stevemcqueen1

Members
  • Content Count

    11,805
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

About stevemcqueen1

Profile Information

  • Redskins Fan Since
    1992--first season I remember
  • Location
    Hampton Roads, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    If the reparations were to be cash payments to cover the promise of 40 acres and a mule, then the payments would have to be divided equally among the members of each estate of freed slaves from 1865. Only people who are alive to submit a claim at a time the estate is divided would receive benefits. This is one reason why I don't think that would be a great way to do it. First, tracking down 11 million estates from 1865 for people who were enslaved and had minimal literacy and later were impoverished in many cases, and for generations, and who probably don't have much of a legal historical paper trail is an unfathomably difficult task. Second, getting together tens of millions of claimants and authenticating their genealogies is the next impossible step. A lot of poor black people don't have a government issued ID that can prove their own identity, and we'd be expecting them to fill out claims forms that would require them to demonstrate their genealogy going back 150 years? It'd be creating a system where poor black people would almost certainly be excluded from a one time payout of benefits to an overwhelming degree. Those are some reasons why I think reparations would have to take a different form of benefits. Renegade's idea of collectivizing the benefits to improve schools and utilities in black neighborhoods sounds like a good idea on the surface, but it would significantly change the scope of the reparations structure of the tangible 40 acres and a mule promise. Negotiations for the payment of reparations are already unlikely as is, they would fall apart if the scope were to change too much in the process.
  2. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    Literally paying 40 acres and a mule or the equivalent dollar amount in today's money to the estates of every freed slave from 1865 doesn't seem to be the realistic goal of the push for reparations. I'd have to imagine that tracking down all of those estates would be a practical impossibility. Then you have to negotiate a satisfactory recompense, which others have rightly stated is a minefield where no one will end up happy. Plus I'd imagine this whole thing would be extremely complicated from a legal perspective. @nonniey is right that that kind of process would be incredibly divisive. Instead the goal seems to be to economically uplift the descendants of slaves, which seems worthy to me. I could get behind a GI Bill-esque set of benefits for people who can authenticate their genealogies, but I don't exactly know how they'd do that. I'm not ruling out that it could be done, but I know from first hand experience that old census data is tough to navigate. I do think reparations could have a lot of negative unintended consequences though, and I think just straight up cash payments to the descendants of slaves is a bad idea that would probably do more harm for black people than good in the long run. For one thing, it would almost certainly galvanize resentment of blacks and white supremacist sentiment among poor and middle class whites and drive support for Republicans.
  3. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    From what i understand, reparations would be to cover the promise of 40 acres and a mule that was made post-war. It's a post-war promise that was reneged on by the Johnson administration, so the blood spilled in the War isn't payment to address that promise.
  4. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    That was a much smaller and more homogeneous group of claimants though, and a much smaller amount of cash. It was only paid to survivors of internment. There are tens of millions of descendants of slaves, of all ages. And the presumed payout would be in the billions of dollars, not a couple hundred thousand. It would have a vastly bigger economic impact, good or bad.
  5. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    No matter what, handing out cash payments worth thousands of dollars to millions of people would be a **** show with vast unforseen economic ripples. It would cause a feeding frenzy of exploitation and graft, not to mention inflation in many black communities that are already very economically vulnerable. Reparations intended to economically better the descendants of slaves would have to come in the form of something of value that can't be easily liquidated or exchanged. Probably a set of benefits handled by an institution like a GI Bill would be my guess.
  6. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    I don't think cutting a check to black descendants of slaves for a one-time pay off a 150 year old debt would be the start of economic empowerment for them. But I do think it would be the end of white guilt and white sympathy for black people and the issues of white supremacy that they face.
  7. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    There is never going to be a good time to work on reparations. I can't even fathom how difficult it would be to authenticate the genealogies of what could potentially be tens of millions of claimants. The longer we put off work on reparations, the more remote the ancestry will become, and the harder the task becomes. At a certain point, it would mean the debt will never be repaid.
  8. stevemcqueen1

    NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

    If there were reparation payouts, they would be used to justify a halt to further action. Reparations have to come in the form of sustained economic empowerment of our black citizens who are descended from slaves. That's what they were supposed to achieve in the first place. I don't know what form that kind of empowerment could take though.
  9. That's more of a discussion of tactics than ethics then. We agree on the ethical issues in play. I can get on board with the argument for picking your battles. It's important for progressives to keep in mind in every issue. Honestly banning the episode will do more harm than good to the people of Alabama trying to sustain a taboo on gay marriage. They'll get ridiculed, they'll galvanize opposition inside the State, and also drive interest in the issue by making it a fresh battleground. Kids will watch the episode online anyway.
  10. You've taken an absurd and extreme position in order to justify a taboo against depictions of gay marriage in media. To claim that straight weddings and marriages aren't portrayed in media for all ages, or even worse, that these portrayals are a bad thing for children, is ridiculous. Nobody shelters children from the concept of straight marriage, nor depictions of it.
  11. Nah man. RGIII was the best QB prospect I ever watched. Better than Watson and Mayfield. Better than Haskins. Even a little bit better than Luck. He was a Heisman Trophy winner that outperformed Luck in 2011 and 2012. He was a brilliant passer and I remember a point during the 2011 season when he had more touchdown passes than incompletions. He had the talent to become what Russell Wilson and Patrick Mahomes are today. But great prospects get ruined all of the time. He suffered a serious injury and ended up with a horrible team and coaching situation. Many a prospect has failed due to those circumstances. OTOH Wilson and Mahomes stayed healthy and ended up on great teams with great coaching and management situations and thus they thrived and realized their potential. Haskins is a blue chip prospect in his own right though. And the hope is that our organization has achieved some stability since the RGIII debacle and that Haskins is walking into a much better situation than RGIII had. And hopefully he stays healthy. He shouldn't get hit as often or as hard as RGIII did. He is much more careful whereas RGIII was fearless to the point of recklessness. But you can never predict health or injury. All it takes is one really bad step to alter careers.
  12. I don't know, I don't watch the show. It doesn't really matter if they have. Cartoon depictions of weddings shouldn't be taboo.
  13. stevemcqueen1

    ***2018-19 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    If Davis has made it known to them that he wants out, then they need to trade him ASAP. Indy and the Clippers proved that you can turbo charge your rebuild if you trade your disgruntled star before he has the chance to walk. New Orleans is also in the enviable position of already having a new franchise player to build around. The smart GM leverages Davis to put a tremendous supporting cast around Zion so that he develops properly and never becomes unhappy. I would trade Davis to New York on draft day for every asset they've got: Knox + Robinson + Smith Jr + RJ barrett + 2020 first + 2022 first + 2024 first. David Griffin is a bad GM though. I think he's going to try and ride this thing out with Davis and eventually deal him for a crap return or let him walk.
  14. You're right. There is no mainstream taboo on straight marriage. It's positively reinforced to an overwhelming degree.
  15. There needs to be a good, non-dogmatically sourced reason for a government to enforce a taboo. "Think of the children" is not one in this instance. And TBH, it's not that big of an evolution beyond "Think of the children" being the past justification from shaming/banning gays from other public spaces. Thinking that children need sheltering from the concept of gay marriage, while no such sheltering from the concept of straight marriage is necesarry (or even exists) is wrong. It places/reinforces a taboo on a fundamental part of gay peoples lives, where no taboo is rationally justified. What's more, the fact that this taboo exists justifies the cartoon's normalization of gay marriage as necessary. We need a lot more normalization, especially in third-world crapholes like Alabama.