Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:45 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558

Who does *not* deserve reparations? (a separate discussion)


So as to not derail the other ongoing reparations thread which is specifically about black Americans only -

It is often argued that if we pay reparations to black Americans, that logically then opens up the door to many other Americans disadvantaged in history -

(quotes by some posters in the other thread):

Quote:
I notice that you....leave out the harm done by government policies and practices towards women, gays, hispanics, Chinese, etc.
Quote:
That's because the topic of this thread (and TNC's focus of study) is "reparations to African Americans". But I'm very much open to studying such harm done to any groups, including those you mention, and I'd gladly contribute to a thread on such topics.
Without going into long detail, the list of people who could claim they need reparations might encompass Arabs, Hispanics, LGBT people, atheists, Native Americans, Asians, women, Muslims, Jews, etc. Indeed, perhaps everyone, with the exception of white straight Christian men, would qualify.

But the financial math gets pretty tough if the people who deserve a victim payout constitute the majority of the population while the people who deserve to be paying reparations constitute a minority. The only way that could work, financially, would be if white straight men were really wealthy - and with the exception of the likes of Buffett, Gates, Zuckerberg, etc., most aren't. How would that work.......... increase taxes on white straight men 3-fold or 5-fold?

Furthermore, where is the cutoff point? At which point is a victim's grievance strong enough to deserve reparations, and at what point is it not? And how do we determine that cutoff point - by committee decision?

Last edited by Velocity; 06-24-2019 at 10:46 AM.
  #2  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:53 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
This seems like a "But if we offer reparations to African-Americans we have to offer them to everybody!" variation to me, used to shut down discussion of reparation totally. Proposing making a master list with a set of rules attached is just another way to muddy the issue, in my opinion. Each argument for reparation should be made separately, independent of the others.
  #3  
Old 06-24-2019, 11:41 AM
l0k1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 235
Definitely not thd descendants of Facundo Bacardi.
  #4  
Old 06-24-2019, 11:43 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Each argument for reparation should be made separately, independent of the others.
Sure. Then this would be a thread to do it, but avoiding scattered threads here and there.
  #5  
Old 06-24-2019, 11:48 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Sure. Then this would be a thread to do it, but avoiding scattered threads here and there.
This thread is the exact opposite of "the place to do it".
  #6  
Old 06-24-2019, 11:51 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,426

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
This thread is the exact opposite of "the place to do it".
This thread is about those that do not deserve reparations. Feel free to not participate if this isn't something you wish to discuss or debate.

[/moderating]
  #7  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:01 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
I don't make an argument based on "deserve", but rather what I think is best for the country. If you're just interested in who "deserves" reparations, then I don't have an answer; if you are interested in what programs are best for the country, I think that would require some very involved research and study -- I think that research and study is definitely warranted for those large groups that have suffered, by far the most in America due to discriminatory policies and practices -- black people and Native Americans. I'm certainly open to arguments that it's warranted for other groups as well.
  #8  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:10 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I don't make an argument based on "deserve", but rather what I think is best for the country. If you're just interested in who "deserves" reparations, then I don't have an answer; if you are interested in what programs are best for the country, I think that would require some very involved research and study -- I think that research and study is definitely warranted for those large groups that have suffered, by far the most in America due to discriminatory policies and practices -- black people and Native Americans. I'm certainly open to arguments that it's warranted for other groups as well.
Sure, but we don't have to wait until "research and study" before discussing an issue - otherwise, we might as well shut down the topic until or unless such study is done.
  #9  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:11 PM
l0k1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 235
I'd go as far as to say Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, the Walton Family, and dozens of others have received more than their share of public assistance at this point, and should learn to be self sufficient. The welfare they receive have made them lazy, and in some cases they flaunt their drug use. The have grown up on a culture that's broken. Unable to even maintain a marriage, there children grow up in broken homes never knowing or even having models of good old American work ethic.
  #10  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:13 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Sure, but we don't have to wait until "research and study" before discussing an issue - otherwise, we might as well shut down the topic until or unless such study is done.
Quite obviously, and I'm interested to read any arguments anyone has for other groups.
  #11  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:19 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Quite obviously, and I'm interested to read any arguments anyone has for other groups.
Hispanics = discriminatory experience
Chinese-Americans = lots of discrimination, especially in 1800s, such as Chinese Exclusion Act
Asian-Americans in general = face discrimination in admissions (i.e., ongoing lawsuit against Harvard)
LGBT = should be pretty self-explanatory
Women = couldn't vote for decades, didn't have this or those rights for decades
Muslims = face discrimination, especially after 9/11
Jews = faced anti-Semitism in America
atheists = face discrimination in America


(not meant to be all-encompassing, just a sampling)
  #12  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:20 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Well, let's start at the beginning-Native Americans. Over four centuries of broken promises, stealing, persecution and death to make up for, and no chance in hell of coming anywhere close to making up for it, but that doesn't mean we should shrug our shoulders, say "Whatcha gonna do about it?" and walk away. Every American History book in every public school should have a public apology printed on the first page. Native American tribes should get first option on any public land the government puts up for sale at a deeply discounted rate. If there is a tribal casino operating, no other casino should be allowed within a fifty mile radius.
These aren't even close to making up for what was done, but it would be useful as a constant reminder of what we did and what we are capable of doing again when it is convenient.
  #13  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:23 PM
DrCube is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Caseyville, IL
Posts: 7,417
I'm sure plenty of white Christian men have been oppressed throughout time, we just need a government funded study to separate those who have, and their descendants, from those who haven't.

Also, I see women listed several times as deserving of reparations, but everyone is descended from women. Not everyone is descended from slaves or an oppressed racial underclass, at least in recent history. So that alone makes the two cases very different.

Since I support a basic income, I guess you could say I support reparations for everyone.
  #14  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:26 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Hispanics = discriminatory experience
Chinese-Americans = lots of discrimination, especially in 1800s, such as Chinese Exclusion Act
Asian-Americans in general = face discrimination in admissions (i.e., ongoing lawsuit against Harvard)
LGBT = should be pretty self-explanatory
Women = couldn't vote for decades, didn't have this or those rights for decades
Muslims = face discrimination, especially after 9/11
Jews = faced anti-Semitism in America
atheists = face discrimination in America


(not meant to be all-encompassing, just a sampling)
Are you saying all of these groups "deserve" reparations, or all of these groups should get reparations to make America stronger?
  #15  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:29 PM
DrCube is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Caseyville, IL
Posts: 7,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Are you saying all of these groups "deserve" reparations, or all of these groups should get reparations to make America stronger?
At the very least they all deserve a rigorous government funded study.
  #16  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:29 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Hispanics = discriminatory experience
Chinese-Americans = lots of discrimination, especially in 1800s, such as Chinese Exclusion Act
Asian-Americans in general = face discrimination in admissions (i.e., ongoing lawsuit against Harvard)
LGBT = should be pretty self-explanatory
Women = couldn't vote for decades, didn't have this or those rights for decades
Muslims = face discrimination, especially after 9/11
Jews = faced anti-Semitism in America
atheists = face discrimination in America


(not meant to be all-encompassing, just a sampling)
How would you prioritize this list, from most to least deserving of reparations?
  #17  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:30 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Well, let's start at the beginning-Native Americans. Over four centuries of broken promises, stealing, persecution and death to make up for, and no chance in hell of coming anywhere close to making up for it, but that doesn't mean we should shrug our shoulders, say "Whatcha gonna do about it?" and walk away. Every American History book in every public school should have a public apology printed on the first page. Native American tribes should get first option on any public land the government puts up for sale at a deeply discounted rate. If there is a tribal casino operating, no other casino should be allowed within a fifty mile radius.
These aren't even close to making up for what was done, but it would be useful as a constant reminder of what we did and what we are capable of doing again when it is convenient.
Yes i should have included that in the list. (The list wasn't meant to be all-encompassing, otherwise could go on and on)
  #18  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:31 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Are you saying all of these groups "deserve" reparations, or all of these groups should get reparations to make America stronger?
Is there a difference? A dollar is a dollar, whether it was awarded out of "deserve-ment" or for the sake of making America stronger. The practical effect is the same.
  #19  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:32 PM
Dinsdale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 18,305
I'd say reparations are appropriate for a clearly delineated group relatively soon after a specific harm was done to them. So I can readily distinguish between Japanese-American WWII internees and "black" people deserving reparations for - what exactly?

And I think that reparations ought to be quite unusual - not compensation for every real or perceived slight. In the vast majority of situations - including racial inequity - the approach ought to be to presently level the playing field, and to offer benefits/advantages to those most deserving due to their current situation - rather than perceptions of past behavior by 3d parties.

Although I DO appreciate the idea of reparations to atheists in this "god fearing" nation!
__________________
I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused.

Last edited by Dinsdale; 06-24-2019 at 12:32 PM.
  #20  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:33 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Anyway - aside from white straight Christian men, is there any other category that should not get reparations?

(maybe anyone earning $100k or more a year?)
  #21  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:34 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Is there a difference? A dollar is a dollar, whether it was awarded out of "deserve-ment" or for the sake of making America stronger. The practical effect is the same.
That doesn't answer the question as to which one you meant. Are you proposing that each group should receive reparations, or are you proposing that, while each group deserves reparations the fact that there are so many of them makes it difficult(or impossible) to achieve this goal?

Last edited by Czarcasm; 06-24-2019 at 12:35 PM.
  #22  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:39 PM
l0k1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 235
I'll add to the list Paul Allen, David Rockefeller, and Charles Schwab, they all should immediately stop receiving federal aid.
  #23  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:39 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Is there a difference? A dollar is a dollar, whether it was awarded out of "deserve-ment" or for the sake of making America stronger. The practical effect is the same.
Just to be clear, you're arguing that all these groups should get reparations? If so, you haven't really made the argument yet, IMO. So why do you believe these groups should get reparations -- is it just that you believe that any group that has suffered any sort of discrimination should get reparations? If so, I'm not convinced by that argument, but I'm open to more if you have a more detailed summation of why you personally believe these groups should get reparations.

To be clear, I'm asking about your personal beliefs about reparations. If you're just playing devil's advocate, then that's something else that I'm not nearly as interested in.
  #24  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:43 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
is it just that you believe that any group that has suffered any sort of discrimination should get reparations?
It's the only logically consistent approach.
  #25  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:45 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
It's the only logically consistent approach.
No prioritizing at all?
  #26  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:48 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
It's the only logically consistent approach.
For what? Not what I advocate. I certainly wouldn't make the argument that "any group that has suffered any sort of discrimination should necessarily get reparations". I only advocate for reparations in circumstances in which I think detailed research and study has revealed that both they're warranted based on harm to living americans, and that reparations in some form are necessary to make American stronger and better (such as by reducing the chance of a permanently aggrieved underclass). And I'll note that we haven't even done the research and study necessary to cross this wicket -- I would oppose any proposal for reparations that skipped this step.

But you still haven't offered your personal beliefs about reparations for all of these groups. If you're not willing to do that, then I may not interact with you on this any longer.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-24-2019 at 12:48 PM.
  #27  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:48 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
No prioritizing at all?
Coming up with an exact 1-10 ranking would be tough, but I think it could be in tiers:

Blacks and Native Americans would be at the top priority. Irish, atheists, women, etc. in a more lower priority. etc. Not so much that the latter have it easy as the former had it hard.
  #28  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:51 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
For what? Not what I advocate. I certainly wouldn't make the argument that "any group that has suffered any sort of discrimination should necessarily get reparations". I only advocate for reparations in circumstances in which I think detailed research and study has revealed that both they're warranted based on harm to living americans, and that reparations in some form are necessary to make American stronger and better (such as by reducing the chance of a permanently aggrieved underclass).

For the record, I think that forward-acting policy is better than backwards-looking policy - that the nation would be better off with policies that act going forward, rather than always looking in the rearview mirror. But since reparations has become such a big and inescapable part of the public debate, then we might as well look at it. For instance, if a college has had a practice of banning a certain category of students (for no truly good reason,) then the policy should be abolished.

My view is, if someone has suffered discrimination, then ideally they should have something done to make that discrimination right (assuming that discrimination is an unfair or unjust one, or one that does not help out the situation.) Whether it can be practically done is a different matter entirely.
  #29  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:54 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
For the record, I think that forward-acting policy is better than backwards-looking policy - that the nation would be better off with policies that act going forward, rather than always looking in the rearview mirror. But since reparations has become such a big and inescapable part of the public debate, then we might as well look at it. For instance, if a college has had a practice of banning a certain category of students (for no truly good reason,) then the policy should be abolished.

My view is, if someone has suffered discrimination, then ideally they should have something done to make that discrimination right (assuming that discrimination is an unfair or unjust one, or one that does not help out the situation.) Whether it can be practically done is a different matter entirely.
Okay, thanks. None of this appears to conflict with what I've advocated for, as far as I can tell.
  #30  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:57 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
The practical problem is that it's one thing to say that the 80% owes reparations to the 20%. That might be doable. Unfortunately, when it's the 20% that owes reparations to the 80%, that's well nigh impossible.

Last edited by Velocity; 06-24-2019 at 12:57 PM.
  #31  
Old 06-24-2019, 12:59 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
The practical problem is that it's one thing to say that the 80% owes reparations to the 20%. That might be doable. Unfortunately, when it's the 20% that owes reparations to the 80%, that's well nigh impossible.
What is this referring to? Who is advocating anything close to that the 20% "owes" reparations to the 80%?
  #32  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:00 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
The practical problem is that it's one thing to say that the 80% owes reparations to the 20%. That might be doable. Unfortunately, when it's the 20% that owes reparations to the 80%, that's well nigh impossible.
For example...?
  #33  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:02 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,558
Not digging up the demographic data (which would take some time,) but likely only 20% of Americans (or fewer) are comprised of white straight Christian men. Since all the remaining 80% are either non-white, or non-male, or non-Christian, or non-straight, that means that the 20% would have to be paying reparations to the 80% (if all the 80% were cleared by the government to receive their reparations)
  #34  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:05 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Not digging up the demographic data (which would take some time,) but likely only 20% of Americans (or fewer) are comprised of white straight Christian men. Since all the remaining 80% are either non-white, or non-male, or non-Christian, or non-straight, that means that the 20% would have to be paying reparations to the 80% (if all the 80% were cleared by the government to receive their reparations)
Nobody to my knowledge has ever suggested that only white straight Christen men ever pay reparations. What are you talking about??
  #35  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:56 PM
blindboyard is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Newark
Posts: 2,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Anyway - aside from white straight Christian men, is there any other category that should not get reparations?

(maybe anyone earning $100k or more a year?)
Straight, white, Christian men have ancestors who have faced discrimination and prejudice. Catholics were discriminated against. Quakers were lynched in colonial times. Some white men were imported to America as indentured labourers. Some white men were "black" under the one drop rule in the Jim Crow south. Some were in trade unions that were put down by the National Guard or by Pinkertons with government support. Many were conscripted into the armed forces against their will and sent to their deaths. Red necks were targeted by Eugenicists for sterilisation. Racists hated Irish and Poles and Italians.

If we accept the principle that harms done in the past to specific groups merit reparations to present day members of those groups, then those groups will include the vast majority of the American population.

Unless you exclude the descendants of more recent immigrants, I suppose.

As for who doesn't deserve reparations, yeah, rich people. Captain Bone Spurs never got conscripted. If reparations would be beneficial to America as a whole, it would be as a redistribution of wealth. There are plenty of people in America who simply have no money and hardly benefit the economy because they have nothing to spend. A reparations bill for the poor would disproportionately benefit certain ethnic minorities, certainly, and would have a massive benefit to the economy and the nation as a whole.
  #36  
Old 06-24-2019, 02:33 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Well, let's start at the beginning-Native Americans. Over four centuries of broken promises, stealing, persecution and death to make up for, and no chance in hell of coming anywhere close to making up for it, but that doesn't mean we should shrug our shoulders, say "Whatcha gonna do about it?" and walk away. Every American History book in every public school should have a public apology printed on the first page. Native American tribes should get first option on any public land the government puts up for sale at a deeply discounted rate. If there is a tribal casino operating, no other casino should be allowed within a fifty mile radius.
These aren't even close to making up for what was done, but it would be useful as a constant reminder of what we did and what we are capable of doing again when it is convenient.
Since the OP said this was also the place to discuss each group on their own merits, does anyone have any objections to what I have proposed when it comes to Native American reparations?
  #37  
Old 06-24-2019, 02:34 PM
Richard Parker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 12,055
In almost every aspect of policy from one end of the federal government to the other, we are engaged in line-drawing. Why should reparations be any different? The only other group who has had their wealth so decimated and were slaughtered for even trying to start families and businesses are indigenous peoples. It isn't close. Yes, lots of other groups have been on the receiving end of horrible discrimination. But there is no realistic debate about degree, or the extent to which such discrimination is ongoing and affects the lives of people now living.

So what people are really doing when they insist that on this one issue there can be no line-drawing is treating this issue as somehow special and different and subject to greater hurdles than any of the other issues worth of national consideration. Why?
  #38  
Old 06-24-2019, 02:56 PM
Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,368
At this point it feels like posting an answer to the OP feels like a hijack.

Nonetheless -

Who should NOT receive reparations?

No one should receive reparations. At least, that should be the default assumption to be overcome. If you want the taxpayer to give you reparations, you have to make the case on your own. Or, come up with a plausible reason why the government should make your case for you.

If you cannot show that you were directly harmed, and that the US government was directly responsible, and cannot explain the chain of responsibility, you should not receive reparations.

Regards,
Shodan
  #39  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:03 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
At this point it feels like posting an answer to the OP feels like a hijack.

Nonetheless -

Who should NOT receive reparations?

No one should receive reparations. At least, that should be the default assumption to be overcome. If you want the taxpayer to give you reparations, you have to make the case on your own. Or, come up with a plausible reason why the government should make your case for you.

If you cannot show that you were directly harmed, and that the US government was directly responsible, and cannot explain the chain of responsibility, you should not receive reparations.
Native Americans. They are being directly harmed, the U.S. government was responsible in the past and the present, and the chain of responsibility is there for all to see. What is your argument against this reparation proposal?
  #40  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:03 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,021
Why in the world would you discriminate against white men? How many white men had their careers and lives upended by being forced into military service by the draft? How about reparations for the families of soldiers killed in WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam? All used drafted soldiers. What should we pay to the wives and children of the men killed in those wars? How about the men who went and fought and therefore lost years of seniority and work experience at home? How much lifetime pay are they owed for being forced off the career ladder? Some people were given benefits by the military, and death benefits to families were paid in some circumstances, but what about all the millions who fought and came home and went back to work emotionally scarred and behind on the seniority ladder?

Millions of young white and black men (but mostly white) were forcibly removed from their homes and sent to fight and possibly die in wars. How is that not deserving of reparations if the treatment of blacks or natives a hundred years ago does?

Workplace accidents overwhelmingly involve white males. Clearly society didn't do enough to protect them. Reparations!

As you might guess, I'm against ANY reparations, because all they will do is increase the tension between various victim's groups. And once you pay the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane. Then there's the fact that windfall money rarely has a lasting effect on people's quality of life, and in fact can do a lot of harm.

Finally, the idea that someone today who did nothing wrong should be taxed or otherwise forced to pay reparations to another person who did not suffer any personal harm, solely on the basis that some ancestor of the same skin color harmed the other person's ancestor, is an affront to justice. It will make divisions among us worse, increase resentment, and lead to the breakdown of trust that is required to maintain a 1st world economy.

Reparations should only be paid to people who are alive who suffered direct harm at the hands of identifiable individuals or governments. Paying reparations to distant descendants for historical crimes done to an entire race is wrong and offensive.

If you're going to go down that path, remember the words of Bill Murray in Stripes: "We're Americans! That means our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country on Earth." Every American should get reparations. Also, Europe should pay reparations to America for the immense cost of WWI and WWII, 'cause they started it. How many trillions of dollars has America spent fighting other people's wars? Reparations!

This is a rabbit hole that we should avoid at all cost.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 06-24-2019 at 03:06 PM.
  #41  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:30 PM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 35,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
This is a rabbit hole that we should avoid at all cost.
WE? Aren't you from Canada?
  #42  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:50 PM
Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Native Americans. They are being directly harmed, the U.S. government was responsible in the past and the present, and the chain of responsibility is there for all to see. What is your argument against this reparation proposal?
Who should not receive reparations?

Regards,
Shodan
  #43  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:55 PM
Nars Glinley is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sweeping down the plain.
Posts: 5,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0k1 View Post
I'll add to the list Paul Allen, David Rockefeller, and Charles Schwab, they all should immediately stop receiving federal aid.
ICYMI, Charles Schwab is still alive.
__________________
I've decided to spend more time criticizing things I don't understand. - Dogbert
  #44  
Old 06-24-2019, 03:58 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
WE? Aren't you from Canada?
First, the rabbit hole I'm talking about is reparations in general. Second, you don't think we have debates about reparations in Canada? We've been paying reparations of one sort or another to our native populations for decades. Guess what it hasn't done? It hasn't solved the serious problems facing indigenous people. In fact, a lot of what we did to 'help' made things worse. For example, we considered that one problem was that the lives of people on reservations were poor compared to those who had moved away, so we gave special benefits to people who lived on reservations. That resulted in locking people into the reservations where there were no job opportunities, creating a culture of dependency. We then provided government schools, which were horribly mismanaged and led to all kinds of abuses. We gave them exclusive rights to run casinos or buy untaxed cigarettes, tax exemptions for just about everything, etc.

One of the byproducts of this is corruption and crime. Government money flows to the indigenous groups with the most political power, which are often run by Chiefs and elders who make sure to line their pockets heavily at the expense of their own people. They then have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. Criminal elements moved in to exploit things like tax-free cigarettes, selling them to non-Native people for big profit. None of this activity and money made it down to the people who really needed it.

Reparations in the U.S. will be the same. They'll be hijacked by the political powerful race hucksters who will insinuate themselves into the process and take a major cut. There will be distortions for political purposes, and reparations money could well prevent disadvantaged people from taking the steps necessary to improve their permanent life outcome, such as moving out of a distressed area - much as government projects to 'help' African-Americans often had the perverse effect of locking them into crime-ridden areas with lousy schools, thereby making them dependent on government forever.

Last edited by Sam Stone; 06-24-2019 at 03:59 PM.
  #45  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:01 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Who should not receive reparations?

Regards,
Shodan
No-let's stick with the ongoing conversation, shall we?
What is your objections to the reparations I have proposed concerning native Americans?
  #46  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:08 PM
Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Are you saying all of these groups "deserve" reparations, or all of these groups should get reparations to make America stronger?
That's a head spinning statement, even from you. Any form of reparations not tied to being a direct personal victim* would be highly divisive and further weaken the country from that divisiveness. That's almost too obvious IMO to even debate. Although, rather than saying 'we need more study...' I suppose you could reasonably say we need more time to convince the large majority of Americans in every poll I've seen that it's actually not unfair as they believe it is. There is no way it would 'strengthen America' if imposed today, just from the divisiveness.

Which means it must be justified based on who 'deserves' it in some moral sense which overrides any consideration of overall national welfare.

Again reparations as discussed in *, and not just any public policy to try to close economic gaps (and the education, skills, productivity gaps that cause a lot of them) in a race blind way. The latter is a broad field for discussion and debate but isn't reparations.

*IOW not counting cases like particular living people of Japanese descent themselves held in WWII internment camps, and this could also apply to blacks or natives the victims of particular public policies against them personally rather than against deceased ancestors, or in case of blacks who are immigrants from Africa or the Caribbean just being the same color as deceased persons treated unjustly in the US.

Last edited by Corry El; 06-24-2019 at 04:09 PM.
  #47  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:16 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corry El View Post
That's a head spinning statement, even from you. Any form of reparations not tied to being a direct personal victim* would be highly divisive and further weaken the country from that divisiveness. That's almost too obvious IMO to even debate. Although, rather than saying 'we need more study...' I suppose you could reasonably say we need more time to convince the large majority of Americans in every poll I've seen that it's actually not unfair as they believe it is. There is no way it would 'strengthen America' if imposed today, just from the divisiveness.

Which means it must be justified based on who 'deserves' it in some moral sense which overrides any consideration of overall national welfare.

Again reparations as discussed in *, and not just any public policy to try to close economic gaps (and the education, skills, productivity gaps that cause a lot of them) in a race blind way. The latter is a broad field for discussion and debate but isn't reparations.

*IOW not counting cases like particular living people of Japanese descent themselves held in WWII internment camps, and this could also apply to blacks or natives the victims of particular public policies against them personally rather than against deceased ancestors, or in case of blacks who are immigrants from Africa or the Caribbean just being the same color as deceased persons treated unjustly in the US.
Huh? It was a question, not a statement. I'm not sure what you're objecting to.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #48  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:26 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Anyway - aside from white straight Christian men, is there any other category that should not get reparations?

(maybe anyone earning $100k or more a year?)
Yep, straight white Christian males are the only non- disadvantaged group. Maybe 25% of the population.
  #49  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:26 PM
Aspidistra is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrCube View Post
Also, I see women listed several times as deserving of reparations, but everyone is descended from women. Not everyone is descended from slaves or an oppressed racial underclass, at least in recent history. So that alone makes the two cases very different.
This is the only truly logical response in the thread so far. Let's break it down, shall we?

The only thing that's holding back the lives of women who are alive right now is whether we discriminate against women right now, because women have as many "advantaged" (male) parents as men do, so there's no opportunity to transmit disdvantage through the generations.

The only thing that's holding back the lives of LGBT people who are alive right now is whether we discriminate against LGBT people right now, because LGBT people have as many "advantaged" (straight) parents as straight people do (ie, most of them), so there's no opportunity to transmit disadvantage through the generations.

There is an opportunity to transmit disadvantage through ethnic groups, since there's a big difference between the number of (for example) black parents that today's black people have, and the number of black parents that today's white people have. If your ethnic group gives you a worse chance of starting off with at least some inherited wealth, you're a good category for financial help.

There also is an opportunity to transmit disadvantage through birthplace ... it's well known that some areas of the country are less wealthy than other areas, so being born in a disadvantaged area also gives you less chance of starting off with some inherited wealth. So "less wealthy region" is also a good category for financial help which does in fact happen - there are plenty of statistics out there about which American states, for instance, are net givers of tax revenue and which are net receivers. And that wealth transfer goes on continually all the time. Unlike the sort of reparations which are currently under discussion, which are a "one-off" proposition.
__________________
It is easier to fall than to climb ... letting go for the fall brings a wonderful feeling of ease and power
- Katherine Kerr Daggerspell
  #50  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:29 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
What is this referring to? Who is advocating anything close to that the 20% "owes" reparations to the 80%?
You take out all the disadvantaged groups, leaving just straight white Christian males, and you only have left maybe 25%. So 75% get ponies, and 25% foot the bill. 100% tax rates and confiscation of all property should cover it.

If we could limit that to alt-righters, Southern Apologists and certain hard core Churches that call themselves "Christian" but dont follow the teachings of Jesus, I'd be all for it.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017