I’ve never understood the objection that reparations are too expensive.
If you think they are otherwise justified, then the appropriate solution to that objection is to do what we can afford.
If you think they aren’t otherwise justified, then spending $1 is too much.
Reparations aren’t a fighter jet, such that you never want to just buy part of the thing. A little reparation is better than none.
I agree with that on practical grounds, but politically it is more problematic. As (I think) DrDeth has pointed out, “you deserve a million dollars but we can’t afford it - here’s twenty bucks instead” is not likely to be a solution that satisfies anyone.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t see how “doing nothing – not even fully identifying and acknowledging the harm done” is necessarily better.
Are you saying the subject of reparations for Native Americans and the victims of slavery and Jim Crow segregation and discrimination have not been extensively researched? I believe they have, and there should be a case to be presented for each. Otherwise you are talking about congressional fishing expeditions. Let’s not pretend it’s research, if the facts exist for the consideration phase, then it’s time to act on that. Unfortunately the result will not be favorable for this cause and is likely to make the subject politically unpalatable for quite some time into the future.
In terms of trying to describe in detail, including quantifying when possible, harm done (directly and indirectly) to living Americans? This would be a huge project, and while there has been private and academic work on this, I don’t believe we’ve come close to answering this very large (and very important) question in anything close to its entirety.
Do you think a congressional committee is a way to resolve that? There will be multiple and competing arguments presented for both the pro and con sides of the general issue. I don’t think this is the kind of thing congress is good at dealing with, especially in the current political climate. The proposal calls for a report in just 90 days to provide recommendations for presumed remedial action after describing the numerous and widespread reasoning for such actions, this is insufficient time to fully consider an issue of such depth. If this were simply a call for fact finding it might help advance this cause in the future, but I see nothing but the creation of a divisive political canard.
I think it’s a way – in my understanding, that’s how reparations for Japanese American internees was accomplished (with a Congressional-appointed panel of experts and researchers). Private research would be great, but this would be such a large project, and it’s so vital to the purpose that there be an official acknowledgement of the harm and responsibility by the US, that I think government action must be involved.
90 days doesn’t sound like nearly enough time, IMO, so if HR 40 restricts the research to 90 days I think that should be expanded. I agree that much more time would be needed.
There is no such 90-day limit in the law. The 90-day limit is how long the Commission will be around after they complete their work.
Thanks!
This issue is no more complex than a dozen other public policy issues and Congress doesn’t have any special expertise in understanding it. There is absolutely no reason why universities, foundations and think-tanks can’t issue detailed policy papers on reparations with a rough consensus emerging among reparations activists on the way forward. The problem of course is that the issue is politically toxic and the more concrete the proposal the more toxic it becomes. So instead of specific policies you get vague posturing about having a “conversation” and the need for “study”. The problem is that this is also politically damaging for the Democrats especially as the rhetoric on this issue becomes more and more strident.
My apologies, I misread that.
Not in a box, not with a fox. I am not in favor of tripling my tax bill at all, for anything, SamI Am.
You know the guy in the story eventually tried and enjoyed the green eggs and ham, right?
But they haven’t ruled that out. And that’s the killer. Us working class people have to live with the fear and anger about our tax bills tripling. The blacks will be angry when those checks dont come.
When the “pie in the sky” of $1,000,000 checks evaporate you’re not going to have anything but a lot of angry, disillusioned people.
Sure that’s great. But that’s not what has been sold as “pie in the sky” for decades and even longer- Million dollar checks. And if reparations end up being some more college grants and money for disadvantaged inner city areas, I am all for that- except that that will just leave blacks angrier than before.
Nope, it’s Million dollar checks or nothing- and since it CAN NOT BE million dollar checks- lets drop the whole stupid idea.
Along with what has been said above, I would like to add that planting the idea into people’s minds that a big monetary check is on the way, and then later on yanking the carpet from underneath them and telling them that they won’t be getting the ca$h after all, is going to be worse off psychologically than never having introduced the idea at all in the first place.
And Hispanics. And women, chinese, irish, gays…
Thanks for this.
“The blacks will be angry…”
Fear of supposedly ‘angry blacks’ drives a lot of policy in the US, pretty much none of it to the benefit of black Americans.
Why leave out Hispanics? And women, chinese, irish, gays…
Haven’t they been mistreated? Discriminated against?
Look, let’s make it easy. We take ALL the money, homes, land and anything of value from every straight white male in the uSA, and hand it over to everyone else. OK? Will that make you happy? Because that’s the only end result.
Tell us** iiandyiiii** if you want you tax bill tripled so much, how many thousands of $ have you donated to the NAACP and the United Negro College Fund? or are you just willing to pick MY pocket, not yours?
I’ll leave your to your fantasy world.