No Excuses

NYT: What Reparations for Slavery Might Look Like in 2019

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
Quote

 

If you’re surprised that the issue of reparations for black Americans has taken so long to resolve, blame the president. President Andrew Johnson.

 

As the Civil War wound down in 1865, Gen. William T. Sherman made the promise that would come to be known as “40 acres and a mule” — redistributing a huge tract of Atlantic coastline to black Americans recently freed from bondage. President Abraham Lincoln and Congress gave their approval, and soon 40,000 freedmen in the South had started to plant and build.

 

Within months of Lincoln’s assassination, though, President Johnson rescinded the order and returned the land to its former owners. Congress made another attempt at compensation, but Johnson vetoed it.

 

Now, in the early phase of the 2020 presidential campaign, the question of compensating black Americans for suffering under slavery and other forms of racial injustice has resurfaced. The current effort focuses on a congressional bill that would commission a study on reparations, a version of legislation first introduced in 1989. Several Democratic presidential hopefuls have declared their support, including Senators Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro.

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/23/business/economy/reparations-slavery.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Edited by No Excuses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The numbers they quote seem high, but If they spread the payments out over 10 or so years, I think they could probably do it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider reparations of any meaningful sum being paid directly to individuals being extremely unlikely.  If by some miracle it did manage to gain enough support to have a real chance, people would howl at the moon over every detail of this.  On both sides.  The closer it moved to an actual cash pay out the angrier both sides would become.  If it passed some would argue it was too little, others too much, and everyone would be furious that their favorite budget items were drastically cut. 

 

Lawyers would benefit though.  That much is certain. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If these reperations to happen, I would hope that they will also be offering reparations for indentured servants and other migrants that were treated very poorly.

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DCSaints_fan said:

The numbers they quote seem high, but If they spread the payments out over 10 or so years, I think they could probably do it.  

 

Can you post the numbers? I can't get to the article due to the paywall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Destino said:

I consider reparations of any meaningful sum being paid directly to individuals being extremely unlikely.  If by some miracle it did manage to gain enough support to have a real chance, people would howl at the moon over every detail of this.  On both sides.  The closer it moved to an actual cash pay out the angrier both sides would become.  If it passed some would argue it was too little, others too much, and everyone would be furious that their favorite budget items were drastically cut. 

 

Lawyers would benefit though.  That much is certain. 

 

 

there would also be some not so small number of people who will (rightly) say "reparations? you think you can pay people off for hundreds of years of institutionalized oppression in the form of slavery and jim crow? i don't think so."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Can you post the numbers? I can't get to the article due to the paywall. 

 

Quote

What would Sherman’s promise be worth today?

Mr. Darity has been mulling that question for years, and is writing a book on reparations with Kirsten Mullen, due out next year. He begins with the cost of an acre in 1865: about $10. Forty acres divided among a family of four comes to 10 acres per person, or about $100 for each of the four million former slaves. Taking account of compounding interest and inflation, Mr. Darity has put the present value at $2.6 trillion. Assuming roughly 30 million descendants of ex-slaves, he concluded it worked out to about $80,000 a person.

 

To get a sense of the scale, consider that the United States budget this year is $4.7 trillion.

 

Of course, varying any critical assumption can add or subtract billions or trillions of dollars.

 

Thomas Craemer, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Connecticut, used the same starting point — 40 acres and a mule — but a different method in a study published last year. He used the current average price of agricultural land and figured that 40 acres of farmland and buildings would amount to roughly $123,000. If all of the four million slaves counted in the 1860 census had been able to take advantage of that offer, it would have totaled more than $486 billion today — or about $16,200 for each descendant of slaves.

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have turned pro-reparations over the years, but I think the bigger issue right now is really the institutional racism issues that prevent the climbing of the ladder in the first place. It doesn't hurt me any for descendants of slaves to receive a check for $16,200, but that also isn't going to work as some kind of cure-all. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, grego said:

 

there would also be some not so small number of people who will (rightly) say "reparations? you think you can pay people off for hundreds of years of institutionalized oppression in the form of slavery and jim crow? i don't think so."

 

My response would be "No, but its a step in the right direction" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the dems add reparations to their 2020 platform the only logical conclusion I can draw is that they’ve punted on the election cycle. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DCSaints_fan said:

My response would be "No, but its a step in the right direction"  

 

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

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.

 

Well, given further action isn’t exactly happening now or in the future, I’d say a tax-free $80k check would be a good step. 

 

(insert Chappelle Show reparation day skit) 

 

Seriously though, I hadn’t even considered reparations as a thing that should be on the table until I read this: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ Required reading, in full, for anybody commenting on the subject imo. 

Edited by skinsfan_1215

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be astronomically divisive. Do we really want to do that? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nonniey said:

It would be astronomically divisive. Do we really want to do that? 

 

No one is running for office with this being a high ticket issue or issue at all.  This thread really isn't having to do with the election so much as just the subject itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

No one is running for office with this being a high ticket issue or issue at all.  This thread really isn't having to do with the election so much as just the subject itself. 

So lets say my wife gets $80,000 and daughter get $80,000 this year but then we have another child next year. That child would not get anything? Or child born on 31 December would get the money but one born on 1 January would be **** of of luck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

If there were reparation payouts, they would be used to justify a halt to further action.

 

What "further action" are you referring to?  They've been waiting 150+ years for further action. 

 

9 minutes ago, nonniey said:

It would be astronomically divisive. Do we really want to do that? 

 

Desegregation was "astronomically divisive" in the 50s/60s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, nonniey said:

It would be astronomically divisive. Do we really want to do that? 

 

400 years of slavery and institutional racism has also been pretty divisive. Only difference is white people haven’t had to deal with black people getting things like rights and wealth most of that time. 

Edited by skinsfan_1215
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nonniey said:

So lets say my wife gets $80,000 and daughter get $80,000 this year but then we have another child next year. That child would not get anything? Or child born on 31 December would get the money but one born on 1 January would be **** of of luck?

 

Maybe make it only for those 18+.  Alternatively for a family the compensation for minors would lbe controlled by the parents to put into trust so they could divide it amongst any future offspring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

 

Seriously though, I hadn’t even considered reparations as a thing that should be on the table until I read this: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ Required reading, in full, for anybody commenting on the subject imo. 

 

It's interesting to hear different perspectives. I can see the good and potential bad. It could probably be done. 

 

Coleman Hughes response of sorts - 

https://quillette.com/2019/03/17/reparations-and-ta-nehisi-coatess-pyrrhic-victory/

 

Glenn Loury and John McWhorter  on reparations 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nonniey said:

It would be astronomically divisive. Do we really want to do that? 

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

At a certain point, it would mean the debt will never be repaid.

I think we’re already past that point. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we could solve the logistical issue of accurately identifying the descendents of slaves and could come up with 2.7 trillion to 500 billion, 80k to 16k wouldn't come close to adequate reparation for slavery (anyone willing to be sold into slavery so that your children could collect 80k max?).  And it doesn't even begin to address the wrongs black Americans suffered after emancipation.  Not to mention that reparation will be used as an excuse against actually trying to address racial injustice in today's society.  It's a bad and inadequate solution to a hugely complex problem.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

No one is running for office with this being a high ticket issue or issue at all.  This thread really isn't having to do with the election so much as just the subject itself. 

 

They do mention some canidates have supported it 

Quote

Democratic presidential hopefuls have declared their support, including Senators Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro.

 

Although I agree, none of them are going make it a big issue in the debates or a major part of their platform. 

Edited by DCSaints_fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.