Why have Democrats and Republicans refused to vote on H.R 40 for 25 years?

[iiandyiiii]

@Czarcasm

As do I…but being the right thing to do is only part of it. It would be right for all past injustices throughout the history of our nation to be recompensed in some form or another, but to even attempt to do so would bankrupt our nation both monetarily and spiritually.

We already have attempted to do so to some degree. The Japanese-American internment reparations is an example. That was a good and positive (and non-bankrupting) thing to do.

Funding that was originally designed to move us into the future would instead be spent on figuring out how to assuage the guilt of the past, and taxpayer revolt would make today’s Tea Party fuss look like an actual tea party.

This is an argument about the politics, which I haven’t been getting into, except admitting that it’s politically infeasible at this time. This discussion is about moving the overton window for the idea of reparations of some sort.

The question is not, and never has been, Are reparations right?
The actual question is How far are we prepared to go, what are we willing to pay, in time, money and effort, to right this particular wrong?

How far? That’s exactly what this discussion is about! That’s the reason for every post I’ve made – trying to determine the appropriate balance. And I thank you for contributing.

[iiandyiiii]

@Honesty

Oh, please,** John Mace**. The institution is the will of the people and it’s the people that have to pay. It’s truly that simple.

Here’s an example. Ya’ll* decided to vote for the highest peacetime deficit in the history in U.S in 1980 and 1984 elections. Then you got together and did it again in 2000 and 2004. We now have $17 trillion in debt with about ~$2 trillion in revenue. Who do you think will pay that debt? It won’t be us. It’ll be your grandchildren that’ll pay for it. You see, my friend, the government is a timeless institution which means the particular people in power at the time of these policies will be long, long dead.

• Honesty

• I say ya’ll, because blacks voted for Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis, the latter of the two specifically warned that the deficit was getting out of control during the 1984 and 1988 debates. We also voted for Gore and Kerry. If you look at the 2000 debates, Gore wanted to use the surplus to reduce the deficit. Ya’ll ignored them and decided to break the piggy bank anyway. So, now, I hope you like your $17 trillion peacetime deficit, the highest ever in the history of the United States. The voting public earned every penny of that deficit. And what do you have to show for it? Ridiculously low taxes, an anemic recovery, pot-hole filled roads, an education system thats underfunded, and millions of Americans still out of work. Good job.

Like Coates (and Yglesias), if some sort of monetary compensation were to go forward, I believe that the US government (including federal, state, and local) is the entity that should pay.

[Ludovic]

@Honesty

Ya’ll ignored them and decided to break the piggy bank anyway. So, now, I hope you like your $17 trillion peacetime deficit, the highest ever in the history of the United States. The voting public earned every penny of that deficit.

That’s it. You’re done.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Did somebody already tell Honesty that the deficit is not and has never been $17 trillion?

[spifflog]

@iiandyiiii

Like Coates (and Yglesias), if some sort of monetary compensation were to go forward, I believe that the US government (including federal, state, and local) is the entity that should pay.

I wish we could stop this “the government” will pay meme, as it the individual taxpayers and citizens you, me, your wife, your son etc. won’t have to pay. There isn’t some magic pile of cash in a cave somewhere. It will be your money.

If that’s was the nation collectively decides to do this then so be it. But pretending that this money won’t come our of your pocket is asinine.

[Honesty]

@iiandyiiii

Like Coates (and Yglesias), if some sort of monetary compensation were to go forward, I believe that the US government (including federal, state, and local) is the entity that should pay.

If it were, I agree, U.S government should pay. I advocated this inanother thread. If we were to get monetary compensation, I don’t think it would be safe for blacks to live in the country. The vengeance from the majority would be Biblical in proportion.

• Honesty

[spifflog]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Did somebody already tell Honesty that the deficit is not and has never been $17 trillion?

Forget it, he’s rolling.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@spifflog

I wish we could stop this “the government” will pay meme, as it the individual taxpayers and citizens you, me, your wife, your son etc. won’t have to pay. There isn’t some magic pile of cash in a cave somewhere. It will be your money.

If that’s was the nation collectively decides to do this then so be it. But pretending that this money won’t come our of your pocket is asinine.

That’s as distinguished from the wrongdoers paying. It’s not asinine at all; nobody thinks the money comes from some bottomless well (except Coates.)

[Honesty]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Did somebody already tell Honesty that the deficit is not and has never been $17 trillion?

Split those hairs. lol. Debt, I mean.

[QUOTE=Wikipedia]
On December 12, 2013, debt held by the public was approximately $12.312 trillion or about 73% of Q3 2013 GDP[5][6] Intragovernmental holdings stood at $4.9 trillion (29%), giving a combined total public debt of $17.226 trillion.[7] As of January 2013, $5 trillion or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public was owned by foreign investors, the largest of which were the People’s Republic of China and Japan at just over $1.1 trillion each.[8]

[/QUOTE]

• Honesty

[iiandyiiii]

@spifflog

I wish we could stop this “the government” will pay meme, as it the individual taxpayers and citizens you, me, your wife, your son etc. won’t have to pay. There isn’t some magic pile of cash in a cave somewhere. It will be your money.

If that’s was the nation collectively decides to do this then so be it. But pretending that this money won’t come our of your pocket is asinine.

There would be affects on my finances, most likely. Some would be negatively affected, and some would probably be positively affected, if they are in a business poised to take advantage of the sudden influx of cash.

[spifflog]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

. . . It’s not asinine at all; nobody thinks the money comes from some bottomless well (except Coates.)

If only that were true. Five will get you ten that someone will swing by within five posts to claim the bottomless well is where it’s at.

At edit:

“ding, ding, ding, we have a winner” I’ll send you my checking account info privately.

[Honesty]

@spifflog

Forget it, he’s rolling.

Drug-free here, my friend. I don’t even smoke marijuana (I know, shocking right? I can’t tell you how many white people have asked me whether I had a hookup on it. lol. I must have that thug, drug-dealer look, I guess). Still waiting for you to reply to my post. Thanks.

[QUOTE=Ludovic]
That’s it. You’re done.
[/QUOTE]

I mistakenly conflated deficit and debt and I am done, eh? You hear that moderators? Time to shut this down.

• Honesty

[Czarcasm]

@iiandyiiii

This is an argument about the politics, which I haven’t been getting into, except admitting that it’s politically infeasible at this time.

But if we admit that it is politically infeasible at this time, then aren’t we admitting that H.R. 40 and other such broad proposals are a waste of time? Instead of putting forth the same idea year after year for 25 years, might it not be better to try to come up with a bill that actually had a chance on passing?

[spifflog]

@Honesty

Drug-free here, my friend. I don’t even smoke marijuana (I know, shocking right? I can’t tell you how many white people have asked me whether I had a hookup on it. lol. I must have that thug, drug-dealer look, I guess). Still waiting for you to reply to my post. Thanks.

Defensive much??

What question have you?

[Honesty]

@spifflog

Defensive much??

What question have you?

#252. You seemed dubious whether reparations could exist without money. I pointed out that the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action was an imperfect but suitable reparations. I am curious to see how you tackle the idea of non-monetary reparations or if that’s off the table. In addition, what do you think of the previous slave-holding States still not issuing an apology for slavery? Big deal? Or no? Similarly, would you feel different to Germany if it had not apologized for the Holocaust or, like McDonalds in Deutschland, would you still “Ich liebe es”?

Thanks

• Honesty

[Czarcasm]

@Honesty

If it were, I agree, U.S government should pay. I advocated this inanother thread. If we were to get monetary compensation, I don’t think it would be safe for blacks to live in the country. The vengeance from the majority would be Biblical in proportion.

• Honesty

Ah, yes-your “All Expenses Paid Trip To Candyland” proposal.
As has been pointed out to you over and over again, Candyland doesn’t exist.

[spifflog]

@Honesty

#252. You seemed dubious whether reparations could exist without money. I pointed out that the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action was an imperfect but suitable reparations.

Yes and no. I can’t think of a reparations situation (although I’ll concede that one probably exists) that doesn’t involve payments to the aggrieved party. And certainly most view this situation in terms of payments. Are you claiming that proposed H.R. 40 here does not include a request for money?

"(C) Whether, in consideration of the Commission’s findings, any form of compensation to the descendants of African slaves is warranted.

(D) If the Commission finds that such compensation is warranted, what should be the amount of compensation, what form of compensation should be awarded, and who should be eligible for such compensation."

Are you really saying that payments to individuals is not one of the goals with this proposed legislation? Seems pretty central to most.

@Honesty

I am curious to see how you tackle the idea of non-monetary reparations or if that’s off the table.

As I noted up thread, I think there is significant difference between compensation and redress. I personally think any compensation payments would be largely squandered. It’s my experience that when the poor are given a significant amount of money at once, it’s squandered on cars, trips etc. And at the proverbial end of the day, these folks are back to where they started.

I’d be more supportive of efforts to redress the ills of slavery in so far as they exist today via education. That effort was largely done in the latter half of the 20th century to no avail. If the government could do something along those lines, I’d support it, but I don’t know what that would be. If I could be God for a day on this issue and do just one thing, I’d magically make the African American community value education, as the white and particularly Asian community does. But I can’t do that of course.

@Honesty

In addition, what do you think of the previous slave-holding States still not issuing an apology for slavery? Big deal? Or no?

I think it’s wrong and they should. But there isn’t one slave holder alive today. And really Honesty, aren’t you bigger than that? Do you really care that they haven’t? Will it really mean that much to you?

@Honesty

Similarly, would you feel different to Germany if it had not apologized for the Holocaust or, like McDonalds in Deutschland, would you still “Ich liebe es”?

My Jewish friends couldn’t careless what the people of Germany think about them, other than they can kiss their ass! While I (understandably) believe that Holocaust survivors have a difficult time getting over that, I think most believe the best revenge is living well. Good advice I’d say.

[iiandyiiii]

@Czarcasm

But if we admit that it is politically infeasible at this time, then aren’t we admitting that H.R. 40 and other such broad proposals are a waste of time? Instead of putting forth the same idea year after year for 25 years, might it not be better to try to come up with a bill that actually had a chance on passing?

I think articles like Coates’, as well as discussions like this one, might be useful in shifting the overton window on the topic so that in the future, bills like HR 40 might be possible.

[slash2k]

@iiandyiiii

This is (or would be) just a start. And in my experience, the percentage of older black people who know what redlining is, especially among the people who actually lived in redline areas, is quite high.

We’re just throwing ideas around, you know. You seemed to be okay with some of my other ones. If you don’t like this one, that’s okay too.

Most of the people who actually lived in redlined areas are DEAD. Redlining has been (at least legally) gone for four decades. The number of people who lived in redlined areas, were harmed by redlining, and are still alive to collect compensation is tiny.

[QUOTE==iiandyiiii]
Once we have neighborhoods starting to fill out a bit, the information will build on itself – we might know for sure who lived in house 3, 4, and 6, but not house 5, so we ask the folks in 3, 4, and 6 “who lived in house 5?” and compare their answer to the person who said they lived in house 5 but didn’t have solid evidence.
[/QUOTE]

You seem to be imagining static neighborhoods. Have you ever actually lived in a rental-dominated low-income neighborhood? Many are high-churn, meaning a house may have had a dozen tenants in ten years–the notion that a half-century later, anybody is going to remember the names of all the people who lived in house 5 is, um, unlikely. The notion that most people would remember THEIR OWN addresses that long after the fact is pretty unlikely when they moved around a lot.

[QUOTE==iiandyiiii]
We don’t need to continue this “how difficult would it be” – we both think it would be… and obviously I think it would be worth it, and you don’t seem to.
[/QUOTE]

I think it would be near to impossible. No, spending many millions of dollars to track down just a handful of people, when there are so many other pressing problems in our inner-city neighborhoods, is a waste of resources better spent on projects that would make a meaningful difference to more people.

[iiandyiiii]

@slash2k

Most of the people who actually lived in redlined areas are DEAD. Redlining has been (at least legally) gone for four decades. The number of people who lived in redlined areas, were harmed by redlining, and are still alive to collect compensation is tiny.

If so, then it would be a lot cheaper. But considering we’re talking about people in their 50s and older, there would probably still be millions.

You seem to be imagining static neighborhoods. Have you ever actually lived in a rental-dominated low-income neighborhood? Many are high-churn, meaning a house may have had a dozen tenants in ten years–the notion that a half-century later, anybody is going to remember the names of all the people who lived in house 5 is, um, unlikely. The notion that most people would remember THEIR OWN addresses that long after the fact is pretty unlikely when they moved around a lot.

These are possible and reasonable difficulties.

I think it would be near to impossible.

I don’t.

No, spending many millions of dollars to track down just a handful of people, when there are so many other pressing problems in our inner-city neighborhoods, is a waste of resources better spent on projects that would make a meaningful difference to more people.

Perhaps, but I still think there might be value to it.