reparations

[bmain77]

I was watching that episode of Chapelle Show the other night when Dave portrays what would happen if reparation were rewarded to descendants of slaves and got to thinking that'd make a good topic here.

I don't think it will ever happen, but what is all of your feelings about reparations being paid by the government for the slave trade? We did pay out settlements for to Japanese Americans rounded up in the camps during World War II.

My own feelings are that it will never happen. I feel too much time has passed for it to occur. I hate to sound too Republican, but I think it would in a sense be punishing generations of taxpayers that had nothing to do with the slave trade (my god that does sound republican doesn't it :D ...shoot me now!)

I think it should have been done at the time. It does disgust me how little was actually done then. But now its just going to make current race relations even worse.

[Jon Lyrik]

Originally posted by bmain77
my god that does sound republican doesn't it :D ...shoot me now!

No, it makes you sound like these two:

http://www.quibbles-n-bits.com/archives/bomber/kkk.gif

But, seriously, no, I don't think it will happen. If it was to happen, it would have been years and years ago.

[ANavissi500]

I think that it is not the best idea in the world and it is very unfair for the millions of families who did not have descendants in the United States during the Civil War, my family included.

[bmain77]

Originally posted by Jon Lyrik
No, it makes you sound like these two:

http://www.quibbles-n-bits.com/archives/bomber/kkk.gif

But, seriously, no, I don't think it will happen. If it was to happen, it would have been years and years ago.

I had a couple responses to this, but couldn't settle on one:

Damn it how did those pictures get out...there goes my political career :D

or

Where'd you find my mom and dad's wedding photo?

[The Postmaster General]

I would rather give money to slave descendents than tax breaks to the rich.



So, I think that slave descendents should be given some cash.*


*On the sole condition that the money is handed out on a person-by-person basis, and each person can only get the money if they pass a quiz on black history.

If anyone is going to get compensation for slavery, they should at least know who Nat Turner is.

[SLAW]

Will never happen. America will and can never owe anybody anything because America doesn't make mistakes. We haven't owned up to slavery or genocide and we never will.

[Lynn7]

I think all people ahve been crapped on throughout the history of the world. I am descended fromGreeks and Irish and both of them have been oppressed in the past. What happened to the slaves was an unbeleivable travesty but the reparations made now will not do the people who were oppressed any good.

One weird thing is there was this guy on TV and he was talking about something called post slavery traumatic disorder as a defense against criminal acts. The interviewer (I think it was Joe Scarbourough) said, if this was implemented, no black could ever be charged for a crime against whites. The guy said something like "Well, you guys brought us over here as slaves, you have to deal with the consequences!" It was really funny-he was totally serious. I think his last name was Shabazz.

[Scarface98.9]

If this were the 1800's and we had the same beliefs and mindsets that we do now, I think most of us would be in favor of implementing reparations to black people. But considering the amount of time passed and how it wouldn't really heal many wounds, it doesn't seem like the best idea. I doubt many people are still boiling hot angry and emotionally damaged enough that slavery reparations would be the only thing to help them

[loner]

Originally posted by SLAW
America will and can never owe anybody anything because America doesn't make mistakes. We haven't owned up to slavery or genocide and we never will.

Oh no?? Yes slavery is the dark cloud on this nation's history, but it was America that officially abolished slavery nearly 150 years ago. Slavery is still alive today in many parts of Africa and Asia.

Black Americans are more successful here than anywhere else in the world. The black community here, when taken on it's own, is the 12th richest nation on the planet. This reparations claim is one more attempt to turn African-Americans into victims. Like most leftist policies, it sends a damaging and offensive message to the black community.

[TheDeadWalk]

I'm not trying to sound anti-religious here, but there isn't enough gold in the fuggin Yucatan to pay reparations to all of the peoples that have been oppressed by the Catholics and(or) Protestants.

Slavery and oppression has occurred since the dawn of time. The only reasonable cure is through proper education and equality toward all human beings.

If United States pays out reparations, every other culture and civilization is going to follow.

"Say, you're a Muslim right?"

"Yeah."

"Well, I'm Hindu. I want my reparations from the 1600's when your Emperor had our temples destroyed in India, bitch."

[jeo4]

Originally posted by loner
Oh no?? Yes slavery is the dark cloud on this nation's history, but it was America that officially abolished slavery nearly 150 years ago. Slavery is still alive today in many parts of Africa and Asia.

Black Americans are more successful here than anywhere else in the world. The black community here, when taken on it's own, is the 12th richest nation on the planet. This reparations claim is one more attempt to turn African-Americans into victims. Like most leftist policies, it sends a damaging and offensive message to the black community.


Excellent response.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
"Say, you're a Muslim right?"

"Yeah."

"Well, I'm Hindu. I want my reparations from the 1600's when your Emperor had our temples destroyed in India, bitch."

LOL!!

[jeo4]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
I'm not trying to sound anti-religious here, but there isn't enough gold in the fuggin Yucatan to pay reparations to all of the peoples that have been oppressed by the Catholics and(or) Protestants.

Slavery and oppression has occurred since the dawn of time. The only reasonable cure is through proper education and equality toward all human beings.

If United States pays out reparations, every other culture and civilization is going to follow.

"Say, you're a Muslim right?"

"Yeah."

"Well, I'm Hindu. I want my reparations from the 1600's when your Emperor had our temples destroyed in India, bitch."

Again, excellent response. And this applies to all nations, not just America. It reflects a bloody world history that no amount of money or land can compensate for reasonably. Education and government reform are the best compensation for a troubled history. And that goes for all nations, not just America. Why we are getting picked at for past behavior when there are dozens of nations on this planet that still abuse minorities is beyond me.

[Morgana]

It's not going to happen, I don't see it happening. I certainly wouldn't want to get penalized for something that happened hundreds of years ago, I've only immigrated to this country in 1981. If anything, I should be getting money from the communists because they forced my family to escape from what is now the Czech republic. Where's my money? I want my reparation money from the commies, dammit! ;)

[quoth_the_raven]

It won't get past the floodgates argument...I can't see a claim of this magnitude being accepted...it would set a mammoth precedent.

Plus, the case has also been extended to cover Lloyd's of London who provided the insurance underwriting service to cover the boats used to transport the slaves across. Thats it taken it much too far...it almost seems like bringing a suit against them, had they done the same for the planes used in 9/11. It takes it a step too far and starts looking to place liability on people who were only marginally involved, people who shouldn't carry any liability IMO.

Money for nothing eh?

[SLAW]

Originally posted by loner
Oh no?? Yes slavery is the dark cloud on this nation's history, but it was America that officially abolished slavery nearly 150 years ago. Slavery is still alive today in many parts of Africa and Asia.

Black Americans are more successful here than anywhere else in the world. The black community here, when taken on it's own, is the 12th richest nation on the planet. This reparations claim is one more attempt to turn African-Americans into victims. Like most leftist policies, it sends a damaging and offensive message to the black community.

Right, exactly my point.

[Ultrahumanite]

Originally posted by bmain77
I think it should have been done at the time. It does disgust me how little was actually done then. But now its just going to make current race relations even worse.

You know, more was done back then than had been done in any other country. Of all the countries around the world that practiced slavery (which is to say, nearly all of them), the USA is the ONLY country where potential slaveowners banded together to put an end to slavery. No other country had that.

Reparations for slavery. Give me a break.

Or I'll tell you what. If you can get reparations from the French and the British first, maybe then I'll consider it.

[bmain77]

I don't know how anyone can argue against freed slaves being compensated more than what they were after the Civil War. There was a very short period where some changes were made and a few educated blacks made great advancements. But it wasn't too long into Reconstruction before the same southern former slave owning rednecks came back into power and very little changed and things reverted.

I mean come on when you consider that not even 40 years ago white only lunch counters and drinking fountains still existed. Some of you are almost sounding as if Africans Americans should consider themselves lucky for the treatment they recieved. Give me a break.

[The Postmaster General]

I just don't see what the problem is with giving people free shit.


Fuck, we're building a whole new country for Iraq, and I don't even know those people.

I mean, the guy living two doors down needs a new roof for rainy season, and he's black. He works his ass off in the Wal Mart auto shop too. I'd be proud to know my tax dollars helped him out. I really don't care if he deserves it or not. Wal-Mart gets my tax dollars, and they still won't pay my neighbor the national average.

I deserved to be pulled over that one time I ran a stop light in a predominately black neighborhood (in plain sight of a cop) -- and I still feel the cop didn't pull me over because I was white, and looking clean cut. He even started to pull me over and then decided not to as he was passing to pull in front of me. Hmmm.... Blacks don't deserve to be profiled by the police. My co-worker was pulled over in the same area for going 3 miles over the limit -- and he's black. To me, running a stop sign is a far more dangerous offense. So don't even start talking about deserve.

http://www.oscars.org/press/pressreleases/images/030922.jpg

"Deserve ain't got nothing to do with it."



and PS - If anyone thinks I am blind about race relations with the police, or am talking out of my ass -- just do a search on Saint Petersberg, 1996, which I was stuck in during a race riot.

And I still think they should get free shit.

[Ultrahumanite]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I mean, the guy living two doors down needs a new roof for rainy season, and he's black. He works his ass off in the Wal Mart auto shop too. I'd be proud to know my tax dollars helped him out. I really don't care if he deserves it or not.

Hmmmm. You're willing to let your tax dollars get the guy a new roof, but you're not willing to go over there and help him put a roof up, or buy him some supplies to put the roof on. I see.

Which do you think he'd appreciate more -- that fact that you'd be willing to let your tax dollars go for a new roof for him, if it ever happens; or the fact that you came over with hammer and nails and helped him get his roof fixed?

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Ultrahumanite
Hmmmm. You're willing to let your tax dollars get the guy a new roof, but you're not willing to go over there and help him put a roof up, or buy him some supplies to put the roof on. I see.

Which do you think he'd appreciate more -- that fact that you'd be willing to let your tax dollars go for a new roof for him, if it ever happens; or the fact that you came over with hammer and nails and helped him get his roof fixed?



Oh, now your want to share sunshine all of a sudden.

What makes you assume I'm not willing to help him? Is it because that's the type of person you are, and you assume others are the same? I don't think you know my situation well enough to jump to a conclusion like that. From the fact that he actually has a key to my garage, and free reign of my tools - to me carpooling him to work three times a week and taking his kid to Busch Gardens so he could take his wife out to the beach, you probably shouldn't pass judgement in order to further your political stance.

And really none of it has anything to do with the fact that I'd rather know that he is getting my tax dollars, and Wal Mart isn't. Of course it sounds good to try and skim the topic and make it sound like values and ethics are the issue -- unless of course there is no question of a set of values and ethics, as is my case.

So this qustion you ask is pretty much without basis, since my neighbor can have it both ways. I help him, and also would be happy to see him get tax money. Do you actually think he would be unhappy to get a check? You make it sound like you do, which is funny, because I'm not sure if you know my neighbor or not.

You all act like you refuse things because you don't think you really need them. Give me a break. When was the last time any of you have turned something down because "You didn't deserve it."

I really don't see the difference. My taxes are paid, I should have an opinion on where I'd like the money to go. At least I have a reason that makes more sense than "Oh people don't want money, because it just makes them feel helpless." That's some major bullshit. Yes, the policies for welfare and other subsidies can create a closed cycle, but that is hardly the fault of the recipients. At least last time I checked Mama Jib on welfare isn't making government policy.

Get over it and stop with the "Victim" talk -- because it's not about trying to empower anyone. It's about money, plain and simple. Why doesn't anyone see that? It's all about wanting to save money by not giving "hand outs". Okay, fine -- I say if we are going to stop with hand outs, we should first stop with the actual hand outs we do give -- and when the question of whether a group of INDIVIDUAL people should have the money. That sounds fine too -- We seemed to have been able to afford it to pay the companies. Hell, I'd want something for nothing -- I doubt many people wouldn't.

It's the Golden Rule -- The Christian Motto, people. Really, would you turn down tax money? I pay taxes and happily took my $500 marriage refund, although I never understood why I deserved it.

So, okay -- Why don't you focus on that, instead of fantasizing about what I don't do with my neighbor??

Why is it okay for married people to get extra money back, but not okay for blacks to get extra money back? It just seems selfish to actually fight and argue in order to prevent people from having. What's the point? Hell, it's harder to be black than married - even to some of the wives I've seen out there.

[Ultrahumanite]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
What makes you assume I'm not willing to help him?

The fact you're willing to use my money to do it and not your own. If you suited action to words, you wouldn't be telling us about how he needs tax money to get his roof fixed. The roof would be fixed.

And really none of it has anything to do with the fact that I'd rather know that he is getting my tax dollars, and Wal Mart isn't.

Actually, I'd rather that neither of them were getting my tax dollars.

Do you actually think he would be unhappy to get a check?

Beats me. I was raised not to want to take what other people have earned. I wish the government felt the same way.

You all act like you refuse things because you don't think you really need them. Give me a break. When was the last time any of you have turned something down because "You didn't deserve it."

Again, that goes back to my upbringing. I was raised to earn what I want. To take nothing I didn't earn. And to not take the things that others have earned for themselves. Then again, I was raised by my grandparents, so that may be the difference.

Get over it and stop with the "Victim" talk -- because it's not about trying to empower anyone. It's about money, plain and simple. Why doesn't anyone see that? It's all about wanting to save money by not giving "hand outs".

You want to save money? Okay. Eliminate the income tax system, which takes money directly from people's paychecks, and return to a system of trade tarriffs. Then everybody has full power over their money again.

a group of INDIVIDUAL people

Contradiction in terms.

Why is it okay for married people to get extra money back, but not okay for blacks to get extra money back?

You're missing the point. It's not okay to take the money in the first place. Never mind about 'who gets it back'. The government's job is not to distribute wealth.

[The Postmaster General]

Shit, Ultrahumanite. I agree on all points. Oddly enough, I was partially raised by my Grandparents.....

Let me touch on a couple of things....



The fact you're willing to use my money to do it and not your own. If you suited action to words, you wouldn't be telling us about how he needs tax money to get his roof fixed. The roof would be fixed.

Actually I never said he "needed" tax money, especially not anymore than you or I need it.

I come from the position of "Why the hell not?" I'm not really getting any breaks, well, the marriage refund kicks ass, but other than that -- If I'm not getting it, I have no problem with someone else.

My point is, we all need money - that's fact. I just have no problem with people getting money. If my money is going to corps anyway, I really don't care who it goes to.

I think this is where it's fair for you to call me a bleeding heart liberal. :)




Group of individuals = Contradiction in terms.


Meant to read as "specific" people. I was trying to pound that out while on my lunch break. Oops.




You're missing the point. It's not okay to take the money in the first place. Never mind about 'who gets it back'. The government's job is not to distribute wealth.


Damn - We are pretty much nailing those definitions of conservative and liberal right on the wall.

What blows me away, though, is to see the common threads.

- Both of us agree that Wal-Mart should not get tax breaks.

- We agree the income tax system sucks

- I think we both agree that people think money solves problems, when it doesn't.



This is slightly off-topic, but I think it fits more with where you are coming from in regards to the reparations. My stand of reparations is that I imagine it would make others happy, and that's okay with me, regardless of if they need it or not. However, I can also see how that would embitter others.

Let me assure you, I feel that no one getting "hand outs" from the government can directly help them -- It can provide opportunities, but it can also provide free beer.

Do you have a problem with programs that assist such people -- if the program is funded by the government.

I think those are the people you are really focused on -- those who are in poverty, and need to gain an education, trade, or whatever to escape that poverty -- That's not quite my neighbor. He actually outearns me, but has kids, and two ex-wives. His problem, yes, but I don't think my neighbor fits the same impoverished culture that normally gets these hand-outs.

I have a bigger problem with the welfare system than the possibility of reparations.

[SLAW]

Why are people afraid of taxes? I am happy to pay taxes to a great country that gives me freedom and the right to say whatever the hell I want. I'm sure they have their reasons.

[Lynn7]

The thing is that the government is a big cold bureacratic giant who might dole out dollars but often makes things worse all the way around. isee Ultrahumanite's point that personal compassion goes a great deal further than a government handout. Some of my church friends will go to extraordinary lengths to bring the people home cooked meals, temporarily shelter people under their own roofs and babysit as needed. Many in our community take turns making meals for the rescue Mission and delivering them personally to meet and greet the guys.

Bubba- your heart is in the right place and you want to help people but IMO gov inadvertantly makes things worse. The handouts give people a feeling of resentment and entitlement and of low self worth. if someone is going thru a hard financial time then I am all for welfare as long as it doesn't become a way of life.

A lot of those welfare rules started the breakup of families- if you got married your checks were smaller. That made it easier to break up relationships and families. a lot of the kids began to get to be delinquents becasue their family lives were in such turmoil-Dad's out of the picture while Mom's new boyfriends come and go. It all started with the best of intentions but has failed miserably.

Companies have the right to make profits. Many see them as evil but many are leaving the country becasue of excessive government restrictions and high tax rates and sky high union salaries. Much easier and cheaper to make things overseas where these harsh penalties do not exist. People keep complaining about outsourcing but it has been gov restricitions that have led so many businesses to leave. That is why Arnie Schwartz. is trying to lure businesses back to CA. The businesses pay most of the taxes and the state needs to be more helpful to them to get them to stick around. That is why the state has been in so much trouble. Too many taxes and too many anti-business policies.

I agree that reparations would be good if the people who were hurt directly were still alive but for now it is a very divisive issue becasue both the victims and the perpetrators are gone. Paying reparations makes some white people feel like they are being judged guilty for something they had nothing to do with and would never have agreed to.

[Ultrahumanite]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Actually I never said he "needed" tax money, especially not anymore than you or I need it.

That's true. I just assumed, because I'm so sick of hearing the same old arguments, like I said in response to your last post on the Bush Ad thread. It just seems that we've come to a point of, "Let the government do it," in this country, and we just keep getting our paychecks sucked dry, which means that the people we're trying to help still can't get by, and the people who should be able to get by can't because the Government's taking all their money. Maybe I just got up on the wrong side; I've been sorta grumpy all day.

My point is, we all need money - that's fact. I just have no problem with people getting money. If my money is going to corps anyway, I really don't care who it goes to.


I think this is where it's fair for you to call me a bleeding heart liberal. :)

*LOL* Admitting it is the first step on the road to recovery.... :p

Damn - We are pretty much nailing those definitions of conservative and liberal right on the wall.

What blows me away, though, is to see the common threads.

- Both of us agree that Wal-Mart should not get tax breaks.

- We agree the income tax system sucks

- I think we both agree that people think money solves problems, when it doesn't.

Well, you know, it's true, money isn't the solution to the problems we face, but it is a tool. The solution to 95% of the problems that most people face doesn't have anything to do with what we can get from others, but with what we can get from ourselves. Like that old Johnny Cash song goes, "How many times have you heard someone say / If I had his money, I could do things my way?"

I'm all for making other people happy. I feel that true conservatives really do hate seeing poor people -- we hate it so much, in fact, that we want them all to be rich. We want them to stop doing things that make them poor and start doing things that will make them rich. Really, we get more benefit from having a country full of wealthy, productive people than we do from having a class war. But they way to get there is to get everyone into the idea that personal responsibility is the key, not by taking from Peter to pay Paul. Cause when you do that, you can always count on Paul's support, but Peter gets continually screwed.

As for Wal-Mart... don't even get me started. Wal-Mart is so offensive, from shady labor practices to illegal eminent domain land grabs, that I'm sure Sam Walton is spinning in his grave at the speed of sound.

Let me assure you, I feel that no one getting "hand outs" from the government can directly help them -- It can provide opportunities, but it can also provide free beer.

*LOL* You said a mouthful there, brother!

Do you have a problem with programs that assist such people -- if the program is funded by the government?

Yeah, I do, if they are funded by the government. I think that's really what the Faith-Based Initiative was about, really -- taking some power away from the Federal Government and cutting through some of the strangling red tape.

Like it says on the White House web page:


The indispensable and transforming work of faith-based and other charitable service groups must be encouraged... We must heed the growing consensus across America that successful government social programs work in fruitful partnership with community-serving and faith-based organizations — whether run by Methodists, Muslims, Mormons, or good people of no faith at all... The paramount goal must be compassionate results, not compassionate intentions. Federal policy should reject the failed formula of towering, distant bureaucracies that too often prize process over performance. We must be outcome-based, insisting on success and steering resources to the effective and to the inspired. Also, we must always value the bedrock principles of pluralism, nondiscrimination, evenhandedness and neutrality. Private and charitable groups, including religious ones, should have the fullest opportunity permitted by law to compete on a level playing field, so long as they achieve valid public purposes, like curbing crime, conquering addiction, strengthening families, and overcoming poverty.

Giving private organizations, like churches, more power to help get folks off the government dole and back on their feet, or straightened out, or whatever. Because, you know, the church down the street can help some needy single mom with her light bill by taking up a collection from the parishoners, and not have to bother with miles of offical forms and crap like that. And it's local, closer to home, so they can meet the needs of their communities better than some guy at a desk in an office two or three hundred miles away who's got a couple of hundred cases to look at and doesn't have time to get to know the inside-out of the thing.

But if people don't have to rely on the government for assistance, then it erodes a large, dependable voting base for some politicians, and they don't want to give that power up. And people want to turn it into a huge separation of church and state issue, which really doesn't have anything to do with it.

It's a limited power thing -- the government has two essential functions: to protect us against aggressors (domestic or foreign) and to settle disputes between us. Anything else needs to be relegated to local or state government.

[The Postmaster General]

One big thing they need to do is stop holding those private organizations to such stringent standards. That is to say stop worrying about shit like if the dryer trap is laden with dust, and set higher standards that ensures the people aren't being exploited -- actually being helped, and not just maintained in a cycle of helplessness.

Several faith-based organizations are the Tampa area have been closed down due to various ordinance violations.

One food bank was closed due to health violations, and this one organization that helped people obtain ID cards got fined to closure over violating a public assembly ordanance?????

Again - government exercising too much power. These were good programs too - Well, can't speak for all, but the food bank was also setting people up with jobs, finding residence, teaching living skills, all sort of stuff.

Blah -- Of course, I'm in Florida where people have a hard time seeing what's going on in the other lane.

[Neesh]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the fact that the US made promises for reparations, at the end of the Civil War. "40 acres and a mule" isn't just the name of Spike Lee's production company. This topic has of course been discussed many times in the past, by people much smarter than me.
A teacher at Yale University had a curriculum which he outlined and titled "What About My Forty Acres & A Mule?", and you can read it here:

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1994/4/94.04.01.x.html

Personally I think reparations at this point are highly unlikely, though stranger things have happened.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Neesh
"40 acres and a mule"



Maybe this explains some black rappers' fascination with "40 ouncers" and "big asses".

[Ultrahumanite]

*LOL* YEEE -- OUCH!!

[Raymond Babbit]

Originally posted by Ultrahumanite


I'm all for making other people happy. I feel that true conservatives really do hate seeing poor people -- we hate it so much, in fact, that we want them all to be rich. We want them to stop doing things that make them poor and start doing things that will make them rich.


But that's making the assumption that all poor people deserve to be poor and all rich people deserve to be rich. That just isn't true. Many rich people are born into the money, and therefore less deserving of it than people who worked for it. And I don't think it's fair to make genralizations about all poor people when you don't know each individual's specific situation.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Raymond Babbit
And I don't think it's fair to make genralizations about all poor people when you don't know each individual's specific situation.




Yeah - that's what I was getting at. I don't want the bad apples spoiling it for those who could realy use the money and do something with it.

If a poor person could walk into a bank, and get a small business loan, that would be great, but it just won't happen.

The problem with the system isn't the system it is the way people have figured out they can screw the system I've seen people not get jobs to keep their social security supliments, or , and I thought that was sucky, but I've seen other people do the something similar, and because of their situation, it made perfect sense. One situation involved a dude with really severe schizophrenia who was trying to go to school. The other was my friend who quit his job because he just didn't feel like working there, and once he was unemployed, he realized there was more time to kick back.

Heh - It's pretty obvious that in one situation, the government subsidy is helping, and in the other it is just hurting the tax payers.

In other words, I don't think that we should let my lazy friend screw it up for my smart crazy friend, who tend to have a genuinely difficult time getting work.

And that's something people overlook when they bitch about government handouts -- those handouts include money for veterns and the handicaped.

Ultrahumanite mentioned why we don't physically help others, and I think that is all groovy -- but the problem is we don't physically help others, not that others aren't being helped. If people aren't threatened with jail time for not paying taxes, few would pay them. It's stupid that we have to be FORCED to help others, but that isn't the fault of the people who might be able to use the help.

Either way, the current system is too easily abused.


Sorry for not taling about reparations.... snowballed topic and all.

[SLAW]

Not enough people care, therefore the government should.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Reparations are a load of crap.

If it ever happened, I would be appalled. My parents can't get a fucking break financially and they work their asses off...but let's give every single descendent of a slave money, because they need it. Ridiculous.

[chasingbanky]

Originally posted by SLAW
Not , enough people care therefore the government should.

Last time I checked these weren't seperate entities.....Now I'm not sure I'm saying that the people are the government, but more that the Majority of people seem to be the government. That's negatvie, and positive depending on your beliefs...Personally like many people said I don't think the black community would all accept, and I also don't feel they should. If they still hate america(If they're not complaining then no discussion needed) then I think they can take them as long as they leave when they do take em. Negative on reperations

[The Postmaster General]

So, I guess you all who are against reparations think the American Indians got way more than they deserved.

[SLAW]

I'm not for reparations either. It just wouldn't work, but it would be cool if we ould just acknowledge America used to do bad things. Still does, but nobody is perfect.

[bmain77]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
So, I guess you all who are against reparations think the American Indians got way more than they deserved.

If you've lost the amount of money that i have in Indian owned casinos you might feel that way too. :D

But seriously if you had to rank the worst things our country has ever did I honestly don't know how to rank our treatment of American Indians and African AMericans. I think I'd have to rate them as a tie at the top.

But anyways what do the Indians have to complain about?


GO REDSKINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/ncf/2002/1011/photo/s_seminole_hi.jpg

[The Postmaster General]

Totally.

I think the answer is probably somewhere in between. The things no one seems to disagree with are that cutting someone a check can't change the past, and that most people wouldn't know what to do with "owed" money.

To me, I think reparations come through cases like the white minister who was found guity of hate crimes in the 50s, and other such cases.

These do much more for not just that black race, but the human race - and such injustices being rectified provide more good than any amount of money ever would.

If you want to get into money -- what about a civil suit against the KKK?

That's something people should be thinking about. An organization is an organization, and all groups should be held accountable for the actions of its members, or they should denounce those members. I have yet to hear of the KKK denouncing any of the acts its members committed in the past.

So, hopefully that's something we can talk about for awhile, because I still think this is an interesting topic that really should be discussed.