Right! Even with this relatively modest sum, survivors of internment and their heirs, in addition to Japanese Americans in general, broadly feel that they are fully equal members of American society with a fair chance at success (according to my understanding of polling). So this is an example that can show us that reparations meant to acknowledge and make redress for harm done such that a group will have good reason to feel like truly equal members of American society don’t have to break the bank.
The programs you described were not, in my understanding. There was no detailed study of the harm done, no acknowledgement of this harm, no focused study of how to “heal” this harm, etc.
Detailed study of the harm done, acknowledgement of this harm, focused study of how to heal this harm, etc.
It’s my understanding of Adam Smith/Econ 101 – giving money to the members of a poor community benefits that community economically. It would encourage local spending, which would lead to local investment and innovation, etc. Normal capitalism stuff when people have more money to spend.
This is possible, but there are ways to spend money without increasing taxes – reduce spending in other areas and printing more money, both of which are done in many circumstances today. There are some circumstances in which those methods are ultimately beneficial and some in which they are not.
I’m attempting to address a specific type of harm – that caused by discriminatory policies and practices of the US government. I’m certainly open to studying other types of harm, and other groups harmed aside from black and Native Americans.
I think this could be a very valid approach, and I’d certainly consider it. But I think the first step of identifying, in great detail, the harm done directly and indirectly to living Americans today, fully acknowledging the US government’s responsibility and role in that harm, and apologizing for it in full, is necessary first. Once that is done, we could evaluate multiple proposals for how to make up for this harm, including everything offered in this thread and countless more.
I don’t believe so (since each research project will necessarily require different expertise, I think it would be most prudent to have a different program for each proposal), but I’m open to any arguments to the contrary. If anyone actually supports the bill (as opposed to just playing devil’s advocate) and thinks that more groups should be included in HR 40, I’d be interested in hearing their arguments.
You’re right they didnt- yet. But you are using Reparations for Japanese-American internees to justify reparations for Blacks and Native Americans. And no one can deny that women, gays, Chinese, hispanics were disadvantaged too. Ponies for everyone!
Yes, because, as I’ve already said, there are others to consider besides the Black community. Native Americans absolutely have to be taken into account. Also, there are communities in the heartland where the people were basically sold down the river by corporations wanting to get rich via dirt cheap labor overseas. Many were completely disenfranchised and have never recovered.
If you’re going to do this at all, that is the only methodology that I can see that would have a chance to work.
Because apologies aint checks. Coates wants checks, and until now, you havent abandoned that crazy idea.
Once the foolish idea of bankrupting the nation and taking *all the money *from the straight white males has been totally abandoned, we can talk apologies. Heck, even some more college grants and aid to inner cities, sure.
And you cant drop Redlining even tho it has been shown that victim could and did sue the banks for those policies- and collected. Redlining has been solved by new laws and the courts.
Cite that “Coates wants checks” – or is this just another baseless allegation, like your cite-free vitriolic attacks that Coates is a “scamster” and a “racist”?
This is just pure straw-man garbage.
In some cases, but certainly not all. Not even close to most, by my reading.
So the purpose is not merely to avoid an aggrieved underclass, just an aggrieved black underclass, and the others have to wait their turn. Do the other groups need to wait until the reparations study for blacks is done? If not, why not include them in HR 40 as well? Why is studying aggrieved white poor people more difficult than studying black ones? Or Hispanics, or Asians, or Jews, or gay people, or women, or any other group? What special expertise is needed to determine that the US government tolerated slavery (until it outlawed it) and discrimination against black people (until 1964) and therefore the US taxpayer is on the hook, vs. the US government tolerating discrimination against women?
The purpose of reparations for discrimination and oppression against black people is to avoid a permanent aggrieved black underclass. The purpose of reparations for discrimination and oppression against Native Americans is to avoid a permanent aggrieved Native American underclass. I focus on those two because those are the groups that I’m aware of that, statistically, appear to be in danger of being a permanent aggrieved underclass.
If you believe any other groups might become “permanent aggrieved underclasses”, then I’d be interested in which other groups you believe this is accurate for, and whether you believe it has anything to do with widespread discrimination and oppression.
We can all agree that huge checks wont be coming. But that’s what people have been talking about. So, since big checks are impossible, and people expect big checks, then iiandyiiii idea of a study and apology will just lead to a aggrieved black underclass.
Reparations are a bad idea, no matter how you slice them.
I also find it notable that you, apparently, can read the minds of all black people and believe that they would react immaturely to “a study and apology”. Have you always thought so negatively about black people as a whole, or only recently? When did you start having such negative beliefs about black people, or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?