California Doing California Things

[Derec]

It bothers me when conservatives, hearing about the SF reparations proposal, launch with a misunderstanding that the reparations are for slavery,

You are right. According to the "African American Reparations Advisory Committee", aka the Grifting Committee, one only has to have identified as black.

An individual being an African American descendent of a chattel enslaved person or the descendant of a free Black person prior to the end of the 19th century or who has identified as Black/African American on public documents for at least 10 years

In addition to identifying as black, the individual must have suffered one of the listed "harms", but that is a broad list that includes things like attending SF schools between 1983 and 2005, or having been arrested (or being descendent of somebody who has) for a drug crime.
It reads like a Portlandia-style parody, but it is real.

and then double down on their error by claiming that there was never slavery in the state, when there absolutely was. In many different forms applied to many different people over many diverse empires and centuries.

Pretty much every group of people has suffered subjugation at hands of someone at some time in history. All the more reason to stop with this divisive shit.

If someone wants to launch a bill to repair the damage of those policies, I'm all for it, but if the recommendation is for complete inaction on all fronts, that I cannot get behind.

What would be your suggestion? What should SF and California do ideally, if Poltesse were in charge?

If a government doesn't govern, what's the point of it?

If a government governs poorly, it is even worse than pointless. The only practical outcome of this I foresee is that SF has wasted, and will waste even more, of its scarce taxpayer moneys on enriching the members of the so-called "African American Reparations Advisory Committee". It's a grift.

 

[Derec]

It could tell you that bilby really doesn't give a rats arse about this subject.

And yet you keep replying to this thread, even though it's about an issue on a different continent.

My interest begins and ends with the correction of your obvious errors of fact and of logic^TM as displayed on this discussion board.

That's an empty set.

What the people of California do is up to them.

Well, duh. But we can still discuss their folly in a political discussion forum.
Especially since it's the largest state in the US, and their governor is likely frontrunner for 2028 Dem nomination.

Of course, you can't let it go, because "all things race" is your beloved hobbyhorse. ^TM

I am not the one advocating for a government-sponsored, race-based, grifting program.

 

[laughing dog]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

 

[Politesse]

What should SF and California do ideally, if Poltesse were in charge?

I think omnibus racial anti-discrimination laws are well-intentioned but often functionally flawed, and that from a legal and practical standpoint it would be better to design reparation law around specific laws, polities, and actions the polity has taken.

 

[Politesse]

The main targets of legal slavery in California were, in all eras, Native Californians. But it was legal to own a Black slave in California until 1865, you just couldn't buy or sell one. As in much of the country, even in the South. The 1850 Compromise ensured we would always be a Free State on paper, but there was a whole constellation of exceptions, and we were among the last states to close all the gaps.

Even so, that was a long time ago (> 160 years) and I do not see why it should entitle descendants to riches like $5M payment plus all the other goodies the San Francisco Grifting Commission has demanded.

And yes, we're a major node for the prison system, with more inmates than any other state aside from Texas, though outright forced free labor is not permitted here.

California is also the state with more people than any other state aside from Texas, so duh! And do really you think criminals who serve, or are serving, or are descendants from those who had served time in prison get "reparations"? Or only the black ones?

And then there's illegal slavery (aka "human trafficking" for those who demand we should be extra polite to slavers),

Well, illegal slavery is illegal, and victims should get compensation - from the perps, not the government. And it certainly should not be based on race. And you also have to be careful about the definition. The sex work prohibitionists have coopted the term "human trafficking" to refer to consensual sex work as well.

which is a problem whose scope is somewhere between "rampant" and "endemic".

I would say "often exaggerated".

It's not permitted, but it would be hard to make the case that we are doing enough to prevent it, when some of our legislators themselves pocket millions from illegal migrant labor worked by people who have little recourse if an employer refuses to pay them for the season or brings their family here under what are effectively terms of indenture,

Illegals should not be here to begin with.

and most of our leaders apparently attend Manhattan sex slave parties with the president.

[citation needed]

You are trying to interpret my entire post as though it were all meant as a direct commentary on the SF reparation law, which it wasn't, and then complaining that your interpretation makes my post seem illogical. Which it would, because I wasn't. The question of slavery in California is longstanding, complicated, and involves many groups of people beyond the Black population of SF.

 

[robnisch]

The best we can hope for is that we tell the true story of American history.
I as an Oregonian only learned of the racist past a few years ago.
The main reason there are Black people here is the shipyards in WWII.
The KKK was a big deal here in the 1920's.

 

[Politesse]

You are right. According to the "African American Reparations Advisory Committee", aka the Grifting Committee, one only has to have identified as black.

...Derec wrote, and then for some reason went on to contradictorily list out dozens of other criteria, as though they did not render this sentence completely incorrect... this is like saying that in order to receive ADA accomodations, one need only identify as a US citizen.

 

[Derec]

You are right. According to the "African American Reparations Advisory Committee", aka the Grifting Committee, one only has to have identified as black.

...Derec wrote, and then for some reason went on to contradictorily list out dozens of other criteria, as though they did not render this sentence completely incorrect...

If you actually read what I wrote in context, instead of being on a lookout for gotchas, you'd have understood that the "only" was in reference to the criterion mentioned before, i.e. being a descendant of slavery. That requirement is ORed with "has self-identified as black for 10 years", which means the former is not necessary.
And as I mentioned, all those dozen criteria are are also ORed between each other, and some of them are very weak. For example, if a Nigerian teenager moved to US in 2000 and went to high school in SF, and self-identified as black since at least 2015, he'd be eligible for SF-style "reparations".

this is like saying that in order to receive ADA accomodations, one need only identify as a US citizen.

If the context is explaining that one need not be e.g. a natural-born US citizen, then saying "one need only be a US citizen" is a perfectly fine way to word it, and does not preclude there being additional criteria (which are, btw, much more strict than the nonsense the SF Grifting Committee came up with.
Btw, "accommodations" is spelled with two 'm's.

 

[Derec]

You are trying to interpret my entire post as though it were all meant as a direct commentary on the SF reparation law, which it wasn't, and then complaining that your interpretation makes my post seem illogical.

Since that was the law we were talking about, that was the natural framework for interpretation, yes.

Unrelated to the law, you mentioned some "Manhattan sex-slave parties" you claim most California leaders attended. What is your evidence of that, and did say Newsom and Kamala partake?

Which it would, because I wasn't. The question of slavery in California is longstanding, complicated, and involves many groups of people beyond the Black population of SF.

Another few reasons why this push by SF is misguided.

 

[Derec]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

Yes. If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But saying things like "everybody who identifies as black and attended SF public schools or whose granddaddy was once arrested for smoking weed" is not a reasonable definition of individuals who were harmed. If you want to compensate people for past drug arrests and convictions, for example, that may not be a great policy, but it would not be discriminatory if you do it regardless of racial identification. It should also not be a heritable status like it is in the SF reparations document.

 

[bilby]

If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But ...

... fortunately nobody kept detailed records. So we are completely absolved of any responsibility whatsoever.

It should also not be a heritable status

... because most of the victims are safely dead.

Obviously any wealth I inherited from my grandfather (however he acquired it) is legitimately mine, because I earned it reasons.

But if he earned it by exploiting others, I owe them nothing. Also because reasons.

 

[laughing dog]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

Yes. If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But saying things like "everybody who identifies as black and attended SF public schools or whose granddaddy was once arrested for smoking weed" is not a reasonable definition of individuals who were harmed. If you want to compensate people for past drug arrests and convictions, for example, that may not be a great policy, but it would not be discriminatory if you do it regardless of racial identification. It should also not be a heritable status like it is in the SF reparations document.

So according to you, if my dead parents or grandparents were demonstrably harmed by some gov't policy and that harm demonstrably affected me or my siblings, we should not be entitled to some hypothetical compensation scheme?

 

[Harry Bosch]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

Yes. If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But saying things like "everybody who identifies as black and attended SF public schools or whose granddaddy was once arrested for smoking weed" is not a reasonable definition of individuals who were harmed. If you want to compensate people for past drug arrests and convictions, for example, that may not be a great policy, but it would not be discriminatory if you do it regardless of racial identification. It should also not be a heritable status like it is in the SF reparations document.

So according to you, if my dead parents or grandparents were demonstrably harmed by some gov't policy and that harm demonstrably affected me or my siblings, we should not be entitled to some hypothetical compensation scheme?

Well, that would be a pretty broad group of people!

 

[thebeave]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

Yes. If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But saying things like "everybody who identifies as black and attended SF public schools or whose granddaddy was once arrested for smoking weed" is not a reasonable definition of individuals who were harmed. If you want to compensate people for past drug arrests and convictions, for example, that may not be a great policy, but it would not be discriminatory if you do it regardless of racial identification. It should also not be a heritable status like it is in the SF reparations document.

So according to you, if my dead parents or grandparents were demonstrably harmed by some gov't policy and that harm demonstrably affected me or my siblings, we should not be entitled to some hypothetical compensation scheme?

Well, that would be a pretty broad group of people!

Yep. Recent descendents of soldiers who were drafted by the US government to fight in some misguided, bungled war and were subsequently killed or severely disabled. That would seem to me to be a deserving group, if there ever was one.

 

[TSwizzle]

Welp, the iconic Hollywood Center Motel in Los Angeles burned down at the weekend. I pass there most days when going to the office. I always admired it and hoped it could be restored. I will not be surprised if the cause is down to the squatters that had been using it. Karen Bass' Los Angeles.

A year on since the Palisades fire and still hardly a home rebuilt. So much for Newsom and Bass expediting planning permits etc.

 

[Elixir]

I always admired it and hoped it could be restored.

How about a nice ballroom? I mean, you’re half way there already …

 

[Harry Bosch]

Welp, the iconic Hollywood Center Motel in Los Angeles burned down at the weekend. I pass there most days when going to the office. I always admired it and hoped it could be restored. I will not be surprised if the cause is down to the squatters that had been using it. Karen Bass' Los Angeles.

A year on since the Palisades fire and still hardly a home rebuilt. So much for Newsom and Bass expediting planning permits etc.

It has very little to do with permits. It's all about insurance. Insurance rates have gone up in that area dramatically.

 

[Harry Bosch]

If a state or local gov’t wishes to remedy a past harm that it inflicted on an identifiable group (any group), would it be objectionable because it is discriminatory based on victim-group membership?

Yes. If there were identifiable individuals who were harmed, that would be different. But saying things like "everybody who identifies as black and attended SF public schools or whose granddaddy was once arrested for smoking weed" is not a reasonable definition of individuals who were harmed. If you want to compensate people for past drug arrests and convictions, for example, that may not be a great policy, but it would not be discriminatory if you do it regardless of racial identification. It should also not be a heritable status like it is in the SF reparations document.

So according to you, if my dead parents or grandparents were demonstrably harmed by some gov't policy and that harm demonstrably affected me or my siblings, we should not be entitled to some hypothetical compensation scheme?

Well, that would be a pretty broad group of people!

Yep. Recent descendents of soldiers who were drafted by the US government to fight in some misguided, bungled war and were subsequently killed or severely disabled. That would seem to me to be a deserving group, if there ever was one.

Yep. I know that it's not PC to say this anymore, but I think that future generations are going to pissed at our government today for ignoring climate science, running up gigantic deficits, and etc.

 

[TSwizzle]

Welp, the iconic Hollywood Center Motel in Los Angeles burned down at the weekend. I pass there most days when going to the office. I always admired it and hoped it could be restored. I will not be surprised if the cause is down to the squatters that had been using it. Karen Bass' Los Angeles.

A year on since the Palisades fire and still hardly a home rebuilt. So much for Newsom and Bass expediting planning permits etc.

It has very little to do with permits. It's all about insurance.

True, there are a lot of factors that are slowing things down but permits is still a major factor.

Insurance rates have gone up in that area dramatically.

If you can actually get insurance.

 

[TSwizzle]

While the state of California falls apart with chronic “homelessness”, skyrocketing gas prices, unemployment, Pacific Palisades (and other areas) turned to ashes, insufferable prick Governor Newsom has shown up at the Davos WEF to scold European leaders about not standing up to US President Donald Trump. Going so far as to say he wishes he had brought knee pads for them.

Newsom is such a clown. It is going to be hoot watching the clown’s presidential campaign.