CA lawmaker warns Black residents to be 'realistic' on reparations

originally posted by: HUBE007

originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
a reply to: Maxmars

lets face it... many of them don't want the reparations for the pain of their ancestors. theyjust want them to buy the newest Gucci purse or a Cadillac Escalade with spinrims

Tasteless and pretty offensive...

The lowest common denominator of society, and I have some in my family which is not black, only wants quick handouts. Let's be painfully honest with one another here. You and I both know that whatever color the skin, the people who are like this aren't thinking about how they could use a payout like this for their long-term best interests. They see dollar signs and short-term gratification of all the things they want and can't have which is basically why they are in the economic strata they are in.

About the only thing that may differ here from cultural group to cultural group is what the short-term gratification items might be.

a reply to: carewemust

Perhaps it is true that the problem lies in the politicians' mouths and minds... but truthfully I don't think that's where the real problem is rooted. Although celebrity politicians certainly play their part.

I find the problem in the party itself... which can only be characterized in my mind as an "apparatus" driven by oligarchs, technocrats, and cabal minions. For them, the underlying truths are irrelevant, the potential outcomes are immaterial, and the exercise of Bernaysian doctrine is almost religious. It's kind of pathetic. And no political party is innocent of it.

I suppose that if we tried to be cynical we could say that there are no citizens of any nation who could not point to a time of oppression of their people and cling to it as an excuse to scream and writhe over 'injustice' and 'damages done.'

As if the past could actually be remedied with cash. Heaven help us all.

But as with all things political, it is a matter of the local community and what they want... and how political parties can "use" that... to the point of industrializing the effort to 'convince' people of what "they want" by telling the community "what they all think."

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Maxmars


Why do I Sense this Pandering to the Afro American Community there in Commiefornia is being Blatantly Overtly Racist in it's Use of Money to Cull Political Favor ?

From a certain perspective it is exactly that. Like buying votes for Walmart coupons. The funniest (and simultaneously saddest) thing is that it is the same political 'promise" wielding that we have seen again and again throughout our history - all inevitably leading to sometimes explosive disappointment... rinse, recycle, repeat.

Someone could get a degree if they ever catalogued every political promise made... and what came of them... I wonder why no one has ever done that? I suppose we can imagine why not.

originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
a reply to: Maxmars

lets face it... many of them don't want the reparations for the pain of their ancestors. theyjust want them to buy the newest Gucci purse or a Cadillac Escalade with spinrims

Perhaps many would make such plans... after all this is the reparations lotto. And people will do with their 'winnings' whatever they want to. But I would theorize that sudden massive income has the potential to also be a good thing, to be used in life affirming things like education, health, and prosperity opportunities otherwise not included in your post.

I understand the inclination to be cynical, so I am not judging you at all. Just reminding you that your are judging others you don't know.

And there is still the matter of 'easing the pain" of people who are long gone and far removed from the present. The whole proposition reeks of some manner of narcissism ...

a reply to: Antimony

Thanks for including that material to the discussion.

Insofar as what the "committee" has determined, they will always run towards everyone joining the world of the mega-wealthy. Because what else matters?

And why not? ... they've been given a theoretical 'blank check' along with blinders about the world, and it's history.

a reply to: Maxmars

When I say that, I am basing it off the experiences from my own family who lives government "pay check" to government "pay check". I am also recalling the lessons learned post-Katrina with the release of the debit cards that had a reasonable sum of money on them. The intention was for those who had lost everything to use them to replace basics and essentials, and the amount, while not huge, was enough to go quite far for a wise shopper.

But very quickly afterward, people were indeed toting around new Gucci bags and stuffing the g-strings of strippers, and the money was quickly gone and they were again left with nothing. It's these last who are likely the ones who scream loudest for this kind of largesse from nowhere. The ones who aren't looking for it are more likely to be the ones who will use it wisely if it happens.

a reply to: ketsuko

I saw that too. This first thing many did around here was to replace their 'flood' vehicles with cars they could not afford, clothes and gear that had no place in their world, and not much else. Bills got paid for a few months... then return to the same... with many repossessions peppering the communities.

But I reminded folks critical of them that it has never been proven to be different anywhere else...

And of course, this is all generalization... which can be sometimes extremely unfair.

a reply to: HUBE007

Of course Newsom should never have pulled this stunt! but once he did, media could not and should not ignore it. I'm fed up with all of their shenanigans.

They have it all backwards as usual.
Like it or not...
The only group of people that should be paid reparations are the descendants of the slave owners.
The U.S. government literally confiscated legally purchased property with no compensation.
They are the injured parties who should be made whole.
If the African slave descendants want reparations let them get it from their motherland...You know the countries that profited from thier sale.

I have to admit, I have a conceptual problem with the idea of reparations.

What exactly do they repair? How do they 'make right' an offense committed in the past?

To me the extremes of this concept are troubling, with the only 'magical' solution being a return to the past, and preventing the offense from happening... which is the stuff of fantasy, of course. But what would that as a 'best target' mean in terms of what reparations should approximate. We "can't ever un-ring a bell," as a friend of mine said recently... slaves have existed everywhere for most of human history (including today) a "real" problem that I feel no reparations will address - ever.

Personally, I maintain that until there are no slaves in the world anywhere, reparations are a non-issue... it's politicization is a practice of hypocrisy, and a grossly decadent distraction from the real crime, as slavery is now just as prosperous and practiced right before our eyes.

a reply to: Maxmars

It would be one thing if we were talking about actual payments made direct to people who were actually enslaved, but we aren't. When the argument is made, the Japanese internment reparations are often brought, but those payments were made directly to the injured parties, not their descendants of generations.

And, of course, CRT is in part an outgrowth of the justification needed to try to to stretch to keep this whole house of cards alive.

I had a thought here. If the descendants of the former slaves are owed reparations then I would have to ask the flip side of the question. What about the reparations to the former slave owners? Those former slaves were valuable commodities back in the 1860s. At roughly $1300 for adult females and $1500 for adult males in 1860 dollars. An 1860 dollar is worth $35.55 in 2023 dollars so then a $1500 slave is worth $54,825 roughly. Then add the interest earned for 158 years. So I'm guessing 2 or 3 million dollars a head at this point.

So as a descendent of a owner of slaves then I want my former slaves to reimburse me for the losses my family incurred in 1865 for freeing them.

Pay up guys.

a reply to: ntech

Should we also reimburse drug lords for destroying their income when we stop their trafficking? Should we pay pimps for depriving them of subject prostitutes? Should we offer compensation to the jailed abusers of confidence and trust? Should we replace the items we deprived thieves of by restoring what they stole to their original owners? Should the family members or children of murderers ALSO be executed, jailed, or pay in perpetuity for their kin's crime?

I find these ideas in line with what you are suggesting.

And it still doesn't speak to the fact that these "reparations" actually "repair" nothing to those actually injured... it only speaks to the egos of those who wish the injury to live in eternity for the sake of "you should pity me and bear eternal shame" ... even after the perpetrators (and victims) are long dead.

a reply to: Maxmars

Just playing devil's advocate here. Technically if they want to flip over that rock those that want reparations need to realize the can of worms they're opening. The descendants of former slaves want millions but the flip side of the argument is that they owe millions. Any reparations here need to be given first to the descendants of the former slave owners.

Simply put the former slave owners were robbed. Their property was stolen from them by government fiat. If any reparations are paid they should be first on the reparations list.

AMENDMENT V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Technically the freeing of the slaves was an unlawful taking. The civil rights of the slave owners were violated.

Truthfully, right now, the only people in the US who ought to be able to claim any reparations from the government are the ones who lost from COVID. Business owners who lost everything over the shutdowns, for example. I think they ought to have a valid case for reparations from the government that forcibly kept them out of business and put them out of business.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: carewemust


Considering how much money flows through California as of right now, I think they will be just fine.
For now that is.
Fun fact, if California was a sovereign nation, in 2022 they would have had the worlds fifth largest economy.

With no means to protect it.

originally posted by: ntech
a reply to: Maxmars

Just playing devil's advocate here. Technically if they want to flip over that rock those that want reparations need to realize the can of worms they're opening. The descendants of former slaves want millions but the flip side of the argument is that they owe millions. Any reparations here need to be given first to the descendants of the former slave owners.

Simply put the former slave owners were robbed. Their property was stolen from them by government fiat. If any reparations are paid they should be first on the reparations list.

AMENDMENT V

...

Here's a wrinkle in that line of reasoning... those slave owners declared themselves to be no longer citizens of the United States and thus were not protected by it's constitution. As a foreign power, at war with the United States all those clinging to those particular "property rights" were actually enemies of the state... and the matter at hand was one of support to the hostile foreign war effort.

Thanks, General Butler!

a reply to: Maxmars

Was there trials? If not then I reference you back to Amendment 5. No seizure of properties without recompense.

Congress sidestepped this entire process with the Emancipation Clause of the 14th Amendment. Made reparations over the entire issue void.

But I would reiterate this though. If the former slaves get reparations then the former slave owners have first dibs on the money.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: carewemust


Considering how much money flows through California as of right now, I think they will be just fine.
For now that is.
Fun fact, if California was a sovereign nation, in 2022 they would have had the worlds fifth largest economy.

makes you wonder where all that money went.

originally posted by: ntech
a reply to: Maxmars

Was there trials? If not then I reference you back to Amendment 5. No seizure of properties without recompense.
...

With few and specific exceptions our legal system does not extend it's jurisdictional services to foreign citizens, which southern slaveholders claimed to be. This is the risk faced when secessionists think they can walk away from the system and still be protected by it.

The moment you cease to be a citizen of the US is the moment you lose recourse to its constitutional protections.

As a 'foreign nation' engaged in open warfare with the US any and all assets that serve that effort are fair game for seizure... with slavery abolished in the US you cannot be a citizen AND hold slaves... their so-called "loss" is their own to bear... a bad investment, with a negative return.