zlacker

[return to "All foster kids in California can now attend any state college for free"]
1. getmei+F5[view] [source] 2023-07-23 22:02:52
>>pessim+(OP)
This is what affirmative action should be... helping people out based on their individual situation, not because their skin color or gender.
◧◩
2. pessim+47[view] [source] 2023-07-23 22:14:19
>>getmei+F5
Affirmative action shouldn't ever have been a contest with prizes for the most unfortunate. It was sold as a way to fix the wrongs of slavery. Having been enslaved legally in the US is not a race, it's an atrocity.

The reason we should be paying for foster kids' college is because the state is their parent, so it's our responsibility. In a country that wasn't shit, regular people would be jealous of how kids who were wards of the state lived, and how well-raised they were. There's no clearer illustration of our values than the fact that children who, through no fault of their own, have become the responsibility of the state are treated like unwanted trash. The idea that a society like that could figure out how to ethically treat prisoners or immigrants is laughable.

◧◩◪
3. slashd+Fd[view] [source] 2023-07-23 22:56:42
>>pessim+47
Do reparations for slavery even make logical sense? Please cut me some slack here, by the nature of the world we live in, I have not uttered these thoughts to another human being, and they might have obvious flaws. It's tough when you can't talk about ideas out of fear of the consequences.

I think nobody argues that it's a vile, morally repugnant thing to enslave another human being. But that was a long time ago, and all those slaves and the people who enslaved them are all dead.

The descendants of those slaves are now much wealthier and better off by pretty much any metric than their relatives who were not enslaved. How do you make an argument that those descendants are victims in need of reparations? No crime was committed against them directly, and they seem to have benefited from the crimes committed against their ancestors.

I must stress that this is not in any way excusing or justifying the wrongs that occurred. But how would you make an argument for reparations, given how things turned out?

◧◩◪◨
4. eli_go+5e[view] [source] 2023-07-23 23:00:25
>>slashd+Fd
> Do reparations for slavery even make logical sense?

Yes. The slaves did labor. That labor demands wages. The fact that the formerly enslaved also benefited from public goods to which all citizens had access does not pay down the debt owned to them for their labor.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. qwytw+Ie[view] [source] 2023-07-23 23:06:41
>>eli_go+5e
I guess a better question is whether reparation paid out to 5th+ generation descendants of slaves make sense. How do you even implement that practically?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Mister+8h[view] [source] 2023-07-23 23:22:33
>>qwytw+Ie
Figure out how much the labor was worth. Throw on punitive damages for having enslaved them against their will their entire lives. Now calculate for having invested that money at the time that slavery ended.

That's a good STARTING point.

Japanese-American citizens got locked up for a few years during WWII and the result was that Reagan signed a bill allowing for their descendants to receive $20K for each incarcerated person.

Now consider how many LIFETIMES were wasted in slavery.

Turns out that the same people who always complain about others having their hands out are just upset at any situation that doesn't personally enrich them.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. qwytw+jn[view] [source] 2023-07-24 00:11:50
>>Mister+8h
> their descendants

Or themselves since plenty of the victims were alive. This was a single event that lasted ~4 years with comparatively very good records.

Slavery lasted for several hundreds years, there are not records for most slaves and even cases where they can identified good luck tracking down all of their descendants. That's several magnitudes more complex, to an incomparable extent.

> Figure out how much the labor was worth

So do you need to find specific ancestors who were slaves and the payout would be based on how long did they work for? So... somebody who's great-great-great-great-grandfather died when he was 72 years old would receive twice as much than someone who's ancestor only lived to 36?

Of course you'll be especially lucky if you can find any ancestors who were shipped to the America in the 1600s. I bet slaveholders kept perfect record, especially back in those days.

Then you have to figure out how to split the payout between 50 to 1000 (un)verifiably descendants of the same individual or will be on first come first serve basis?

All this just seems so bizarrely impractical that I can't believe anyone would seriously suggest it after spending more than 2-5 minutes thinking about how would it work.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. Mister+0F[view] [source] 2023-07-24 02:40:16
>>qwytw+jn
Your argument is that we should never do anything because attempting to do the right thing to people who have had their pasts and futures stolen is hard.

Meanwhile we've got censuses going back hundreds of years. Do the math. It's not that difficult to come up with a minimum standard unless you're in the "do nothing" category.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. slashd+DO[view] [source] 2023-07-24 04:30:08
>>Mister+0F
I think it would be extremely impractical and impossible to apply fairly.

Maybe that’s not an argument by itself for doing nothing.

[go to top]