Reparations: Let's have a serious talk.

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Like ticket prices for concerts.

lol. The legitimate factor that dare not speak its name.

Lol oh it's far worse than that....

I've actually read an essay and two studies that actually attempt to estimate the wealth lost to descendants of slavery (had slavery not existed in law and those "slaves" had been considered equal citizens and paid employees)....for the purposes of reparations. It's always interesting to me....no matter how wildly inflated those estimates are (I think one was in the hundreds of trillions) or how many factors one includes to try to get a truly objective estimate (which is clearly impossible....but still fun).

There's always one glaring factor that's conspicuously ignored though, and I suspect the reasons are solely about prioritizing sensitivity over objectivity.

That's why I never bring it up....but if you really want to know, just pm me and I'll explain. I'm sure you can handle it.


Don't think you have anything to worry about on that score Ana.

Lol I really don't....you have to respect someone's opinion of you before it can hurt you.

I was just trying to think of what someone who still feels guilt or shame would say....

But there's no foolin you ;-)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tanj
Upvote 0

LostMarbels

All-Lives-Matter
Jun 18, 2011
11,954
3,864
48
Orlando Fl
✟173,798.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Demanding that any reparations must perfectly calculate such things or not be done at all isn’t practical. Civilization would never have developed if we waited for laws, solutions, systems, and strategies to be perfect before enacting them.

That makes literally no sense at all. 'We don't actualy need to understand the perceived wrongs or injury done, you just need to make amends for them anyways. Well, as long as your white that is.'
 
  • Agree
Reactions: archarios
Upvote 0

Sparagmos

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
8,632
7,319
52
Portland, Oregon
✟278,062.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That makes literally no sense at all. 'We don't actualy need to understand the perceived wrongs or injury done, you just need to make amends for them anyways. Well, as long as your white that is.'
Yes it’s clear that you did not understand my post, if that’s what you think it meant.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cow451
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Yeah, before addressing the white people and the slaves they brought here, the original inhabitants may need some fair consideration.
For what? For doing to them what they had been doing to each other for centuries?....taking land from each other, attacking other native peoples because "that's what they do"?
 
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
That's interesting. So I am black according to the "one-drop rule"? Would this apply to Native American ancestry as well?
I think many Americans can claim NA ancestry; that means I can get in line also.....maybe this reparations thing ain't such a bad idea after all.......:ebil:
 
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
What was the implied promise to newly freed slaves after the Civil War? Maybe it is time to fulfill that promise:
"FORTY ACRES AND A MULE"
"FORTY ACRES AND A MULE," a phrase echoed throughout the South in the aftermath of the Civil War, asserting the right of newly freed African Americans to redistributed lands—particularly those plantations confiscated by U.S. troops during the war—as compensation for unpaid labor during slavery. Many historians trace the phrase to General William T. Sherman's Special Field Order Number 15, issued on 16 January 1865, which set aside a thirty-mile tract of land along the South Carolina and Georgia coasts for former slaves and promised the army's help securing loaned mules. In addition, the Freed-men's Bureau initially was authorized to divide abandoned and confiscated lands into forty-acre tracts for rental and eventual sale to refugees and former slaves. Despite the efforts of Radical Republicans during the Reconstruction period, however, significant land redistribution measures ultimately were abandoned, and virtually all southern lands were returned to white owners. The resulting sharecropping system left the social and economic structures of slavery essentially intact in the South.
More here:
Forty Acres and a Mule | Encyclopedia.com
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,028
23,941
Baltimore
✟551,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
If it's not a cash payout, what is it?

I would prefer to see something along the lines of traditional economic development, but on a much larger scale - this could involve sizeable investments in infrastructure, public education, job training, addiction and mental health treatment, medical care, and arts & entertainment. In struggling communities, many of these things have been left to wither, and attempts to address them are often marginal at best.

What are you targeting in your target areas?

Poverty, neglect, and lack of opportunity.

Also, how do you deal with poor black people unlucky enough to live outside your target area?

That's a good question. We can mitigate some of that by targeting a lot of areas. But that still won't help everybody.

Part of our problem is geography - economic growth is centered in urban areas, while many rural areas are dying out and have no foreseeable ways of bouncing back. I've thought for a while that we should do something to better enable people to relocate to where the jobs are, but that won't help the people who remain. I don't know what the solution to this is.


But affirmative action was supposed to do that already. Are you suggesting that it hasn't worked enough?

No, affirmative action wasn't supposed to do that. AA doesn't create jobs or train people for them. It doesn't bring new investment into an area. All it does it take black people who are already qualified for a position and give them a slight advantage intended to counteract the bias that could otherwise be levied against their skin color.

You remember what redlining is....so surely you remember the housing market collapse in 2008 that can be traced back to housing market policies intended to provide more housing opportunities to who?

I've never seen any credible analysis that supports the claim that the CRA was a big factor in the housing crisis. All the ones I've seen that make that claim do little more than make a tenuous association between the CRA and general practices of lowered standards for credit-worthiness. In reality, most subprime loans were not issued under CRA programs and those that were performed nearly as well as regular prime loans. It was other, non-CRA subprime loans that were the problem. But even then, none of that would've been nearly the big deal it was if the loans hadn't been bundled into overvalued securities and then used as collateral by over-leveraged financial institutions. It was the poor valuation and over-leveraging that crashed the financial system.

FRB: FEDS Notes: Assessing the Community Reinvestment Act's Role in the Financial Crisis
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,643.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
You remember what redlining is....so surely you remember the housing market collapse in 2008 that can be traced back to housing market policies intended to provide more housing opportunities to who?

Low income families. This wasn't back in the dark ages....we're talking about the Bush administration.

I'm all for market regulation, but I've lost confidence in the government's ability to price homes for the poor. We did that barely more than 10 years ago and the results were arguably as devastating for minorities as decades of redlining.

I was under the impression it was due to a market bubble created by shoddily constructed high risk loans that were bundled into market vehicles claiming low risk?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
It seems everything is being targeted to areas of 'poverty' and 'poor' blacks blaming slavery for their current conditions. What about middle and wealthy class blacks? If reparations are really about the effects of slavery should they not also be included even though these 2 groups don't necessarily reflect those effects? If they are excluded or receive only minimal consideration does reparations simply get reduced to another wealth transfer program which never seems to accomplish the intended goal.
But maybe we are putting the cart before the horse here. What is the real purpose of reparations? Is it to pay for labor, loss of freedom, maltreatment, etc to a specific group who was held in bondage? Or is this a wealth transfer program with special considerations, opportunities, and privileges to a group who never personally experienced the situation the reparations are intended to compensate? Something to think about......
 
Upvote 0

cow451

Standing with Ukraine.
Supporter
May 29, 2012
41,108
24,128
Hot and Humid
✟1,120,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There are areas with study like education, healthcare, etc. where conservatives are often loathe to invest. An example would be the recent move to change the mandatory drug offense guidelines that clearly focused on minorities.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
I was under the impression it was due to a market bubble created by shoddily constructed high risk loans that were bundled into market vehicles claiming low risk?
@Ana the Ist is correct. The federal government forced lenders to offer loans to people who would normally not be eligible. Those loans were then bundled with 'good' loans and sold; when the bad loans went belly up they dragged down the investors who bought them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bèlla
Upvote 0

cow451

Standing with Ukraine.
Supporter
May 29, 2012
41,108
24,128
Hot and Humid
✟1,120,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
@Ana the Ist is correct. The federal government forced lenders to offer loans to people who would normally not be eligible. Those loans were then bundled with 'good' loans and sold; when the bad loans went belly up they dragged down the investors who bought them.
The federal government did not force anything.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,028
23,941
Baltimore
✟551,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It seems everything is being targeted to areas of 'poverty' and 'poor' blacks blaming slavery for their current conditions. What about middle and wealthy class blacks? If reparations are really about the effects of slavery should they not also be included even though these 2 groups don't necessarily reflect those effects? If they are excluded or receive only minimal consideration does reparations simply get reduced to another wealth transfer program which never seems to accomplish the intended goal.
But maybe we are putting the cart before the horse here. What is the real purpose of reparations? Is it to pay for labor, loss of freedom, maltreatment, etc to a specific group who was held in bondage? Or is this a wealth transfer program with special considerations, opportunities, and privileges to a group who never personally experienced the situation the reparations are intended to compensate? Something to think about......

Reparations aren't only about slavery; they're also about Jim Crow. One of the big effects of Jim Crow was pushing blacks into poverty en masse. While one could argue that those who've managed to escape poverty still, in some way, deserve reparations, they obviously need the help less than others do.

@Ana the Ist is correct. The federal government forced lenders to offer loans to people who would normally not be eligible. Those loans were then bundled with 'good' loans and sold; when the bad loans went belly up they dragged down the investors who bought them.

That is absolutely not correct. The feds didn't force anybody to do anything, and the investors would've been fine if the loans had been properly valued/rated - which they weren't because of the twisted incentives in the rating process.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
The federal government did not force anything.
The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private "government-sponsored enterprises" (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled "too-big-to-fail" financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.
Clinton's Legacy: The Financial and Housing Meltdown
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
20,482
17,644
USA
✟933,652.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
@Ana the Ist is correct. The federal government forced lenders to offer loans to people who would normally not be eligible. Those loans were then bundled with 'good' loans and sold; when the bad loans went belly up they dragged down the investors who bought them.

I worked in the mortgage industry during the boom. Most of the borrowers lacked the financial resources to afford the loan. Many were overextended and didn’t have a safety net in place to shield them if problems occurred.

Add in the variable rates, subprime loans, and many who received first and second mortgages on the property. And we haven’t touched on upkeep, utilities and taxes. They were stretched to the limit. It was bound to fail.
 
Upvote 0

carlv_52

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2019
487
458
56
Washington
✟17,804.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
In Relationship
There are areas with study like education, healthcare, etc. where conservatives are often loathe to invest. An example would be the recent move to change the mandatory drug offense guidelines that clearly focused on minorities.

Excellent read: "The New Jim Crow" which talks about the development of our current incarceration state as a follow on to the old means of control of minorities (slavery and Jim Crow).

It's pretty sobering to see how our justice system is stacked against one particular group.
 
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,586
7,102
✟606,326.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
That is absolutely not correct. The feds didn't force anybody to do anything, and the investors would've been fine if the loans had been properly valued/rated - which they weren't because of the twisted incentives in the rating process.
See above reply to cow451......
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,997
Seattle
✟895,643.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
@Ana the Ist is correct. The federal government forced lenders to offer loans to people who would normally not be eligible. Those loans were then bundled with 'good' loans and sold; when the bad loans went belly up they dragged down the investors who bought them.

According to whom?
 
Upvote 0