San Francisco board open to reparations with $5M payouts

[+OverSword]

Quote

 

Payments of $5 million to every eligible Black adult, the elimination of personal debt and tax burdens, guaranteed annual incomes of at least $97,000 for 250 years and homes in San Francisco for just $1 a family.

These were some of the more than 100 recommendations made by a city-appointed reparations committee tasked with the thorny question of how to atone for centuries of slavery and systemic racism. And the San Francisco Board of Supervisors hearing the report for the first time Tuesday voiced enthusiastic support for the ideas listed, with some saying money should not stop the city from doing the right thing.

 

Link

[glorybebe]

And where is the money coming from?  The banks are in trouble, do they want a bankrupt country?  Why should people who immigrated to the US AFTER the slave trade be accountable for these reparations?  Same goes for the POC who immigrated AFTER the Civil War, why would they get any reparations?

The native population are the ones who deserve reparations IMO, the atrocities that were committed against them on their land were horrific. 

[+Desertrat56]

34 minutes ago, glorybebe said:

And where is the money coming from?  The banks are in trouble, do they want a bankrupt country?  Why should people who immigrated to the US AFTER the slave trade be accountable for these reparations?  Same goes for the POC who immigrated AFTER the Civil War, why would they get any reparations?

The native population are the ones who deserve reparations IMO, the atrocities that were committed against them on their land were horrific. 

I have to say that some of my ancestors were colonists/invaders and some did own slaves before 1840, but I didn't and I don't think this long after it even makes sense for reparations.   On the other side of my family some were brought to this country as indentured servants and slaves and because my skin is white (yes White people were stolen and made slaves in the U.S. and the caribean islands) so I don't get reparation?   I don't want it anyway but the whole concept is idiotic AND racist AND does not solve any current problems for anyone.  Like you pointed out, where is the money coming from?  I would question any one of african ancestry who says they want this as it indicates a desire to  not take responsibility.   You can't pay someone for the pain and suffering their great great grandfather went through.

Unless!  Unless we are also going to give reparations to all the people who lost relatives in the concentration camps (both japanese in the U.S. and germans & polish in germany and poland)  A lot of those people in the japanese concentration camps were from California, born and raise, some more than 2 generations by WW2

P.S. and the natives all over the americas (I saw you mentioned them and I agree with that, though there is a small attempt at reparations for them, quite complicated)

Edited March 15 by Desertrat56

[+OverSword]

Most of this stuff seems undoable. $5 million payment along with $97k per year for 250 years and $1 homes in the second most expensive housing market in the nation, the elimination of all debt and tax burdens along with 100 other recommendations that weren't in the article.  All of this during a downturn in the tech industry which is the financial backbone of San Francisco.  San Francisco a city in a state that never had slavery.  The people in government in SF are nuts.

[+Desertrat56]

9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Most of this stuff seems undoable. $5 million payment along with $97k per year for 250 years and $1 homes in the second most expensive housing market in the nation, the elimination of all debt and tax burdens along with 100 other recommendations that weren't in the article.  All of this during a downturn in the tech industry which is the financial backbone of San Francisco.  San Francisco a city in a state that never had slavery.  The people in government in SF are nuts.

I beg your pardon, California did have slaves, they were natives and asian, not african, but they Were Slaves none the less. And it was the spanish who enslaved the natives in that area.  So maybe we can add that to the list, Spain and the Pope need to give reparations to the natives and the rail roads need to give reparations tot he asian slaves families (mostly chinese) who were brought over to build the rail roads.   

The biggest problem I see here is that someone does not know enough U.S. history.

Edited March 15 by Desertrat56

[glorybebe]

Well, there are people who will keep pushing.  And you are right, just because you are white does not mean you couldn't be treated at lesser.  My daughter's grandad came to Canada back in the 60s  there were signs No Irish, No Black's, No Dogs.   So, that points out right there it was not just the blacks who had a hard time.  It is in the past to make a better future, we need yo work in the present by letting go if all this hate and angst.  We need to stand together as the Human Race, otherwise I just see us destroying ourselves

[+OverSword]

19 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I beg your pardon, California did have slaves, they were natives and asian, not african, but they Were Slaves none the less. And it was the spanish who enslaved the natives in that area.  So maybe we can add that to the list, Spain and the Pope need to give reparations to the natives and the rail roads need to give reparations tot he asian slaves families (mostly chinese) who were brought over to build the rail roads.   

The biggest problem I see here is that someone does not know enough U.S. history.

They did not have any legal slaves as a state in the union.  The natives enslaved each other left and right long before Europeans were here though.

Edited March 15 by OverSword

[+Desertrat56]

4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

They did not have any legal slaves as a state in the union.

Some little comfort that is, allows someone to feel superior that they got away with lying to the government?   Slavery is still slavery whether it is government sanctioned or not.   

California became a state in 1850.   The railroads were still using chinese slaves until the Chinese exclusion act of 1882.   

[Piney]

51 minutes ago, OverSword said:

They did not have any legal slaves as a state in the union.  The natives enslaved each other left and right long before Europeans were here though.

Most California tribes were gatherers and had no use for slaves but the Americans just indiscriminately slaughtered them during the Gold Rush. 

Earlier the Spanish had enslaved them there. 

 

[+Desertrat56]

If one group gets reparations, then all of the groups need it, and that is my point, it is idiotic because you can't leave any one out and feel justified. This idea of reparations seems like a way to perpetuate, not alleviate, racism.   We need to quit living in the past and we also need to teach better history (not better as in ignore the bad stuff, but report it accurately, instead of leaving big chunks of history out)

P.S. Custer died for your sins.

Edited March 15 by Desertrat56

[+Liquid Gardens]

11 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

We need to quit living in the past

Isn't this a much easier thing to say from our (white) perspective though, since most of us were not disproportionately affected by 'the past' governments today?  I'm all for reparations for native Americans and Japanese-Americans who were imprisoned in WWII if they have not been already.

1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

Like you pointed out, where is the money coming from?

From the same place that the money came for the two wars we fought against 'terror'?  'Where is the money coming from' never ever seems to be a problem when war is why they need money, wouldn't it be nice for a change if instead they gave it to citizens?  Even if I disagreed with reparations as a concept I'd still rather money get 'wasted' on people in the population as opposed to wasting it on destroying foreign countries and people.

[el midgetron]

Slavery existed universally for all of human history, No countries did more to end the practice of slavery than the United States and Britain. The reparations for what happened to peoples ancestors, is the freedom those people enjoy today. 

12 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

…..we also need to teach better history (not better as in ignore the bad stuff, but report it accurately, instead of leaving big chunks of history out)

I agree with most of your post. But this idea that we are not teaching history or ignoring the bad stuff just depends on what bad stuff you want people to know. To me, the suggestion seems to carry a specific politic motive. The unfortunate reality it’s there just isn’t time to teach the complete and total history of human cruelty or injustices. I learned about slavery and what happened to the Native cultures in public school. However, it wasn’t until I was well into my adult years that I that I learned that the Native Americans who were forced to relocate via the Trail of Tears dragged along their African slaves with them. 

[+Desertrat56]

10 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Isn't this a much easier thing to say from our (white) perspective though, since most of us were not disproportionately affected by 'the past' governments today?  I'm all for reparations for native Americans and Japanese-Americans who were imprisoned in WWII if they have not been already.

A lot of the people are still alive that were in those internment camps, they were children during WW2, and monetary reparations at this point is not going to repair anything even for them.  I was using those as examples of the huge number of people who are not being included in the racist idea that we should give reparations to people whose ancestors were slaves brought from africa.   The whole thing is just a way to keep the racism going and solves nothing.   

[+Desertrat56]

@Liquid Gardens you are delusional if you think being white makes it easier than other people to quit living in the past.   Do you think being white makes you special?  It doesn't.   Do you know anything about your ancestors and tribulations they may have lived through.   Even the english had trauma with WW2.  Maybe living in the U.S. makes you think it is different, but people are people and everyone needs to quit living in the past.  The whole idea of reparation for something some white ancestors did to some black ancestors is questionable at the very least.   Not to mention not all the slave owners were of european/british descent and not all the slaves were of african descent.   That is the biggest flaw in the whole thing.  Another way to keep the country divided.

Edited March 15 by Desertrat56

[Piney]

16 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

Slavery existed universally for all of human history, No countries did more to end the practice of slavery than the United States and Britain. The reparations for what happened to peoples ancestors, is the freedom those people enjoy today. 

I agree with most of your post. But this idea that we are not teaching history or ignoring the bad stuff just depends on what bad stuff you want people to know. To me, the suggestion seems to carry a specific politic motive. The unfortunate reality it’s there just isn’t time to teach the complete and total history of human cruelty or injustices. I learned about slavery and what happened to the Native cultures in public school. However, it wasn’t until I was well into my adult years that I that I learned that the Native Americans who were forced to relocate via the Trail of Tears dragged along their African slaves with them. 

What's worse is the CNO (Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma) under Chief Chad Smith tried to disenroll their Freeman population so they couldn't collect Indian benefits. What's worse than that is the CNO is so washed out my father use to call them "***** ***** with Indian endowments" and the Freeman have a higher percentage of Indian blood contrary to what Chad said.

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

From the same place that the money came for the two wars we fought against 'terror'?  'Where is the money coming from' never ever seems to be a problem when war is why they need money

There is a problem for me.  I'm generally against the scam known as war.

But personally I would be glad to have reparations given to the descendants of African slaves but not in the form of money.  I would be all for spending whatever extra money needs to be spent putting first rate schools with small classes where it's easy to focus on individuals in largely black neighborhoods as well as free tuition to federally funded colleges for a couple of generations.  After that, no special consideration for any racial group ever again only for living individual victims such Japanese American internment survivors, not their children born after the fact.

[+Liquid Gardens]

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

I was using those as examples of the huge number of people who are not being included in the racist idea that we should give reparations to people whose ancestors were slaves brought from africa.   The whole thing is just a way to keep the racism going and solves nothing.   

I don't agree with your references to 'racist idea' and 'racism', but regardless I guess for me the argument "if we gave reparations to one group for how they were wronged by our government then we'd have to give reparations to others who were wronged by our government' isn't a good argument against reparations, kinda the opposite for me actually.  Let them all make their cases, and I'm sorry but outside of Native Americans there is no group with a better case than blacks.  To me the treatment of both of those groups is the worst blight in American history.

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Do you think being white makes you special?  It doesn't.

No I think it makes me what some term 'privileged', although I prefer a phrase like 'less inconvenienced/oppressed" or something like that as the things that I'm supposedly 'privileged' concerning are things that are basic and everyone should have ('privilege' can imply something above average, as in 'they're from a privileged background', I start thinking wealth and private schools and country clubs when I hear that phrase).  I drive down the road with little fear that a cop is going to pull me over and what would happen if they did, I have never thought that someone looked at my resume and set it aside because I had a 'black-sounding' name, I'm not concerned that I'm going to be refused by a bank or landlord because of my skin color, etc.  Being a man and hetero just adds all kinds of other junk that women and gays have to go through that I don't and never will.  The only attribute I'm missing is that I'm not Christian, but that's no longer the disadvantage it used to be at least where I live luckily.

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Do you know anything about your ancestors and tribulations they may have lived through.

Yes, some.  What I do know is that no government allowed/enforced by law the right of slaveowners to treat my ancestors literally like livestock and breed them with other slaves they didn't even know just based on physical attributes so that they'll give birth to more and better slaves. And then follow that up with a century of separate and not equal. That is a key part to me: government.  Civil disputes are resolved with lawsuits.  We compensate people who are wronged or harmed by the government all the time and usually it's just and unquestioned; if Air Force One crashes into and destroys your house, your insurance company can probably sue them/you'll be compensated, it would be unfair otherwise.  This isn't to me about blaming or holding white people today responsible for the acts of our ancestors that are unfair, it's that there are people today who have been negatively affected by those government wrongs of the past; those wrongs lasted hundreds of years, how could they not?  Not clear then on why this particular government unfairness is so wrong to try to compensate for. 

I mean maybe I'm just unaware, but after slavery, after Jim Crow, both based on race, when were blacks specifically ever compensated for being so wronged?  The only think I can really think of is affirmative action and that's extremely general, I'm having a tough time thinking of other examples that were set up by race.  Doesn't that seem unfair?  The government wronged these people based on their race, shouldn't then any compensation be based on race logically?  I don't see that as necessarily 'racist' or at least unfairly racist.

[SoonerTee]

I'm American Indian. I don't care what happened in the past as long as we don't repeat it. 

The whole conclusion of all of this is people with the power exert it on those that don't. Everywhere. By everybody. Throughout history. 

We stopped it without HAVING to stop it. England the same. THAT'S the rarity, but that credit is never given. That's the reparations. 

[+Grim Reaper 6]

7 hours ago, OverSword said:

Link

This is the most ridiculous idiotic thing I have heard of since Al Sharpton tried to lobby to make Ebonic’s an official language and not a Dialect of standard English!

[+Grim Reaper 6]

6 hours ago, OverSword said:

They did not have any legal slaves as a state in the union.  The natives enslaved each other left and right long before Europeans were here though.

I don’t know enough about the indigenous people of the American enslaving each other to comment. However, I am aware that in Africa, African tribes did enslave each other, they also sold other Africans to White Slave Traders. Now, I am also very aware that not all African slaves were sold by other Africans to White Slave Traders. White Slave Traders also kidnapped Africans to sell in locations across the world.

[Paranoid Android]

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I drive down the road with little fear that a cop is going to pull me over and what would happen if they did,

Candace Owens says the same thing you do! You know why she doesn't fear getting pulled over - because she isn't doing anything wrong and she complies with all police directives! Maybe the real problem is black parents teaching their kids to run and resist arrest rather than comply with lawful police directions. 

 

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I have never thought that someone looked at my resume and set it aside because I had a 'black-sounding' name,

Resume's get set aside for many reasons. Though if I recall the statistics you are referring to, the main reason those resume's were set aside was the perceived class difference, not the "black-sounding" name. Traditionally black names like "Jefferson" didn't get tossed aside, which suggests the discrimination is based on economic factors rather than racial. 

 

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I'm not concerned that I'm going to be refused by a bank or landlord because of my skin color, etc. 

That's illegal! 

Though there are many race grifters who fail to meet the standards by a bank or a landlord, who will use it as an excuse to cry foul - "look, I didn't get a loan, it must be because I'm black". Those people make the news, the mainstream left wing media runs with it, and your perception that black people are being targeted is reinforced! 

 

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Being a man and hetero just adds all kinds of other junk that women and gays have to go through that I don't and never will. 

What freedoms do you have that a woman doesn't have? And is it actual discrimination or just a difference in the sexes - ie, there are many freedoms that a woman has that men don't have, what some would call "female privilege". 

 

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

The only attribute I'm missing is that I'm not Christian, but that's no longer the disadvantage it used to be at least where I live luckily.

Where I live being a Christian was a huge disadvantage. I remember visiting a Scripture class when I was in year 8, the only people in scripture were the Special Ed kids, and everyone else at school pointed and laughed at me for being interested in God, and it was the only time I went to school-based scripture for that reason. 

[Golden Duck]

6 hours ago, el midgetron said:

No countries did more to end the practice of slavery than the United States and Britain.

Girmitiyas weren't slaves?

[el midgetron]

5 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Girmitiyas weren't slaves?

The correct question is “are Girmitiyas still slaves”?

[acidhead]

Since George Santos is black he should go to San Francisco to get $5M in reparations money 

[+Liquid Gardens]

12 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Candace Owens says the same thing you do! You know why she doesn't fear getting pulled over - because she isn't doing anything wrong and she complies with all police directives!

You know this how? To point out the obvious Candace is a woman, and where did I say or even imply that every black person has been unfairly pulled over?

12 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Though if I recall the statistics you are referring to, the main reason those resume's were set aside was the perceived class difference, not the "black-sounding" name. Traditionally black names like "Jefferson" didn't get tossed aside, which suggests the discrimination is based on economic factors rather than racial. 

"White names got about one callback per 10 resumes; black names got one per 15. Carries and Kristens had call-back rates of more than 13 percent, but Aisha, Keisha and Tamika got 2.2 percent, 3.8 percent and 5.4 percent, respectively. And having a higher quality resume, featuring more skills and experience, made a white-sounding name 30 percent more likely to elicit a callback, but only 9 percent more likely for black-sounding names."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/black-names-a-resume-burden/

12 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

That's illegal! 

That would mean more if we had telepathic powers, as the only way it matters if it's illegal is if you can prove it.  I'm pretty sure we were just talking about something like this and you were mentioning how all a racist need do is come up with some other reason other than race why they are discriminating.

12 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

What freedoms do you have that a woman doesn't have?

You don't know how women are more disadvantaged than men?  Pay gaps, laws concerning your reproductive rights, more likely to be victims of human trafficking... Google is your friend.  If nothing else I can walk downtown at night alone and walk home with little concern that I'm going to be assaulted relative to women and no this isn't restricted to just bad parts of town or something, it's pervasive.  

12 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Where I live being a Christian was a huge disadvantage.

Okay, that may well be.  Unlike you sometimes, I don't really make many claims about what it's like in countries I've never lived in.