Slave-holding states? Hang on a sec, let me check the calendar.
Yep, it’s still 2014, not 1865. Oh, and didn’t you leave?
Your proposal does nothing of the sort. You are suggesting a racist law that makes African-Americans a burden on the American taxpayer for the rest of their lives. If, for example, they decided to move to Switzerland, you would be paying them $100,000 a year for the rest of their lives. If they all moved to Switzerland or countries with similar median incomes (and if you’re getting paid $4-6 million to do it, why wouldn’t you?), you’d be taking four trillion dollars out of the US economy every year. That’s more than the entire US federal budget.
And you think that your racist law to double taxes on non-blacks to set blacks up for life isn’t Affirmative Action?
I’m not actually certain what to say. Honesty proposes a massively racist law to formally institute racism, on the grounds of “fixing racism”, under the belief that this will be supported by Southerners because they are just so darn racist, while attempting to completely destroy their economy, which they’ll totally support because they hate black people that much.
I hereby nominate this as my single most favorite post **ever.
Actually, it’s a very old idea. The American Colonization Society was started around 1820, and Abraham Lincoln was one its advocates. It resulted in the country of Liberia, where former American blacks are (or at least were) the ruling class for decades.
Sure. Where do I send the check?
Me. I’ll make sure it gets to the proper destination.
Like my bank account.
Since we are discussing historical grievances here, I am curious on one thing.
My great-great grandfather had 4 older brothers who went to fight in the Civil War on the Union side, and only 1 came home. Two killed in battle and the 3rd at Andersonville.
You remember the Civil War ? Right ? The horrific 4 year battle fought to abolish the evil of slavery here in the US, and btw………no question it was evil and had to be eliminated.
Would I be exempt on your extortion scheme here, or do I have to pay up also ?
Something for reparationists to consider:
External migration isn’t necessary at all. Think internal migrations instead.
Right now, MD, DE, VA, NC, GA, and AL are all, more or less, a quarter black in population. SC is 1/3 black, as is LA. MS is a bit less than half black. If the black population that lives outside of these states migrates into them, you have 8 black majority states, control of those states’ governments, with a corresponding number of votes in the Senate and House.
Now, political power is useless without corresponding economic power, and this is really the sticking point. The means of gaining such power when you have little are painful, and/or risky. Savings, investment, business startups, skill development and educational credentials in STEM fields are tough to do for everyone. All these things are particularly tough when you have hundreds of years of experience being punished by the larger society for acquiring, or attempting to acquire these things.
Still, there isn’t any way around it. Savings, investment, business startups, skill development and educational credentials in STEM fields are the only way to get the economic power that gives you a decent measure of autonomy. Autonomy in this case being the capacity to resist American style anti-black racism. When you own it, and you run it, you’re not at anyone else’s mercy.
Now this is a very hard way to go, and it would take generations to achieve under the best of circumstances, but there aren’t many practical alternatives. If you emigrate to foreign countries, the problem of acquiring economic power remains, but it’s made all the more difficult because you don’t have the potential advantage of working in synergy with political power.
In Utah, Mormons are not so concerned about anti-Mormon prejudice. It’s and issue, but not a big one. Mormons control economic and political life in the state, and non-Mormons are at a disadvantage. Now, it’s not likely that black Americans are going to start living like Mormons, on the whole, but what if black Americans did do this?
OP, why are you so prejudiced against American Indians?
After all, historically they’ve suffered almost as much as black people. And currently, they’re much worse off as a group than blacks are.
Hey, I’m Irish and Catholic and we were discriminated against for decades! Where’s my reparations?!
150 years of compound interest on that 40 acres and a mule sure adds up.
My family didn’t emigrate here until the early 1900s. Does that mean I only owe from 1903 to 1968?
So if there were 194 years of poor treatment of African Americans in the U.S. then I should only owe a third of what everyone else does right?
This is negotiable, though I believe using genetic markers will allow for high fidelity to determine whether someone is African-American. Eligibility could also be determined using census records.
Since and during the Cold War, the East has been quick to point out the fatal flaw in American exceptionalism: how poorly they treat their own black citizens. There would be countries that host a large number of black citizens for the sole purpose of embarrassing the U.S.
The same place where you fund your tax cuts.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
An unworkable idea, and based on an argument that makes no sense. Why would a US government that is as hostile to black people as you say do any of that?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think the U.S government is hostile to black people, in fact, I think the government is what’s stopping the States from hanging us on on trees and people getting away with it. I think most the electorate is hostile to black people and have voted against their interest time and time again in order to “punish” us. The Southern Strategy, the War on Drugs, Welfare Reform, and even the 2010 elections were all steeped in the boiling waters of racism. By removing blacks from the equation, the electorate can move forward to more pressing issues of the day.
[QUOTE=DCnDC]
If the electorate believes blacks are a burden to the US, why in the world would they agree to relocate them and give them money for life?
[/QUOTE]
Through its actions, the electorate made it quite clear that it wants us gone. The electorate “wants their country back”. This reparation program offers the electorate their country back by offering robust incentives for blacks to emigrate out of the country. The electorate will no longer have to complain about blacks being on the welfare rolls, about blacks committing violent crimes, how Affirmative Action is reverse racism, and how the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act is the sign of an egregious, overreaching federal government. The electorate can be free, move back into the urban areas (we know the real reason the electorate fled to the suburbs) and not have to worry about blacks ruining your country.
[QUOTE=Canadjun]
I agree completely with Der Trihs. In addition to what he said, what “non-U.S. region” are you referring to? The “non-U.S. regions” might have some concerns about sudden massive immigration, regardless of the race of those immigrants. Paying those immigrants not to work (as your statement sounds) would not alleviate all those concerns.
[/QUOTE]
I am thinking Canada and Europe for the most part; I can also envision Venezuela, Argentina, Iran, Russia, and China absorbing a large portion of the black population in order embarrass to the U.S. Paying the immigrants not to work means they are permanent tourist who will buy goods and services thus contributing to the host country’s economy. Blacks who get reparations will allowed to work, payments simply ensure that their income never falls below the median income of their region.
[QUOTE=Alessan]
Why should blacks, who’ve been in the United States as long or longer than almost any other ethnic group, want to leave their country?
[/QUOTE]
It’s obvious: the electorate does not want us here, at all. Here’s a short videoabout Obama and West Virginia, lest you have any doubt.
[QUOTE=Farin]
That’s actually larger than 210 of the 244 wiki-reported countries! That’s an incredible way to look at it.
To follow this line of reasoning, we had a GDP of 15.6 T in 2012. 10% of that is 1.5 T, which is roughly $38,500 a year for each of 39 million people. Additionally, Federal tax revenue was 2.8 T in 2013, so we’d have to jump taxes by 60 % (47% direct tax increase, roughly 13% increase due to population loss).
[/QUOTE]
Whoa, I am not suggesting blacks all leave at once. The policy is to encourage blacks to emigrate out which should hopefully shrink the black population living in the U.S by half every 50 years, this should allow for a slow diaspora of blacks from the U.S to non-U.S regions. There will be blacks who feel affinity for the U.S, its land, its people, will stay, and will work. This is why I added a provision that allows African-Americans who stay to have federal loans (not free money) offered to cities and municipalities to which they live for the improvement of infrastructure and such.
[QUOTE=Farin]
There is no fiscal way this would work.
[/QUOTE]
Um, the U.S has the money for a reparation program. You’ll just have to raise taxes or sell territorial assets like Guam or the Marshall Islands. The U.S can sell its gold and oil reserves, and heck, I’m sure the Interstate Highway System can be sold for at least a cool trillion - and, frankly, since the electorate refuses to pay to fix it*, you might as well sell it anyway before another bridge collapses.
- Honesty
- I can only think that it’s because funding infrastructure projects would benefit the poor, which may benefit blacks, thus making it a non-starter.
Thank you for showing us that no idea is so silly that it cannot, through hard work and imagination, be made even sillier.
If the American electorate “clearly” wants to get rid of black people, why do they keep electing a black guy president?
CIA mind control, obviously.
<adjusts tinfoil hat>
I’m not a reparationist. Anymore. 
I do have to point out that all Americans, by virtue of citizenship, including black Americans, have a stake in all of Americas liabilities and assets. That means, "I came here after all the unpleasantness, " or “my ancestors were oppressed too,” are bullshit arguments.
It’s analogous to buying stock in a corporation. As a stockholder, you take on the corp’s assets and liabilities. If it’s found that the corp has huge liabilities for dumping toxic waste 30 years ago, the payments come out of your stock value too.
Now, as a practical matter, this hypothetical reparations program would probably be doomed by the millions of white Americans who would suddenly have cause to acknowledge their African ancestry, get a DNA test, and stand in line for a check. There are probably more white Americans who are partially descended from African slaves at this point than black Americans.
Now, lawmakers and courts might be willing to restrict group membership based on DNA, but there problems here too. There are roughly a couple million black Americans who have no African DNA markers. Would they be shut out?
eta
The courts don’t determine Native American tribal membership by DNA. Never have considered it. Which creates the ironic situation where many tribes are composed of people who are white by any reasonable standard while people with verified DNA are not eligible for membership
Honesty, I think you’re way, way off about the electorate. Most of them do not want black people to leave. There are certainly some who do, but they are not close to a majority.
Okay, Honesty, you win. I completely agree with your plan and will lobby my representatives in Washington and in Arkansas to implement them as quickly as possible.