He’s a good economics blogger? Maybe. But with his BA from . . . nowhere . . . I’ll downgrade is credibility a tad. Dropping out of Howard doesn’t make him dumb, but let’s not make him a Ph.D. in economics from Princeton either.
There is much discussion on QE throughout the world, a lot of it bad. And your author takes the worst case of QE and says we could just do this for 25 months and be done with reparations! 25 months! Are you kidding me? That’s if you believe that giving people $33,000 is going to rectify slavery, which I don’t think that it will.
Oh, and you conveniently left out the part of his article that stated:
“If at some point during the two year span inflation did become undesirably high, the Fed could offset that by increasing the interest rate it pays on excess bank reserves or through conventional monetary means.”
We do all know what that means, right?
When someone says the government should just pay it, it mean you and I.
If 25 months is too quick, and too much of a shock to the system, then the payments could be spread out over a longer term.
But in any case, Yglesias’s idea wasn’t the final word – I’m not even sure I support it. It was back-of-the-envelope math, and there are certainly concerns.
But it shows that, using some reasonable metrics (like the wealth gap), reparations are not necessarily a ‘break the US economy’ idea. Virtually all of whatever payments are made would be ultimately saved, invested, or spent (and mostly spent) in the US economy.
If the government (somehow) orders you to give me $100,000 are you OK with that because I’ll “ultimately save, invest or spend it?” I didn’t think so.
Stupid ideas like QE aside, if reparations payments are given to some select portion of society, the other portions of society are going to have to pay them out of their pockets via taxes, inflation, higher cost of goods (if it’s a corporate bill) etc. You understand the term “the government is going to pay for it” is another way to say “you and I,” right
You’ve heard of the term “there is no free lunch?”
This might - might be justifiable if it fixes something. I’m just not seeing how $33k is fixing anything other than pissing off the taxpayers that are going to pay for it.
It means that virtually all of that money is staying in the US economy. As opposed to, for example, German reparations to Israel, which left the German economy.
This is a different proposal, and one that I oppose. Not the same proposals, with real differences, and real reasons to oppose one and consider, at least, supporting the other.
It’s not “another way to say “you and I””, though it certainly will have other affects, which could affect many Americans in negative ways. These are reasonable concerns to be raised.
Of course. There are many reasonable concerns, and if a proposal like Yglesias’s was brought to the table without lots and lots of time and discussion, then I would certainly oppose it.
It would, once and for all, show Americans that the US government recognizes the great evil that it perpetrated and allowed to be perpetrated – not just slavery, but the century of brutality and repression that followed, including toleration and outright policies meant to deny black people the ability to take full part in US society and the US economy, and that the US government is finally taking serious and focused action meant to address these centuries of wrongs done.
Reparations were paid to Japanese-American detainees. This was a good and positive thing. Is anyone arguing that Jim Crow, housing discrimination, and other forms of discrimination in recent decades (not to mention the earlier and greater terrorism of slavery, lynchings, and the like), have not negatively affected people to the same or greater degree than the Japanese-American interment?
That’s fixing something. It may not be worth it – that’s why I’m not ready to support any particular proposal. But it’s a very good goal.
Also, non water-pixie privilege. Because there’s just as much relevancy.
And if there’s not, and slavery that ended about 150 years ago damages people now through, oh, the collective subconscious or racial memory or something, then I demand all African-Americans pay for my people’s (Jew) slavery in Egypt, which we learn through Afrocentric Education, was the pinnacle of African civilization. And while slavery in the USA lasted maybe 90 years for black people (the United States didn’t exist as such before 1789 with the ratification of the constitution or, you could argue 1776 with the signing of the Declaration–regardless of which date, the USA is no more responsible for the previous nations here than we are for what Native Americans did to each other 1000 years ago) while Hebrew slavery in Egypt lasted between 250-430 years depending on who you believe. So…YOU owe US, black people.
I would support that device, provided it was waved over everyone in the country and it was able to do one more thing: Make each person feel that whatever happened to them was fair and just.
If the magic device can’t do that, then I think it will do more harm than good.
If you can identify exactly those individuals that were impacted by Jim Crow, then petition the state they lived in (not the federal government) to pay them compensation. If you can’t identify those individuals, then your analogy fails.
Yet another thread has been hijacked into an episode of Bloggers know nothing about money.
Let’s set aside the fact that faith in the dollar depends on a vague hope that the U.S. might end its profligacy, and pay its debts. Let’s assume that the U.S. can indeed create $N trillion out of thin air with no ill effect. Let’s suppose N=1. Thus we stipulate, for the sake of argument, that one trillion dollars can be conjured up with no ill effect, in addition to whatever additional QE our wretched economy will require.
Now, what do we do with this magical money? (Remember it’s a one-time deal: if the blogger believed ten trillion magic dollars were available, he’d give everybody $33,000.) With a trillion dollars we could make a big dent in healthcare costs. Or we could give every American a shiny computer, an iPhone, and 15 treatments at Madame Gigi’s Tanning Salon. Or $3000 cash. Or we could finance another wonderful War against Gog and Magog. By giving the whole trillion to one subset of the American people, we are denying the money to remaining Americans. This is true regardless of how deserving that subset might be.
If the article’s author really made the almost unbelievably inane claim that these “reparations” would have no cost to the non-reparated, I’m glad I didn’t waste my time clicking the link.
I assume you’re also lumping in other forms of repression, like housing discrimination. And considering that the federal government allowed and therefore tacitly approved of such repression, I think it’s reasonable that they share culpability.
So if these individuals (which would be nearly every African American over a certain age) were identified, you would support compensation from state governments (and, if you agree with me, the federal government)?
There is no need for this bill. Any “findings” by the committee will be that slavery sucked the big one, hurt blacks in the past and continues to do so to this day. The remedy that the committee suggests will be no worse or better than what Congress might recommend, and Congress will be the one deciding anyways. It’s a waste of time.
Time isn’t enough. It has to be accompanied by race blindness. The more we—Americans of all colors—allow race to be an issue, the longer it will be an issue. The government needs to take the lead in this and actually have race-blind policies. Next, we—especially Black leaders themselves—we need to starve the Sharpton’s and Jackson’s and Farrakahn’s of the world of oxygen. What would do more than any reparation plan could would be for young, popular, non-shakedown-artist Black leaders to stand up and say, “Fuck it. We don’t need reparations. We don’t need a handout. We don’t need whatever you want to call it. The only thing we need is that level playing field we’ve been asking for. And you, it’s pretty level, so let’s get on with it. and you young black men and women, realize that your future is in your hands, no one else’s. There isn’t anything you can’t do. Go do it.”
I don’t see how that much changes things. In fact, I’d say it points to the problem. This group mindset is the opposite of helpful. Why not send the message that “Yeah, Blacks have had a shitty time of it. And there were laws in place to ensure that had a shitty time of it. But those laws are no longer in place. You, young Black Man or Young Black Woman can do and be anything you want. Slavery doesn’t affect your life and Jim Crow doesn’t affect your life—unless you cling onto the past. And since it was so shitty, why in the world would you want to do that?”
Blacks need more and more success stories. Which will both inspire other Blacks and erase the stigma that they are associated with low performance. The thing that is standing in the way of that more than anything is the public education system. Which is precisely why urban Black families are such fans of Charter schools.
That mindset is grounded in reality. Jim Crow still affects the lives of young black people. It affects the monies they inherited (don’t tell me inheritances are irrelevant unless you’re willing to support a 100% estate tax), their educational opportunities, all sorts of things.
In some respects it was worse. You left out state-sanctioned murder and thousands of unsolved property crimes.
Considering the decades (and centuries before), then it may actually have been far more damaging. For some it was probably less, and for some (like those that were beaten and had family members murdered) it was far more.
To me, dealing with it solves this far better and quicker than some unrealistic (for now, at least) concept like “race-blindness”.
Considering the centuries of incredibly race-conscious policies, a reckoning which might include compensation comes closer to achieving this, in my view.
They don’t need reparations. Reparations aren’t for ‘them’, they’re for us. They’re for America. Much of America was built by black people, and for most of our history black people were prevented by law and common practice (which extended into recent decades) from enjoying the fruits of their labors. This has resulted in extreme disparities in wealth, as well as things like housing. Pretending that opportunity is equal will not actually equalize opportunity. I’m not sure if reparations would, but I think they might come closer to sweeping the past under a rug.
A point Coates makes is that, for most of American history, America was the active and violent enemy of black people. In the same vein, though to a lesser degree, and for a far, far longer period of time, as Nazi Germany was the active and violent enemy of Jews.
iiandyiiii, then with respect, I’d say you don’t understand economics.
There is no way for government to “create” wealth, certainly not wealth of this magnitude.
What you are proposing are transfer payments pure and simple. That is taking $100 out of your pocket, and putting that same $100 into someone else’s. It’s really that simple. Put in another term, it’s a zero sum game. Some gets the exact amount that I lose. That is why we must understand the discontent that this will cause those on the negative side of the equation you are proposing, and ask what harm that will cause in our society.
There isn’t any magic way to create billions or trillions of dollars and give it to African Americans, or Women or Cowboy’s fans. That’s why I asked you about the free lunch. You (and others I’ve talked about on this issue for some reason) believe that “the Government ™” has some magic that can create billions of dollars to solve this issue without taking if from someone else. That cannot happen. Why do you think it can? Can you explain that to me?