For married white families, it's 5 percent." 

"But why was the black illegitimacy rate only 14 percent in 1940, and why, as Dr. Thomas Sowell reports, do we find that census data "going back a hundred years, when blacks were just one generation out of slavery ... showed that a slightly higher percentage of black adults had married than white adults. This fact remained true in every census from 1890 to 1940"?"

https://blackdemographics.com/households/marriage-in-black-america/

 

I think the causes of the problems for many in the African American community are numerous & varied, and of course discrimination is a significant contributing factor.  But assigning it all to slavery and cutting a check to fix the problem is a silly approach.  If the problems are mostly attributable to slavery, then why did slavery have a roughly one century latent effect on illegitimacy and unemployment rates in the African American community? Also, since the mid 1960s, the US government has spent trillions of dollars addressing poverty, and the illegitimacy and unemployment rates for African Americans has continuously increased during this time; in fact, it has increased at the highest rate it ever has during this period, leading some to conclude that these programs play a contributing role in the phenomenon.  My point is that we need to better understand the problems first and then proceed with reasonable and well thought out solutions, or otherwise our good intentions may just make the problem worse.  

 

That shift follows the war on drugs incarceration ramp up and the associated increase in gang activity pretty closely. Do you have that data up until the present year?  I bet the marriage rate is starting to move back up as gang activity has decreased and more jurisdictions are limiting arrests and prosecutions for possession. 

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

As of 2017 we were still paying off pensions to heirs of civil war soldiers.  

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

14 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

And when the debate switches to the other forms you will rail against them too because, “muh taxes”.

Yeah that's it.  You have an amazing grasp of the inane reply.

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

26 minutes ago, Axiom of Choice said:

What case do you think I intended to make?  One of my points was that slavery is not the sole cause of poverty rates and other disparity between whites and blacks, which you seem to agree with.  Another point I made was that "discrimination is a significant contributing factor" of the "problems for many in the African American community," which you also seem to agree with.  My main point was that "the causes of the problems for many in the African American community are numerous & varied," and include factors other than slavery and domestic policies up to the 1950s.  

As for your assertion on the discriminatory policy actions that began in the 30s, why do you think this had virtually no effect on illegitimacy rates in the African American community for nearly 40 years, and then suddenly caused it to skyrocket a few years after the Great Society programs were implemented?  Why have these rates continued to increase into the 21st century?

 

Those charts relied on data from the census, so the next ones of the type won't come out until after 2020.  I'm not aware of any other reports which compile such reliable and extensive data.  If anyone has any, I would be interested in seeing it.  But I agree with you that the war on drugs and associated incarceration rates and gang activity are likely major contributing factors.  

The chart you provided are marriage rates not illegitimacy rates.  The black illegitimacy rate was anywhere between 14 to 16% in 1940 depending on what data you're using. It was about 8 times that of whites in 1940. Now it's a little more than 2 times that of whites.  Seems like the explosion in illegitimacy happened with both groups. A major factor for the difference is that the starting point for blacks was much higher than that of whites as views towards sex, marriage, and raising children changed in the years afterwards. 

Edited July 10, 2019 by Catdaddyhorn

[Fozzz 152]

25 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

That shift follows the war on drugs incarceration ramp up and the associated increase in gang activity pretty closely. Do you have that data up until the present year?  I bet the marriage rate is starting to move back up as gang activity has decreased and more jurisdictions are limiting arrests and prosecutions for possession. 

I believe marriage rates are still declining.  If you would like to learn about the relationship between poverty and family structure, I would recommend reading Philip Cohen's blog, and particularly the report he helped author a few years ago evaluating the Moynihan Report.

https://contemporaryfamilies.org/moynihan-half-century-brief-report/

[atomheartbevo 89,771]

18 hours ago, TexArcher said:

Secondly, who gets reparations?  All black people?  Even the ones who came here from Europe or Africa in the last decade or two?  Do they only go to black people who can prove their ancestry back past the Civil War, or segregation, or what?  Where's the line?

And then who's next in line?  Native Americans, sure.  '

I'm less than 5% black, and less than 5% NA.   I am, in fact, a card-carrying member of the Cherokee Nation (by card-carrying, I mean everything is in a safe-deposit box).  I have the DNA tests to prove both of those, and I have extensive documentation on the Cherokee thing (since DNA is useless in tribal memberships and my family had their allotments awarded based on being able to prove ancestry).

So do I get something equivalent to my genetic makeup?

Oh, and is there is a problem with the fact that the African-American part of me is due to the Cherokee side of the family being slaveholders?  Does that cancel out reparations?  

Edited July 10, 2019 by atomheartbevo

[atomheartbevo 89,771]

18 hours ago, TexArcher said:

What about the Irish immigrants who were treated like shit? 

Unless Congress wants to correct its historical record and pass legislation stating that the Irish are human beings, I see no reason for them to get shit.

[fattyflattie 4,638]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

This is the stupidest concept ever proposed.  It is, for lack of a better descriptor, retarded.

It is a wet dream topic for any R running, for sure. 

[atomheartbevo 89,771]

18 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

So, I'm not sure how anybody came up with an cost estimate.  Has somebody proposed a dollar-per-person amount? 

This country is full of people that have multi-generational wealth.  If any of that wealth came via slavery, then those motherfuckers need to pay a tax.  A hefty fucking tax. 

I think the whole idea is ridiculous at this point (see my post asking if I get something for having small amounts of AA and NA blood) because of all of these issues.   I doubt few families have wealth that is in existence thanks to slavery - somebody alive in the first half of the 1800s would easily have several thousand descendants.

Like others in the thread, I also don't like the idea that it was just about slavery - plenty of governmental institutions (and private) worked for a century after the Civil War to keep minorities oppressed.

And speaking of Civil War, if we did something like reparations (we won't), it's a good way to get impoverished whites angry, and that's not a group we really want losing their shit.  Plus, plenty of them have been shit on by the same people shitting on minorities.

The only logical thing I've ever seen on this issue, is improving the education of minorities/poor folks as a whole, and perhaps working on some kind of improved loan system to help those in debt (basically not pay it off, but help them with loans to better manage things).

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

55 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

I believe marriage rates are still declining.  If you would like to learn about the relationship between poverty and family structure, I would recommend reading Philip Cohen's blog, and particularly the report he helped author a few years ago evaluating the Moynihan Report.

https://contemporaryfamilies.org/moynihan-half-century-brief-report/

Well, you also have to adjust for the modern trend of women avoiding marriage and focusing on careers. 

Edited July 10, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[Sbbruin 21,865]

1 hour ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

As of 2017 we were still paying off pensions to heirs of civil war soldiers.  

One single heir who is the daughter of a soldier, so maybe a little overstated, or underclarified.  $73/mo.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-08/civil-war-vets-pension-still-remains-on-governments-payroll-151-years-after-last-shot-fired

Edited July 10, 2019 by Sbbruin

[Sbbruin 21,865]

26 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Unless Congress wants to correct its historical record and pass legislation stating that the Irish are human beings, I see no reason for them to get shit.

[fattyflattie 4,638]

Damn. Busting out kids when you are in your 80’s. Stud. 

 

[TexArcher 37,998]

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

If the return outweighs the investment, yes. Of course. I answered this already, but you're so incapable of articulating the problem (because you don't know what it is, you're just regurgitating the shit you've been spoonfed for decades by conservatives) that you just repeat the same question and think you're getting somewhere.

You're not.

It's hilarious that you assume I'm a conservative.  I'm not.  I'm just a guy who's worked in the financial industry for 15 years and acquired a working understanding of this stuff.  Go Kamala. 

 

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Like what? Do you have any idea what those reasons are? Any specifics? The fear is hyperinflation, which we aren't even vaguely near the risk of starting.

And, if the reparations policy is handled properly (metered rates of payout, on-demand payouts, price controls (and other inflation-fighting tools)), then we are at no risk of hyperinflation, even if the overall pricetag is in the trillions.

You should try articulating your arguments. You might learn something.

No offense, but if you need me to explain why printing two trillion dollars is a bad idea or why selling another two trillion dollars of treasuries to China is a bad idea, then what you need is an economics class.

The question to you was, simply: where do the trillions of dollars for reparations come from?

The closest you've come to an answer is basically: We just spend it!

So I think this conversation has gone about as far as it can.

[atomheartbevo 89,771]

This is the kind of stuff that should be discussed.   We can’t fix the ills of the past, even those who maybe alive and who suffered, but we can help their descendants.  

 

[bad_teammate 13,221]

4 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

It's hilarious that you assume I'm a conservative.  I'm not.  I'm just a guy who's worked in the financial industry for 15 years and acquired a working understanding of this stuff.  Go Kamala. 

This does absolutely nothing to establish expertise or credibility, as anyone who knows anyone who works in finance can attest. The idea that the financial industry is most knowledgeable regarding good fiscal policy is a fucking joke. The hogs don't know how to grow crops, just just know how to eat what others grow.

Quote

No offense, but if you need me to explain why printing two trillion dollars is a bad idea or why selling another two trillion dollars of treasuries to China is a bad idea, then what you need is an economics class.

It's amazing how you guys all rely on the same bullshit slogans, never have anything meaningful to say, and think you're smart.

Quote

The question to you was, simply: where do the trillions of dollars for reparations come from?

The closest you've come to an answer is basically: We just spend it!

So I think this conversation has gone about as far as it can.

Yes, because you don't know what the hell you're talking about. We have been "just spending" money that we have invented out of nothing since we left the gold standard. And even the gold standard is illusory. Money is a promise and we can print as much as we want as long as the promise holds, which is what we have been doing very successfully for 5 decades, as you well know.

So as long as we don't see hyperinflation coming (which it isn't, and which we can easily and successfully fight if it even starts), can you tell me what the problem is? Have you taken enough economics classes to even BEGIN to explain the problem?

No, what you have is training in how to be a jackal and the same idiotic catchphrases the jackals bark at each other to make themselves feel smart.

[TexArcher 37,998]

Jesus.  Have a good day, dude.

[Rusty Shackelford 414]

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

 LULZ. This could be the new blackguytappingtemple meme.  

If  you call the fire department, it actually cancels out the fact that you were the one to throw the Molotov cocktail.   Not many people know that. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

10 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Jesus.  Have a good day, dude.

You're a jackal.

But you're OUR jackal, TexArch.

r

[David Dennison 18,941]

 

3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

OK.

Let's have the former Confederate States pony up.

Edited July 10, 2019 by David Dennison

[TexArcher 37,998]

4 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

You're a jackal.

But you're OUR jackal, TexArch.

r

Um, thanks?

Also, now I have that "Lumberjack" song in my head.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

19 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

This is not just about slavery. It's also about the 150+ years of economic terrorism AA's faced in this country after they were "freed". Hell, survivors of BWS are still alive. 

This was a rather loud "Oklahoma sucks".  I did not know about any of this, until I moved after college, and I grew up in that shithole. 

[RDCanecutter 26,461]

For.

If, say, the Irish had been the most enslaved group, they'd still be bitching about it ten times more than black people do. Every white English-ancestry motherfucker would be getting neck-tattoos in Gaelic and crying drunk at Pogues knock-off concerts

Well hell, I guess that happened anyway.

For more practical reasons, I live in an area that is about 50% African-American, and would enjoy seeing my fellow citizens awash in cash.  Why yes, I would like another drink, thank you sir.