CA Reparations Task Force

[bilby]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

 

[Gospel]

What...point, exactly? What are you claiming? That white people don't murder each other when other white people get bailed out?

If you didn't get the memo, black people are already killing each other. Reparations just might give some of them something else to do with their time.

 

[laughing dog]

Are we to be silent and never bring up animal research if it involves primates?

I think it makes a great point. You do recognize that racists white people in America dehumanized the slaves by using imagery & rhetoric depicting them as monkeys right? It's like bringing up how humans react to gas chambers using lab rats during a holocausts discussion. Sure you may have a point but don't be shocked when folks question your motive. because it's reasonable to do so.

No one even intimated that talking about primate research was verboten. To come up with a stupid straw man in this context serves to amplify the reasons for questioning the motive.

 

[Metaphor]

Are we to be silent and never bring up animal research if it involves primates?

I think it makes a great point. You do recognize that racists white people in America dehumanized the slaves by using imagery & rhetoric depicting them as monkeys right? It's like bringing up how humans react to gas chambers using lab rats during a holocausts discussion. Sure you may have a point but don't be shocked when folks question your motive. because it's reasonable to do so.

No one even intimated that talking about primate research was verboten. To come up with a stupid straw man in this context serves to amplify the reasons for questioning the motive.

So, how could it have been brought up without your scolding rebuke for bringing it up?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I think that any reasonable person could predict a reaction from posting such video in a public forum, but so far I have not commented on it because it did not seem productive. I have been more interested in the original commentary which at its essence was "maybe this won't be good for black people because black people." The apologetics commentary revolving around the video posting has been "well, black people are primates just like everyone else," but misses the flaw in the posting of focusing exclusively on Blacks.

So, let's start by listing some of the assumptions implicit in the original post and tentatively accept them whether true or not: ... such as,
1. the current California analysis is for slavery reparations ...
2. the people getting money are Black ...
3. they live in Black neighborhoods ...
4. Blacks in these Black neighborhoods who do not get money will direct frustrations at Blacks who receive money.

Absent in that commentary has been the centuries-long opposition by Whites to upward class mobility of Blacks. I mean, we have another thread about jobless White males and frankly, Blacks are used to lack of upward mobility. Those few who chose to be criminals due to economic disparity probably already are criminals and already targeting whoever for whatever opportunities. What happens when some African Americans take their financial windfall and buy property in so-called White neighborhoods?

It's not like race is the only thing to discuss either but I am still left wondering why the original post narrowly confines analysis of unintended consequences to the character limitations of some Blacks.

 

[Oleg]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

 

[Politesse]

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

Everyone pays taxes, Jack. Not just the innocent.

But if that's really the issue, would you prefer a state-funded manhunt for the individuals directly responsible for housing discrimination in the state? I am certain there are plenty of folks still alive, still propertied, who we could find with enough of a witch hunt. We could take their houses, requisition their funds, and throw them in jail for being unable to pay for the consequences of their crimes. If personal guilt is the rubric for who should and shouldn't pay, then you should want to see all of these people brought to justice, yes? And since nearly all of them will be middle class and white (plus a few crusty old state senators), it should actually be much more fair from a racialized point of view than penalties drawn from taxation, as it will just be whites paying blacks one on one rather than a government legally compensating its citizens.

 

[Gospel]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

Why do you hate Jewish people?

 

[TSwizzle]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

 

[Oleg]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

Why do you hate Jewish people?

Some of my best friends are . . .

 

[Oleg]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

Ya gotta admire the grift.

 

[Politesse]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

Ah, the Daily Mail. Yes, if 10,000 people qualified, and if against all odds all of these recommendations were accepted, the program would eventually cost that much. Never mind how wildly implausible that number is, and how utterly impossible it will be to convince the civic government that any of this is necessary.

 

[Politesse]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

Ya gotta admire the grift.

Accurately accusing the city of theft it did in fact commit = grift.

 

[thebeave]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

Ah, the Daily Mail. Yes, if 10,000 people qualified, and if against all odds all of these recommendations were accepted, the program would eventually cost that much. Never mind how wildly implausible that number is, and how utterly impossible it will be to convince the civic government that any of this is necessary.

The orginal source for this proposal appears to be the SF Chronicle.

$5 million for each longtime Black resident? S.F. has a bold reparations plan to consider

The Daily Mail appears to have thrown in the 10,000, which seems high to me. Just looking at the black homeless population per the Chronicle article (40% black of 7,000 total homeless = 2,800) suggests the number who meet the rather low bar qualifications could easily number in the low thousands. But the point still stands... that's a boatload of money! The proposal by the San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee (AARAC) seems meant to be taken seriously. The link to their Draft Reparations Plan is in the above article, if you want to read it.

 

[Harry Bosch]

This is shaping up nicely;

San Francisco's reparations committee will propose paying $5million to each longtime black resident of the city in a reparations plan this spring. To qualify, people need to have identified as black on public records for at least 10 years and be at least 18 years old. They also must qualify for two of a number of requirements, including having been born in the city or migrated to it between 1940 and 1996 and then lived there for 13 years. It is unclear exactly how many people would qualify should the proposal pass, but if just 10,000 people qualified it would cost at least $50billion. The proposal also says qualifying low-income households should have their income supplemented to match the city's median income - $97,000 in 2022 - for the next 250 years.

Daily Mail

Ah, the Daily Mail. Yes, if 10,000 people qualified, and if against all odds all of these recommendations were accepted, the program would eventually cost that much. Never mind how wildly implausible that number is, and how utterly impossible it will be to convince the civic government that any of this is necessary.

The orginal source for this proposal appears to be the SF Chronicle.

$5 million for each longtime Black resident? S.F. has a bold reparations plan to consider

The Daily Mail appears to have thrown in the 10,000, which seems high to me. Just looking at the black homeless population per the Chronicle article (40% black of 7,000 total homeless = 2,800) suggests the number who meet the rather low bar qualifications could easily number in the low thousands. But the point still stands... that's a boatload of money! The proposal by the San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee (AARAC) seems meant to be taken seriously. The link to their Draft Reparations Plan is in the above article, if you want to read it.

San Francisco is becoming a city where only the super rich can live.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

Racial grievances? The race riots that led to dozens of murders and property destruction, land theft, education theft, public leisure grounds turned white only private halls, failure to fulfill GI Bill benefits to enhance property ownership and education? Banks conspired to stop investment in the city in order to expand growth where there were no settlements (suburbs). Massive government and financial institution investments into creating white only suburbia. Laws not allowing blacks to fuck whites, forget marry them.

Grievance?!

I'm not for lump sum payments. The lottery has provided countless stories of people not taught how to manage money being incapable of managing large lump sums. But to minimize what has happened to blacks intentionally for hundreds of years as merely a "racial grievance" is just beyond dumb.

 

[Gospel]

The clowns screaming "why should my tax money pay for something I didn't do" need to grow up and realize that it's fanciful hope to think tax money will always be spent how you want it to be.

QFT. This is the reason why taxes are needed - because people won't or don't spend their money on stuff society needs.

Whether that need is sewers and highways, or compensation payments to people who have been (directly or indirectly) disadvantaged by the previous actions of their society.

Taxes for roads is one thing. Taxes to fund racial grievances is something all together different. People who did nothing wrong are to pay other people because of their racial caste status. Road to ruin.

Racial grievances? The race riots that led to dozens of murders and property destruction, land theft, education theft, public leisure grounds turned white only private halls, failure to fulfill GI Bill benefits to enhance property ownership and education? Banks conspired to stop investment in the city in order to expand growth where there were no settlements (suburbs). Massive government and financial institution investments into creating white only suburbia. Laws not allowing blacks to fuck whites, forget marry them.

Grievance?!

I'm not for lump sum payments. The lottery has provided countless stories of people not taught how to manage money being incapable of managing large lump sums. But to minimize what has happened to blacks intentionally for hundreds of years as merely a "racial grievance" is just beyond dumb.

But but but Oleg din du nuffin so nobody should do anything about it.

 

[Politesse]

But the point still stands... that's a boatload of money

If someone sues you for something that you did, you don't get off scot free by complaining that what you owe them is "too much money". Should have thought about that when you were stealing it, not when the chickens come home to roost.

What would you consider to be fair compensation for the victim of a redlining policy? In a market where the median home price is now a cool million and a half, and the people who got in early have awarded themselves with a frozen tax assessment value since 1978?

And of course none of these reparations are actually going to be made anyway, it's just talk...

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Most conservatives believe in trickle-down economics. Therefore, they should want to give the people in question at least 10 times as much as what is being proposed. This would then allow the receivers of the money to become job creators and to trickle their wealth over everybody else. I mean, $97K isn't really a lot of money. A cool $ million, on the other hand, is enough to start a business and hire some white people. Everybody wins.

 

[TSwizzle]

If someone sues you for something that you did, you don't get off scot free by complaining that what you owe them is "too much money". Should have thought about that when you were stealing it, not when the chickens come home to roost.

The people that are (potentially) being punished were not responsible for these past transgressions. I sure AF don't owe for it, I only moved here in the 90s!