Reparations - Is it time to get the lead out?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Reparations keeps becoming a subject that gets raised, and quite a bit by Democrat Presidential Candidate hopefuls. It is a topic of much controversy, especially for easily triggered white people, who think affirmative action is akin to "reverse racism" (which I'll remind such people, is not the topic of this thread). I do agree that reparations would be an extremely complicated thing to accomplish. Firstly, you have to figure out what we are providing reparations for... ie slavery, Jim Crow, culturally appropriated rap in the credits of Dragnet. Slavery provides the easiest canvas to provide relief for, but then again... who gets the reparations? Relatives of slaves? Everyone? Jim Crow makes things perhaps easier as that can blanket all African Americans... but what about Hispanics? Giving reparations to African Americans, but not Hispanics? And then what are the reparations? Cash, loans, access to opportunities (careful... that'll trigger those white people again)?

It is admittedly messy.

So I was wondering, maybe it is time to just get the lead out. Not metaphorically, but literally. Old low income housing has lead paint. During the Flint water crisis, I was shocked to learn about the annual trend of lead in the blood of inner city youth. So much that in the summer the lead content in African American children's blood goes up in large part due to the paint dust that comes out. You also have lead piping in homes, which can be a source of leaching lead, especially when idiots think running a water treatment plant is like running a lemonade stand.

What if, instead of handing out money or loans or what not, we stop poisoning children? Honestly, isn't that something we can all get behind (when I say all, I'm excluding many Republicans who'll vote for heart-beat abortion bills but block legislation to stop poisoning children with lead)? It sure the heck wouldn't be cheap, but it seems like a goal that would be worthy, positive, and about fucking time? I mean, I can understand if minorities might think "Stop poisoning their children" wouldn't be considered much of a 'reparation'. Kind of like a wife getting a vacuum cleaner for Christmas. But the price would be high, we are talking a a Dyson on steroids Vacuum cleaner, and the benefits could be substantial and beneficial to everyone.

So is it time to get the lead out?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Reparations.... That's something I have yet to read about with specifics. I wonder if it could be done in a non-racist way. I doubt many if any slaves or slave holders are still living, but if they are, that would be appropriate. More realistically, maybe if an individual can prove they were denied bank loans or kept out of schools due to race....

The problem here is of course that the people who were wronged are not synonymous with those a few generations later, who are born into privilege in comparison and in comparison to most of the world's people.

Not poisoning children should not even be mentioned in the same breath as reparations. Children should not be poisoned period. Race irrelevant. No child should be poisoned. If that is fixed get, get on it already! People should be able to afford to live in non-toxic housing.

 

[ruby sparks]

So is it time to get the lead out?

Well, the word reparation does have its roots in the Latin word for repair.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

There is no repairing history. There is no time machine. You can only do better going forward. Not continuing to push for racial discrimination of any sort is a good start.

 

[ruby sparks]

Copied from another thread.

The Case for Reparations
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/

This is what reparations could actually look like in America
https://qz.com/1012692/this-is-what-reparations-could-actually-look-like-in-america/

- - - Updated - - -

And most relevantly:

Bernie Sanders when asked about reparations says there are 'better ways' to help people than 'writing out a check'
https://www.businessinsider.com/ber...tter-ways-help-writing-check-2019-3?r=US&IR=T

 

[Trausti]

No good can come from litigating greviances that belong to the dead. However, keeping children away from lead is of course a good thing.

 

[Worldtraveller]

...culturally appropriated rap in the credits of Dragnet.

Truly, the defining social issue of our day.

 

[laughing dog]

I don't recall where I read this (I think it was an article in The Economics in the past couple of weeks) that the effects of discrimination on wealth is noticeable for up to 4 generations. If that is accurate, there is good case for doing something.
I think the concept of reparations is a tricky issue. Done poorly, it will fan the fires of racism and bigotry further dividing the country even more than it is today. Done carefully, it may help heal and unite our country.
I like the idea of gov't funded "baby bonds". Every baby is given a Treasury bond at birth that is redeemable at age 18 (or 21) and is non-transferable. The initial amount (and whether the amount should vary by the birth parent(s)' wealth, and any subsequent additions by the gov't would have to be determined.

 

[ronburgundy]

Of course, lead exposure should be eliminated wherever it is occurring, and certainly from all public spaces. I'd imagine almost no conservatives would even object to this, but rather would object to any housing being "public".
Anyone hesitant about the costs of lead elimination should be presented with the extensive evidence linking lead exposure to crime and violent behavior, and all those associated costs.

Eliminating lead in public housing is not "reparations", but it does highlight the type of policy that should exist instead of "reparations".

Policies should target those in need and those experiencing misfortune or injustice, regardless of race. If historical policies lead to some racial groups having a higher rate of those needs, and injustices, then race-neutral policies will still disproportionately help members of those groups.

40% public housing residents are white non-Hispanic. So, lead removal would benefit almost as many white kids as black kids. Yet, blacks are over-represented among public housing resident and thus among those that would be helped by a factor of 5.
So, despite the policy directly targeting empirical need rather than using race as a proxy, blacks would be 5 times more likely to benefit.

The same is true of all forms of public assistance, wealth redistributions, etc. Any policy that targets economic need and ignores race will "repair" damages due to historical racism, while at the same time helping people who have suffered misfortunes and economic injustices for other reasons that get no sympathy or attention because they are more idiosyncratic and less visible. Granted, there are right wingers who object to all forms of public assistance, but the evidence is clear that there is far more support for it when it is directly tied to individual need rather than racist assumption that all and only members of particular races are in need or have suffered injustices.
In fact, a similar racist assumption is evident by framing lead elimination from housing as a form of racial reparations, which would only make sense if only blacks were in public housing.

 

[James Brown]

Kevin Drum has been collecting data for years on the links between the use of leaded gasoline and crime.

The lead-crime hypothesis is pretty simple: lead poisoning degrades the development of childhood brains in ways that increase aggression, reduce impulse control, and impair the executive functions that allow people to understand the consequences of their actions. Because of this, infants who are exposed to high levels of lead are more likely to commit violent crimes later in life...

In a nutshell, this article argues that atmospheric lead from gasoline tailpipes rose steadily after World War II, affecting babies born in the late 40s and beyond. The leading edge of this generation became teenagers in the late 60s and was more prone than previous generations to committing violent crime. Every year the population of teenagers with lead poisoning increased, and violent crime increased with it. This is why the 70s and 80s were eras in which crime skyrocketed.

In the early 70s the United States began to phase out leaded gasoline and newborns became steadily less lead poisoned. Like clockwork, as the leading edge of this generation became teenagers in the early 90s, the crime wave started to recede. By 2010, an entire generation of teenagers and young adults—the age group responsible for most crime—had grown up nearly lead free, and the violent crime rate had plummeted to half or less of its high point. This happened across the board: in big and small cities; among blacks and whites; in every state; in every city; and, as it turns out, in every other country that also phased out leaded gasoline.

As for reparations, some conservatives have argued that if we engage in reparations, then we must simultaneously end programs like Affirmative Action, etc.

 

[Metaphor]

Whenever the question of reparations comes up, my mind goes straight to the top. How much will the Obamas get, and will Barack have to pay for Michelle's?

 

[Trausti]

Whenever the question of reparations comes up, my mind goes straight to the top. How much will the Obamas get, and will Barack have to pay for Michelle's?

Obama is not descended from American slaves. But his Kenyan family/tribe was likely involved in the Islamic slave trade. And we know on his mother’s side an ancestor had slaves in the US. Reparations will be a hoot.

 

[ZiprHead]

Whenever the question of reparations comes up, my mind goes straight to the top. How much will the Obamas get, and will Barack have to pay for Michelle's?

Obama is not descended from American slaves. But his Kenyan family/tribe was likely involved in the Islamic slave trade. And we know on his mother’s side an ancestor had slaves in the US. Reparations will be a hoot.

Why is that likely?

 

[Mumbles]

I wouldn't consider this much in the way of "reparations", but it would certainly be a good idea in general, given lead's link to many societal ills, including both learning disabilities and propensity towards violence. It could certainly be *a part* of environmental work in black neighborhoods - which would also see a rerouting of traffic away from black neighborhoods (responsible for elevated asthma levels in these communities), and industrial toxin sites/coal power plants (which combine the above problems).

 

[Politesse]

I have always thought it reasonable that, the government having endorsed slavery, the government should consider itself indebted to the victims of slavery. But like the OP, I think the idea of monetary repayment is probably not the most effective way to handle this; any number that is a reasonable exchange for, say, a life's work of manual labor, would be a much larger number than we have the collective political will to endorse. A better course is to improve the lives of all Americans, with special consideration for the victims of governmental violence and their children.

I don't know why everyone seems to think it would be hard to determine who the descendants of slaves are. This is usually a fact well known and fairly easy to demonstrate, if the legal era is what we are discussing. Post-Reconstruction slavery, being much more under-the-table, can be a bit harder to pin down documentary evidence for.

 

[Derec]

Reparations keeps becoming a subject that gets raised, and quite a bit by Democrat Presidential Candidate hopefuls. It is a topic of much controversy, especially for easily triggered white people,

You lefties still don't understand what "triggered" means. It's not disagreement, even strong disagreement with your position.

who think affirmative action is akin to "reverse racism"

Or just plain old racism. 'Reverse' is redundant.

(which I'll remind such people, is not the topic of this thread).

Well, you brought it up. Incidentally, 50 years of racial preferences is more than enough reparations, don't you think?

culturally appropriated rap in the credits of Dragnet.

What about all the stuff white people came up with that blacks culturally appropriated?
The whole idea of "cultural appropriation" (as it is used in the "woke crowd at least) is patent nonsense, but what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

but what about Hispanics?

What would even be a justification to demand "reparations" for hispanics? Other than they being another ethnic group US leftists think deserve preferential treatment.

It is admittedly messy.

It's messy because it's a nonsensical idea.

So I was wondering, maybe it is time to just get the lead out. Not metaphorically, but literally.

Sure. The mess in Flint was ridiculous/

Old low income housing has lead paint.

I doubt there is significant number of housing units that still have lead paint. Do you have any numbers on that?
But sure, what housing remains should be retrofitted.

During the Flint water crisis, I was shocked to learn about the annual trend of lead in the blood of inner city youth. So much that in the summer the lead content in African American children's blood goes up in large part due to the paint dust that comes out.

Paint dust comes out in the summer? Explain.

From the paper:

National data confirmed that regardless of age, race, and socio-economic class, people living in urban areas with a population of over one million had higher blood lead concentrations than urban areas of less than one million, which in turn had higher blood lead concentrations than rural areas [21].

So it's not like only the minorities and poor and ever exposed to lead.
Note also that in the study you cited, they profiled poorest of the poor. Median family income of kids in the study was ~$2,500. Even at minimum wage, that's working only 6-7 hours per week! Not surprising that somebody that lazy can't be bothered to paint the house after 30 years or something!
But even so, both median and mean of the blood lead level in that study was well below the recommended cutoff of 5μg/dL.

What if, instead of handing out money or loans or what not, we stop poisoning children?

Who is this we? If the parents own their own home, they are responsible for cleaning up lead paint. If they are renting, it's the landlord. Only if they live in public housing is the public responsible.

Honestly, isn't that something we can all get behind (when I say all, I'm excluding many Republicans who'll vote for heart-beat abortion bills but block legislation to stop poisoning children with lead)?

Do you have a specific bill in mind? And if I recall correctly, a Democrat was the mayor of Flint when they started poisoning childen. Democrats are running cities like Miami (from that study) or Baltimore (I read elsewhere they had a big lead paint problem, it was even blamed for Freddie Grey's antics)

It sure the heck wouldn't be cheap, but it seems like a goal that would be worthy, positive, and about fucking time?

I would agree with you. Government should definitely clean up public housing and municipal water supply and laws/ordinances can be passed to clean up privately owned housing. I do not think it'll be that big of an expense, at least as far as residential lead paint goes, as the numbers should be fairly limited.

I mean, I can understand if minorities might think "Stop poisoning their children" wouldn't be considered much of a 'reparation'.

What's this obsession with "gibsmedat" among some minorities?
Also, lead exposure seems to be correlated with poverty, not minority status. Those are not the same thing!

 

[Derec]

I have always thought it reasonable that, the government having endorsed slavery, the government should consider itself indebted to the victims of slavery.

Sure. Any victim of slavery in the US who comes forward should be entitled to compensation. Their great-great-grandkids? Not so much.

I don't know why everyone seems to think it would be hard to determine who the descendants of slaves are.

A big problem would be how to quantify it. Slavery ended over 150 years ago. That's, what, maybe 6 generations, give or take. 2^6=64 ancestors (not necessarily unique). So should somebody whose all 64 6th generation ancestors were enslaved get the same amount of reparations as somebody with maybe one? Or 64x as much? What about non-unique ancestors? Do they count single or multiple? And what about slave-owner ancestors? Do you get those deducted from your ancestor shares?

This is usually a fact well known and fairly easy to demonstrate, if the legal era is what we are discussing.

I am sure there is always some uncertainty about some of the ancestry going back that far. If your great-grandmother was married to a freedman, but had an affair with some Italian immigrant and your granddaddy was born, do we go by legal or biological parentage? And what about single mothers with unknown biological father and no legal father?

Post-Reconstruction slavery, being much more under-the-table, can be a bit harder to pin down documentary evidence for.

Or any evidence for that matter.

 

[Derec]

Kevin Drum has been collecting data for years on the links between the use of leaded gasoline and crime.

I can see that with Tetraethyllead and its combustion products. But exposure would not be restricted to any ethnic or socioeconomic group.
Leaded paint is a bit different. Paint is designed to stick to surfaces for years. So any lead that gets out will be very slowly over time. So overall effect would be smaller. But on the other hand, any effect would be concentrated among those living in houses with lead paint, especially old, peeling lead paint. So not just living in a place with lead paint, but living in a place where your parents did not bother to paint since 1986 - the year lead paint was banned!

As for reparations, some conservatives have argued that if we engage in reparations, then we must simultaneously end programs like Affirmative Action, etc.

I think racial preferences (so-called "affirmative action") should be ended anyway. And 50 years of giving certain races preferential treatment should be more than enough in terms of reparations.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Women in the U.S. could not vote before 1920. Should women today receive reparations because the government at one time endorsed misogyny?

 

[Metaphor]

Women in the U.S. could not vote before 1920. Should women today receive reparations because the government at one time endorsed misogyny?

Men are owed reparations in the U.S., not women. Men are the only people required to register for selective service.

What Happens If You Don't Register for Selective Service. If you are required to register and you don't, you will not be eligible for federal student aid, federal job training, or a federal job. You may be prosecuted and face a fine of up to $250,000 and/or jail time of up to five years.