Jump to content

Reparations for Slavery


Slavery Reparations Policy  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the US Gov't Pay Reparations to descendants of Slavery?

    • Yes
      9
    • No
      30
  2. 2. If Reparations are paid out, will this end the racism question once and for all?

    • Yes
      1
    • No
      38
  3. 3. Why should we pay Reparations?

    • It will solve the current Racism issue finally
      0
    • White Guilt
      1
    • It will address past wrongs from 300 years ago
      8
    • It will make me feel good
      1
    • It will not solve anything
      29
  4. 4. Reparations vs Social Programs

    • Should we pay Reparations to only blacks with direct Slave ancestry
      2
    • Pay Reparations to all Blacks
      3
    • Pay Reparations to only Poor Blacks (Not Doctors, Lawyers and such)
      0
    • We should enact social programs that lift everyone (even whites) out of poverty
      34


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 384
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes  Yes Address 300 years All Blacks. However. This burden does not belong just to this generation. Maybe they are the least culpable.  America has already

Just get Joe Trudeau to issue a formal apology to them.

I think this kind of statement should make individuals qualify to become "perpetual donors" to the fund. The program should reward those escaping their racial stereotypes and overt racism with economi

4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

That's a whole different kettle of fish than not being "fully independent"

Why don't you say what you mean, the first time? You won't look like such a dumbass

-DSK

You are not independent if you are still fighting a war for your independence.

Why don't you learn to read or consider what you are responding to before doing so.

fuckwit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

 

 Be aware that when black intellectuals, specifically the guy that most recently got this reparations discussion going again Ta-Nehisi Coats,  do this they know it won't ever happen. They do it with the knowledge it would be taken seriously by those who are looking to be outraged against blacks too. They accept this because in their view the prevailing way racists seek to maintain white supremacy these days is to end all discussion about the subject. The status quo suits them just fine. Affirmative Action? All but neutered. Schools face a greater risk of being sued for practicing it than they do ignoring it.  They are trolling you. And IMO anyone who bites should be trolled.   

    

Those of us that are aware of the real world know that our favorite race pimp - The Rev Al Sharpton is specifically the guy that got most of the leading Democrat candidates for President to come to his NAN conference, kiss his ring and make them take the pledge to form a commission to study reparations. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mark K said:

We are all enslaved by the clock, most of us are even it's beast of burden.

 Yet who calls for reparations?? 

There is a Constitutional difference between "voluntary servitude" (like being enslaved by the clock) and "involuntary servitude" (i.e. being enslaved for being African or being enslaved for choosing to smoke cocaine).

The legal slavery clause of of the Thirteenth Amendment has ripped through Black families worse than the previous slavery ever did. It's reprehensible, it's not an act of wordsmithing, it's a crime against our brothers.

A Black friend of mine was enslaved for twelve years for choosing to sell legal, pharmaceutical grade cocaine, but he didn't have the license. He took offense to the word "inmate" because he considered himself a "prisoner" of a racist, classist society.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, J28 said:

Those of us that are aware of the real world know that our favorite race pimp - The Rev Al Sharpton is specifically the guy that got most of the leading Democrat candidates for President to come to his NAN conference, kiss his ring and make them take the pledge to form a commission to study reparations. 

 

I've spoken to Reverend Sharpton, he's smart as hell, and he's no "pimp." He's an academic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

IC-11.png

Sure being on the chain gang is pretty much the very definition of being a slave, but it is not the same thing as chattel slavery. In theory you had to be convicted of a crime to be on the chain gang, you were only on it for a set period of time, and your children did not automatically get put on the chain gang. Also, at least in theory, you could not be maimed or killed just because the overseer was in a bad mood. In theory..........

Forget the "chain gang." In every definition, a convicted felon who is imprisoned for a nonviolent crime is bought and sold as a slave.

He or she doesn't need to lift a finger in slavery, it's worse. Their bodies are sold to the prisons industry as more valuable than any work that they could ever do, up to $60,000 per year per slave charged to the American taxpayer.

You have defined "involuntary servitude" in a way that The Constitution does not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooooooo following along the lines of howlin' woofsey's logic...…..

If society deems it that a convicted criminal be incarcerated, required to labor as a condition of that incarceration,  that person then becomes by definition a slave...….. but, and it is a huge but, the cost of that incarceration exceeds the productive output of this category of slave. 

Now back in the days of the slave trade, African elders and tribal leaders would sell or trade laborers for what they considered fair remuneration. The now slaves were transported to The New World or wherever bound and placed in servitude. To the slave owners/masters this made economic sense in that these slaves' output exceeded the cost of purchase, shipping, housing, food, clothing, etc.

So Mike, question for you then, if I may. Do we as a society then sit down and tabulate the cost of those indentured, a P&L of sorts, to determine whether they are eligible for reparations, or is the fact that they were captive, not freemen, the only standard to be applied?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

You are not independent if you are still fighting a war for your independence.

Why don't you learn to read or consider what you are responding to before doing so.

fuckwit.

You are independent if you already won a war for your independence.

Or did George Washington lose the war, and was he not unanimously elected President before 1815?

Just a reminder- they don't have Presidents in Great Britain.

-DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark K said:

We are all enslaved by the clock, most of us are even it's beast of burden.

 Yet who calls for reparations?? 

Those that are enslaved by the clock generally get reparations in the form of a paycheck

-DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Not at all my intent and maybe the Spanish did equal the French in brutality, but I thought it was more disease that did their slaves in. The French in Haiti were so depraved they inspired the only known successful slave revolt.

 

The only successful slave revolt in history? I've always known something very punk rock with Haitians. It also suggests why that half of the island is still so improverished ... they don't like it when you opt out of the client state economy, do they?

But the successful revolt may have had as much to do with the notorious inefficiency of French bureaucracy, as it does their depravity. Were the French even all that wicked as colonists? My take is that they were just incredibly disorganized and relied on their military commanders to make civilian decisions ... they pretty much De Gauled their way through the New World, even before De Gauling a culture was a thing yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Soooooooo following along the lines of howlin' woofsey's logic...…..

If society deems it that a convicted criminal be incarcerated, required to labor as a condition of that incarceration,  that person then becomes by definition a slave...….. but, and it is a huge but, the cost of that incarceration exceeds the productive output of this category of slave. 

Now back in the days of the slave trade, African elders and tribal leaders would sell or trade laborers for what they considered fair remuneration. The now slaves were transported to The New World or wherever bound and placed in servitude. To the slave owners/masters this made economic sense in that these slaves' output exceeded the cost of purchase, shipping, housing, food, clothing, etc.

So Mike, question for you then, if I may. Do we as a society then sit down and tabulate the cost of those indentured, a P&L of sorts, to determine whether they are eligible for reparations, or is the fact that they were captive, not freemen, the only standard to be applied?

 

Yes, according to The Constitution of the USA, that person then becomes a slave.

But here's where I disagree with your assumption ... you write that person is only a slave if "the cost of that incarceration exceeds the productive output of this category of slave." But that's never historically the case, it's the reason why people keep slaves then and why they do it now, because there is economic incentive to do so, right?

The error is in trying to balance the books with slavery. The slave-holder never cares where the money is made, they gave not a single hair on a rat's ass where the money was made. If they could make money off of the slave's work, off of selling them as soldiers, or just as a function of their weight and strength, then they did it then the Pre-Civil War slave-holders did that. If the Nazis could make money by enslaving and seizing the property of Jews, Romani, Homosexuals, Communists, Feminists or J. Witnesses, then they enslaved them, seized their property, used them for work for as long as they could, and then even made an attempt to turn the skin and bones of their victims into products. Now, we enslave someone who deals weed, or smokes cocaine and as a prisoner, the slave is more valuable to the slave-holder in health than in sickness for being over-worked. So Prison Industry has the slave answer phones for tourism bureaus, train wild horses, make furniture, pick fruit and transcribe books for the blind. In every one of these cases, the cost to hold the prisoner exceeds the value of the job that they do, and in some cases the slaves are even given a tiny bit of money (say 35 cents per hour) to spend in the commissary. But it costs up to $60,000 to house a nonviolent offender for the year, and at best, that prisoner is doing a minimum wage job worth about $12,000/year. But that nearly free labor isn't the gravy, it's the windfall. The gravy comes from charging the U.S. taxpayers to hold and imprison that slave. Us Americans are only too happy to pay the Prison Industry to keep these slaves, because it makes us feel secure to know that lots of Black people and Chicanos are in jail. It gives us a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that they can't interact in our world, and we're willing to pay to see them gone. We like to enslave people who scare us.

To your last question ... they aren't "indentured." By the letter of The Constitution, and the Thirteenth Amendment, they are slaves. So, do we "sit down as a society" and decide about reparations?

No.

That would be ridiculous. The whole point of reparations is a finishing stroke, a way to put a problem to bed. We can't put this problem to bed of enslaving people for doing nonviolent nonsense like selling pharmaceuticals without a license, or smoking the wrong kind of pharmaceutical, because we're still enslaving them. And with creeping legalization of drugs, we're going to eventually run low on the existing kind of nonviolent offenders, so we're now starting to make our Prison Industry profits on enslaving nonviolent immigrants, while almost completely ignoring the crimes of the Americans who hire them and create the demand to begin with.

In a nutshell ... no reparations until we first find a way to end slavery. Once we end slavery, then we might or might not want to do reparations. But that's a question for a point inthefuture.com, because as it stands in 2019, we still buy and sell lots and lots of slaves.

Of course, maybe your idea has value now that I look at it another way ... if we paid reparations while we are still buying and selling slaves, then that cost might gradually push us to do the right thing inthefuture so that we can at least properly value the societal costs of enslaving people. So yeah, I kind of like your idea now that I think about it. What if we just start with a small amount for reparations, just as a way recognizing that these people are slaves, and we would only do it for nonviolent crimes.

So $1,200 per child or common law spouse per year per prisoner, payable for college or trade school tuition, book fees, etc.. That's about 500,000 nonviolent slaves that we currently keep. The total for an average of one child and one common law spouse per prisoner say, would be about $1.2 billion/year. In the first year, it will cost us the full $1.2 billion, which sounds like a lot, but we currently pay about ten times that, or $12 billion per year for enslave these nonviolent offenders. But each year after that, assuming that the reparations are the bee in our bonnet to stop paying the Prison's Industry to enslave nonviolent offenders, we would ideally drop our costs to enslave these people by 10% per year, so within about ten years, our costs to keep these slaves will actually be less than our reparations costs, and we'll start to save some real money. And we get the immediate returns of sending the children and spouses of these slaves to advanced training, which helps our economy.

I like your idea now that I've reconsidered, I don't think it' ridiculous. In fact it's funny that one of the most progressive ideas I've ever seen in Prison Industry reform came from a Conservative. Kinda cool, you dudes have good minds sometimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Start with your last thought, if I may. I have said this before, while I am a right of center libertarian, I am most likely the most "progressive" person on these boards. I seek radical change. But lets move past that sir.

So obviously there is a reason I asked you the question I asked you in the way I asked it...….or what would be the point, eh?  I trust if those from Africa knew what lay ahead for them (which is a bit of a stretch one would think) as they went upon the chopping block they would have revolted then and there..... but don't know that with any certainty. Clearly some slaves realized their fate (to some degree) as they would uprise on the voyage across the Atlantic. Those who would not stand and fight, have they in effect capitulated?**** If so, if they cease to resist, does their status shift from forced slave to indentured servant? Reason I ask, or one of the reasons I ask is this, it is known that some slaves worked towards their freedom. That overtime they were able to achieve freedom either by escaping and making their way to Canada on the Underground Railroad or were purchased by a benefactor and then granted their freedom. Others did not resist and were welcomed into The Master's House, a house slave who carried and served the manor's family. Then we have your class of the incarcerated. An imposition placed upon them by society because they violated the laws of that society. Which one of these is deserving of reparations and by how much? Not necessarily a fixed dollar amount, that alone will bog any such discussion down for generations, but as a percentage of a whole number. As an example, field slaves, being more resistant to their overlord crackers but did not risk life and limb to escape, do they based on their degree of disdain be 66% remunerated while house slaves, who worked within the system only warrant 33% of the eventual reparation amount? Do those that struggled until they were freemen thus deserve 100% remuneration for time spent in servitude because they clearly demonstrated a will and desire to be free, emancipated, beholden to none?

**** As a curious thought, what exactly changed in a person sold into slavery? As a tribal member working in the fields and plains in Africa, were they not already in servitude to the tribal elders and ultimately the possession of a tribal ruler?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rat's ass said:

What percentage of the populus actually owned slaves? I'll give you a clue, the elite 1.4%. Slavery was obviously counterproductive for the rest of the population as it drove down wages. I'll give you another clue, that war was not about freeing the slaves. 

1.4% ?? Bullshit

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/aug/24/viral-image/viral-post-gets-it-wrong-extent-slavery-1860/

-DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rat's ass said:

What percentage of the populus actually owned slaves? I'll give you a clue, the elite 1.4%. Slavery was obviously counterproductive for the rest of the population as it drove down wages. I'll give you another clue, that war was not about freeing the slaves. 

You don't have to give me "a clue" because I know how to read history books too.

Obviously the Civil War was not about "freeing the slaves", because the Thirteenth just made more slaves. The war was a growing pain in our country's push to industrialization, it as the North's reaction to the Southern states agricultural efforts to sell directly to Europe without going through the U.S. client state. 

It was mainly the elite who owned slaves then for the same reason the elite own the U.S. Prison Industry now ... because the elite have the means to control production and land. The few middle class Southerners (and it did total more than 1.5% or so) who owned or inherited slaves tended didn't often have the economy of scale to make it profitable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2019 at 11:56 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

Even though I don't feel like I had any hand in slavery or perpetuating the racism from Jim Crow, or holding a black man down and the like.... I'm willing to do my part to get past this and move on.  So how much do I need to write the check for?  What will it take to move past this current phase?

Now you want the profile of a choirboy?

Your introspection is poor indeed. I've  caught youreal-time,  contributing to the racial problem several different ways: by using cheap stereotypes, by scapegoating, and by expressing the idea that gansta gun mayhem would neutralize inner city problems.

I hounded you for a better understanding, it only turned to race-baiting.

What is with this stream of crap, Jeffie?

Quote

Posted January 2, 2017

  On 1/2/2017 at 10:33 AM, JBSF said:

I don't recall ever saying that all or most gun homicides were gang related.

 

Hmmm,  Jeffie wrote these wrong-ass bits. Links are available.

  • May 2013 the urban thugs in Chicago and similar who are committing the vast majority of the "gun crime"
  • Sept 2013 the majority of the murders in the US (VAST MAJORITY) are commited in the inner city urban areas
  • Nov. 2013 The VAST majority of the gun murders out there are committed by run of the mill criminals and gangbangers,
  • June 2014 The vast majority of our homicide rate is inner city drug related crime and gang activity. [...]

 

 

Quote

Jeff's wisdom on May 2017

Actually joey - its more of a good culling, i.e shitbags mostly shooting and killing other shitbags. Where the problem comes in is when they go and kill a random bystander or civilian by accident or on purpose just because. I'd be happy to wall off South Chicago, let all the civilians out, Then airdrop a bunch of gunz and ammoz into the hood and let the bangers kill each other off. Just make sure they all still have access to facebook and it would be a fait accompli. Problem SOLved.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Start with your last thought, if I may. I have said this before, while I am a right of center libertarian, I am most likely the most "progressive" person on these boards. I seek radical change. But lets move past that sir.

So obviously there is a reason I asked you the question I asked you in the way I asked it...….or what would be the point, eh?  I trust if those from Africa knew what lay ahead for them (which is a bit of a stretch one would think) as they went upon the chopping block they would have revolted then and there..... but don't know that with any certainty. Clearly some slaves realized their fate (to some degree) as they would uprise on the voyage across the Atlantic. Those who would not stand and fight, have they in effect capitulated?**** If so, if they cease to resist, does their status shift from forced slave to indentured servant? Reason I ask, or one of the reasons I ask is this, it is known that some slaves worked towards their freedom. That overtime they were able to achieve freedom either by escaping and making their way to Canada on the Underground Railroad or were purchased by a benefactor and then granted their freedom. Others did not resist and were welcomed into The Master's House, a house slave who carried and served the manor's family. Then we have your class of the incarcerated. An imposition placed upon them by society because they violated the laws of that society. Which one of these is deserving of reparations and by how much? Not necessarily a fixed dollar amount, that alone will bog any such discussion down for generations, but as a percentage of a whole number. As an example, field slaves, being more resistant to their overlord crackers but did not risk life and limb to escape, do they based on their degree of disdain be 66% remunerated while house slaves, who worked within the system only warrant 33% of the eventual reparation amount? Do those that struggled until they were freemen thus deserve 100% remuneration for time spent in servitude because they clearly demonstrated a will and desire to be free, emancipated, beholden to none?

**** As a curious thought, what exactly changed in a person sold into slavery? As a tribal member working in the fields and plains in Africa, were they not already in servitude to the tribal elders and ultimately the possession of a tribal ruler?

 

Americans want to be happy. We really do. But at the current moment in time, Americans are not happy. This is not universal to all Americans. A lot of Americans are happy as hell. But those Americans live in South America, Mexico, Canada, and Central America. For the rest of us Americans -- the ones who stuck around because we love our country that we get sad when we aren't here -- for the rest of us, we're not happy. We were so miserable that we elected the biggest douche in the history to reality television to be our President. That's some nuclear level depression right there.

That's the kind of depression that you can't fix with a jug of tequila, two hookers, and an Atari.

That's the kind of depression where your car breaks down in the Taco Bell drive through.

That's the kind of depression where you turn off Sports Center so you can hear when the hummingbirds come to neighbor's feeder.

And then you know what happened? President Trump made us feel better. We hate him, we insult him for all the screw ups he keeps making, but in the end, he's grown into a half-decent person it seems. We find out that he has a heart and he feels pain the way we do, and suddenly we realize that once again, we've elected a human to this job. And that human is just as fucked up as we are. But somehow, we get out shit together as a country, and we keep pushing.

That's the secret to our success in the United States of America. It's not that we're exceptional, because as a people, we are some of the least exceptional people on the planet. We're not beautiful like the Italians and the Argentines. We're not intelligent like the Germans, and the British, we're not generous like the Canadians, we're don't know how to enjoy our lives like the Mexicans and the French, we don't see into the future like the Portuguese and the Uruguayans. We don't remember and feel every one of our ancestors like the Pacific Islanders. We're just a collection of people who find a way to work with each other. There are countries with people who work with each other even better than we do, like the people in Spain and Ireland. But Spain and Ireland didn't have the mother lode of all treasure chests dropped onto their lap like the citizens of the United States of America. We weren't worthy, we weren't exceptional, we weren't the smartest or the strongest. But we found a way to work together (and unfortunately commit a lot of crimes) and we got the most perfect chunk of land on the planet. One country, fully accessible and industrialized access to both the Pacific and the Atlantic oceans, a land bridge that stretches from the Tierra del Fuego to Newfoundland or Alaska, with the ability to move road cargo, rail cargo and intracoastal transport from the top to the bottom, with a choke point at the Panama Canal. You couldn't come up with a more strategically valuable scenario if you were playing a game of imaginary wars with your codger friends at the country club. And then right in the middle of Canada's vast reserves of water, and Mexico's vast reserves radio announcers who sound like they could solve world hunger with the baritones in their voices, we have the USA. A country of hipsters, hillbillies, recreational vehicle living retirees who like to talk about brewing Mead and quilting, along with the best basketballers that the planet has ever created, a not-too-shabby soccer infrastructure, and some incredibly chill dogs in the USA, that's kind of our thing.

If you plan to move to the USA, you should probably get yourself a dog when you get here, or a cat if you're more of an indoor person, or if you like both indoors and outdoors, then you can get yourself a cat-dog, which is what I have. My cat-dog is a Blue Heeler/Bluetick Coonhound mix. She lays around sleeping all day like a hound, but her heeler ears stick up, so any unusual noise will immediately penetrate into her cattledog consciousness, where she will be immediately dispatched to bark away any dog, horse, human, coyote or prairie dog. You find yourself some kind of dog or cat or ferret or reptile that fits your freaky ass lifestyle, and then you settle into the United States of Fucking America. Damn! You will enjoy it here as long as you don't expect too much from us. We might help you push your car out of the snow even if you're an ex-KGB agent who probably needs to stop betting your entire paycheck with online sports books. I mean, yeah, it was amusing enough when you were betting on PGA Golf and Sprint Cars, but the day you actually found yourself researching mini-golf strategies so you could more intelligently bet on outcomes of the U.S. Pro Mini Golf National Championships, that day, you should have said to yourself "dude, enough gambling." But instead you Nitrogened your way into putting down a bets, and of course they won, because that's why your an addict, it's because you win just a little bit more than you lose, but it's still not quite enough to compete with the bookie's vig. Your gambling never had you lose your house, your gambling never had you hurt someone you love, your gambling didn't hurt yourself. It's not an addiction, it's something you enjoy. But life without a bet on a Minigolf Championship, or just a little action in the stock market, or maybe a long odds bet on the dogs at Mile Hi, and life just feels right.

If you're that guy, I'll help you push your car out of the snow, and you might find a really adorable American girlfriend too. It is a little known fact the the U.S.A. is one of the best countries in the world to find beautiful women who know how to make a nice home, and not torture your sorry ass like they did in the old country. We have this entire breed of American women who really like foreign dudes. They'll marry you too, as long as you promise to be a half-decent dude and not fuck around on her. They like to drink dark beer, they like to hang with you in the gym, and they will find a way to bang you in the airplane lav coming back of Cabo. They might not actually do all of those things, but they'll do other things like make you a plate of cranberry muffins. And they'll actually be able to explain The Wire to you, and they actually will be able to dress up like some chick from Mad Men. We have those kind of women here. They even have compost piles and smoothy machines. But now, if you're a beautiful woman from Eastern Europe or Nigeria or Sierre Leone, then you should know up front, you're going to have a hard time here. You'll never know which men are trying to use you, you'll never know which women hate you as competition and which women love you as a friend. You'll never know if an employer actually wants to help you in a professional sense, and which employer looks forward to the days that you come into the office because he's all alone and you remind him of the life that he wanted to have. American women have a hard time with these same questions, but at least they have the language and the emotional cues down pretty well. A woman from Slovenia though, cripes it has to be hard on her here. American women can barely handle the emotional complexities of these situations, how the hell can someone who barely speaks the language handle them?

All of this is to say that Americans are not happy at the moment. Some are. Lots aren't. But it's nothing to do with the condition of the world, or our futures, or that we're just not getting the high off of Netflix that we used to. We're looking for something else, something of substance that we used to have. We had those feelings about the environment and about social justice, but the reality is that the world just moves more slowly than we would like sometimes. We did what we could, we lost interest in something we never really understood in the first place, and then we got hungry, smeared some avocado on a piece of toast without having a clue as to what the fuck we were doing. We felt a little satisfied because it's avocado on toast, but it just didn't taste the same as it did that one morning at that hipster breakfast spot in Minneapolis. Uh yeah, dipshit, because the person who made your avocado on toast at the hipster spot in Minneapolis studies for three years at CIA to learn how to make that. He knows about balancing the fat in the drizzle of olive oil, with the carboliciousness in the course grain bread, with the flavor of the avocado. And he sliced the avocado for the toast, it's not guacamole on toast fercrissakes, why the fucking hell are you mashing up a beautiful avocado? You live in this bizarre time in the history of the world where you can get a perfect avocado at any time for the FUCKING YEAR IN ANY PLACE ON THE PLANET!!!! And if you're American, and don't mind driving to a lovely suburban supermarket, you can buy that perfect avocado for $1. That avocado has come to your hand through some of the greatest miracles of aviation, and jet fuel and nitrogen pumped warehousing. And you take this perfect avocado, and then you mush the shit out of it? DO YOU HAVE FUCKING ROCKS IN YOUR HEAD!?!? I mean yeah, if it's overripe and not a good avocado, mush away, I get it. But a perfectly ripe avocado is like a miracle. You can literally taste the chemicals in those things working on your jaw. I don't know if either the Haas avocado or the Mexican Grand has been genetically bred to be that delicious, but add some course salt, a little olive oil and a spoon, and you have a meal, a real meal, a this-wine-isn't-good-enough-for-this-meal kind of meal.

At least Trump gave us something to rally around, he did a good job, he helped make us happy again.

We can't talk reparations until we first end slavery. There are too many families in the USA, and that includes Black families, Latino families and White families who have suffered due to our methods of enslaving people who use and sell unofficial pharmaceuticals. I get it, these people should be punished, but not prison punished. The punishment should be community service or a fine. The punishment does not fit that crime. It would be like getting four years in prison for not coming to a full stop on a red light before I signaled and made a right turn.

I love your idea, I think that it's something that both Conservatives and Liberals and even the Libs in the center can agree is a decent thing. We can't call them "reparations" but maybe we can call them "Incarcerated Family Improvement Funds." We keep the structure really simple, maybe administer it through Social Security. So every child and every common law spouse of someone currently incarcerated for a nonviolent crime, will receive $1200 per year for the length of time that the person is in prison. These funds can be used by the recipient for any bona fide educational or business purpose. They prisoner then receives an additional one-time grant of $1200 in addition to his normal funds received on existing prison. The goal here is to incentivize both nonviolent prisoners to stay out of prison, and incentivize We The People to stop paying some $12,000,000,000 each year to imprison nonviolent people.

Your last question ... a slave knows when he or she is a slave. You may not know, I may not know. But the slave knows. If you can leave your home at night to take a walk around a litle pond to clear your head, then that is a pretty rock solid indication that you are not a slave. If you have a wife who does not allow you this freedom, then you are enslaved to her. If you are a woman who is afraid to walk around that pond for fear of a rapist, then you are a woman who needs to understand that we don't want to stop imprisoning the rapists. We want to keep imprisoning them. In fact, we really want to just execute them, but it's too expensive to do that, so we pay some $75,000/year to hold these violent offenders. And we don't execute rapists -- even though we really should -- because we believe that rape is the result of someone who is emotionally ill. And we believe that we can help people who are emotionally ill, and we do help these people. But we keep a sharp eye on them, just in case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goddamn

That was a fun read. “This wine isn’t good enough for this meal kind of a meal?” Love it.

 

But I gotta say, reparations to nonviolent offenders tends to payoff a bunch of plea bargained violent offenders. Also, Id be pretty pissed off if you have some banker actually charged and jailed for stealing people’s money given slavery reparation moneys. I’d vote against your idea in that basis alone.

btw, did you skip your meds?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Goddamn

That was a fun read. “This wine isn’t good enough for this meal kind of a meal?” Love it.

 

But I gotta say, reparations to nonviolent offenders tends to payoff a bunch of plea bargained violent offenders. Also, Id be pretty pissed off if you have some banker actually charged and jailed for stealing people’s money given slavery reparation moneys. I’d vote against your idea in that basis alone.

btw, did you skip your meds?

No policy is perfect, no matter how much you try to key it to their crime and income, some unworthy people are going to receive the benefit.

Given that, are convicted violent offenders able to plea down to nonviolent type of imprisonment? I thought that they could plea to time served or a shorter sentence, but not a low security prison. Am I wrong about that?

Anyway, so I get your complaint, but what bothers you more ... that someone's child might get some money for college, or that you're currently paying some $12,000,000,000 every year to house and feed nonviolent offenders?

And in some cases, some of those nonviolent offenders want to be in prison because it suits their emotional illnesses, that go untreated because of their incarceration.

You're more worried about someone stealing a dime than you are a about getting mugged for a grand?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mikewof said:

No policy is perfect, no matter how much you try to key it to their crime and income, some unworthy people are going to receive the benefit.

Given that, are convicted violent offenders able to plea down to nonviolent type of imprisonment? I thought that they could plea to time served or a shorter sentence, but not a low security prison. Am I wrong about that?

Anyway, so I get your complaint, but what bothers you more ... that someone's child might get some money for college, or that you're currently paying some $12,000,000,000 every year to house and feed nonviolent offenders?

And in some cases, some of those nonviolent offenders want to be in prison because it suits their emotional illnesses, that go untreated because of their incarceration.

You're more worried about someone stealing a dime than you are a about getting mugged for a grand?

I'd much rather put a stop to the private incarceration business than give money to crininals

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I'd much rather put a stop to the private incarceration business than give money to crininals

Say you were reasonably assured that 98% of the families that received the incarceration reparation, did need it, and did receive help from it to lift them from poverty induced by enslavement. Would you support it then?

What if you saw that the money reached break even in four years, and then reduced our $12,000,000,000 per year cost by $1,000,000,000 each year after that? Would you support it then?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Why do we have to give money to prisoners in order to stop spending on prisoners? Let's just restrict the number of prisons and ramp up the alternative path sentencing. Pretend I made up some $numbers like yours. With savings, too.

I think that your view is hopelessly optimistic, and my view is realistic.

How in the hell are we supposed to stop spending all that money on slavery? The Prison Industry is dialed into some heavy shit. They can get voting Americans all kind of scared of us not imprisoning half a million nonviolent slaves. They'll tell that our daughters are in danger and our homes are in danger, and we'll believe them because we always believe them. And in the end, your lovely idea to reduce spending will die in committee because when was the last time you saw a government spend less money on incarceration?

My view makes peace with the reality that the prison industry has its tendrils in media and government, and they have ten or fifteen years to transition their profit models. At least my method shows respect to that industry, your method just attempts to shit all over it.

So the Prison Industry knows how to run these prisons, what if that industry transitioned its minimum security prisons to unfenced training centers? Work-release with an job training component. If they want to live on site to get training, then they follow the rules and they get to stay. If they don't, they have to leave.

That's the opposite of a prison, it's the opposite of slavery, and it's less expensive than incarceration. 

As far as the numbers that I "made up", it seems that you have never read something called a "business plan." If you disagree with my numbers then be specific and maybe you have a better guess. But without that, you're just throwing bare hooks into the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I remain a skeptic, no matter how convincing you think you are. I think we could get Republicans to vote for the job centers and get for-prisons to  “transition their profit models” more easily without the extra payments to the incarcerated. 

This liberal, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Bill, judge not lest ye yourself be judged.

Your approach to this is a bit heinous. You presume to look down upon a terrorized, beaten and enslaved group of people with fucking arrogance. 

I'm sorry, you lost me here, could you expand on and/or explain this? 

I am not looking down on anyone. I am trying to wrap my head around the justification for reparation and if that is warranted. I think the only way to do that is to understand just what those enslaved were put through, how being taken from their homeland to the new world changed their lives. Obviously on one front, being shackled in the bilge of a boat and sailing across the pond is a big part, but once in America how exactly did their lives change? Where those enslaved doing exactly what they were doing in Africa or was their treatment and task vastly different?

Reason I am going about it that way is this. The basis of reparations, as I understand it, is a premise that The USA was built on the backs of slave labor. That they were greatly taken advantage of and as such robbed of wage, income, lifestyle based on the works they performed. So in order to "fix" that one would need to determine exactly how much is owed, what earnings they were deprived of. What the monetary damages were.

29 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Well, I remain a skeptic, no matter how convincing you think you are. I think we could get Republicans to vote for the job centers and get for-prisons to  “transition their profit models” more easily without the extra payments to the incarcerated. 

This liberal, too.

Well I confess to not knowing a great deal about prison having only spent on night in jail in my life...… for playing frisbee in a schoolyard after dusk! That aside I am not so sure private prison v. public prison is how the argument should be framed. I would gladly pay a private entity to reform the incarcerated if it meant they would become a productive member of society. Society has never solved how to reform those of a criminal element. Certainly, howlin' woofsey's idea of paying criminal not to be criminals...… crime paying, is a bit out there. I do not think it productive to set up another system where folks can be paid for being non-productive. Then there is the whole mentality of "give me your lunch money and I won't beat you up at recess". Whacked, just whacked.

What we need do is to set up a system designed to give some found guilty of a crime to demonstrate they are worthy of being released back into society. To aid them in  changing their ways and their outlook, to give them a skillset to compete.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillDBastard said:

I'm sorry, you lost me here, could you expand on and/or explain this? 

I am not looking down on anyone. I am trying to wrap my head around the justification for reparation and if that is warranted. I think the only way to do that is to understand just what those enslaved were put through, how being taken from their homeland to the new world changed their lives. Obviously on one front, being shackled in the bilge of a boat and sailing across the pond is a big part, but once in America how exactly did their lives change? Where those enslaved doing exactly what they were doing in Africa or was their treatment and task vastly different?

Reason I am going about it that way is this. The basis of reparations, as I understand it, is a premise that The USA was built on the backs of slave labor. That they were greatly taken advantage of and as such robbed of wage, income, lifestyle based on the works they performed. So in order to "fix" that one would need to determine exactly how much is owed, what earnings they were deprived of. What the monetary damages were.

Well I confess to not knowing a great deal about prison having only spent on night in jail in my life...… for playing frisbee in a schoolyard after dusk! That aside I am not so sure private prison v. public prison is how the argument should be framed. I would gladly pay a private entity to reform the incarcerated if it meant they would become a productive member of society. Society has never solved how to reform those of a criminal element. Certainly, howlin' woofsey's idea of paying criminal not to be criminals...… crime paying, is a bit out there. I do not think it productive to set up another system where folks can be paid for being non-productive. Then there is the whole mentality of "give me your lunch money and I won't beat you up at recess". Whacked, just whacked.

What we need do is to set up a system designed to give some found guilty of a crime to demonstrate they are worthy of being released back into society. To aid them in  changing their ways and their outlook, to give them a skillset to compete.

I’m all onboard with free/really inexpensive Community College and trade schools especially paired with local industry and firms. 

Not exactly “reparations”, but we gotta face reality. They aren’t ever gonna actually happen.

Bill, when when you write crap like “but once in America how exactly did their lives change? Where those enslaved doing exactly what they were doing in Africa or was their treatment and task vastly different?” you demonstrate prejudice.

After all, why should these Africans enjoy things like human rights? Freedom is a concept only important to whites, after all, our forefathers didn’t need to waste effort extending so-called “inalienable rights” to this group of deplorables. 

Once you label a group subhuman, once you refer to them by saying “murderers, rapists and I’m sure some of them are good people” you take license to treat them like cattle, not people.

Sheriff Joe did that, and callously supervised the deaths of scores of Hispanics. He was quite popular with the whites, and that has tarred our nation with the stain. Stevens miller and Trump now seek to do the same on a grander scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

...    ...    ...

Sheriff Joe did that, and callously supervised the deaths of scores of Hispanics. He was quite popular with the whites, and that has tarred our nation with the stain. Stevens miller and Trump now seek to do the same on a grander scale.

It's kinda funny how the guys who are all wound up about freedom from gov't intrusion, overbearing regulation, etc etc, are all "meh" about the gov't actually killing people.......... as long as the people are members of a certain racial group.

I would think that other rights are in danger too, when the gov't can kill with impunity. Can't really pursue liberty or happiness when you're dead.

Of course it's not racism. No way, uh-uh. So far I haven't heard any explanation of what it really is, other than "those people deserved it" which I can't seem to find in the Constitution

-DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Well, I remain a skeptic, no matter how convincing you think you are. I think we could get Republicans to vote for the job centers and get for-prisons to  “transition their profit models” more easily without the extra payments to the incarcerated. 

This liberal, too.

Republicans do vote for things that cost money. They do it all the time. They vote to enslave more people,, same as the Democratics.

But Republicans don't vote to defund the Prison Industry. They haven't done that in my lifetime and I don't expect them to do it before I die.

So you're skeptical about passing a saving bill that turns minimum security prisons into training centers, but you're optimistic about taking a bone out of the jaw of a hungry dog? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mikewof said:

Republicans do vote for things that cost money. They do it all the time. They vote to enslave more people,, same as the Democratics.

But Republicans don't vote to defund the Prison Industry. They haven't done that in my lifetime and I don't expect them to do it before I die.

So you're skeptical about passing a saving bill that turns minimum security prisons into training centers, but you're optimistic about taking a bone out of the jaw of a hungry dog? 

How about decriminalizing all drugs?  That will take a bite out of the prison system, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

I'm sorry, you lost me here, could you expand on and/or explain this? 

I am not looking down on anyone. I am trying to wrap my head around the justification for reparation and if that is warranted. I think the only way to do that is to understand just what those enslaved were put through, how being taken from their homeland to the new world changed their lives. Obviously on one front, being shackled in the bilge of a boat and sailing across the pond is a big part, but once in America how exactly did their lives change? Where those enslaved doing exactly what they were doing in Africa or was their treatment and task vastly different?

Reason I am going about it that way is this. The basis of reparations, as I understand it, is a premise that The USA was built on the backs of slave labor. That they were greatly taken advantage of and as such robbed of wage, income, lifestyle based on the works they performed. So in order to "fix" that one would need to determine exactly how much is owed, what earnings they were deprived of. What the monetary damages were.

Well I confess to not knowing a great deal about prison having only spent on night in jail in my life...… for playing frisbee in a schoolyard after dusk! That aside I am not so sure private prison v. public prison is how the argument should be framed. I would gladly pay a private entity to reform the incarcerated if it meant they would become a productive member of society. Society has never solved how to reform those of a criminal element. Certainly, howlin' woofsey's idea of paying criminal not to be criminals...… crime paying, is a bit out there. I do not think it productive to set up another system where folks can be paid for being non-productive. Then there is the whole mentality of "give me your lunch money and I won't beat you up at recess". Whacked, just whacked.

What we need do is to set up a system designed to give some found guilty of a crime to demonstrate they are worthy of being released back into society. To aid them in  changing their ways and their outlook, to give them a skillset to compete.

Thus the disconnect.

You actually believe that people convicted of nonviolent, non-theft violations are "criminals."

When you overstay your time at the parking meter, are you a "criminal"?

The reason you think that you are not a criminal, and the guy who sells cocaine without a tax stamp is a criminal is because you do have a history of staying too long in a parking space, but you don't have a history of selling untaxed cocaine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jzk said:

How about decriminalizing all drugs?  That will take a bite out of the prison system, no?

Sure, and that's coming. The industry has already lost tens of thousands of warm bodies to legal cannabis.

The reaction of the Prison Industry has been to convince people who vote that now we to imprison undocumented workers. (But almost never the Americans who hire them.)

A warm body is a warm body. The prison industry is an equal opportunity slave holder. As long as the prisoner is too poor to afford effective legal representation, then they can be profitably enslaved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I’m all onboard with free/really inexpensive Community College and trade schools especially paired with local industry and firms. 

Not exactly “reparations”, but we gotta face reality. They aren’t ever gonna actually happen.

Bill, when when you write crap like “but once in America how exactly did their lives change? Where those enslaved doing exactly what they were doing in Africa or was their treatment and task vastly different?” you demonstrate prejudice.

After all, why should these Africans enjoy things like human rights? Freedom is a concept only important to whites, after all, our forefathers didn’t need to waste effort extending so-called “inalienable rights” to this group of deplorables. 

Once you label a group subhuman, once you refer to them by saying “murderers, rapists and I’m sure some of them are good people” you take license to treat them like cattle, not people.

Sheriff Joe did that, and callously supervised the deaths of scores of Hispanics. He was quite popular with the whites, and that has tarred our nation with the stain. Stevens miller and Trump now seek to do the same on a grander scale.

You are confusing what I said with what you think I said.

I did not in any way wish to suggest that those enslaved were wrongly treated. Not in the least. What I asked was how being enslaved changed their lives. How was being brought to the new world vastly different then the lives they had been living. It is a given that slavery and slave trade wrong, unjust and dehumanizing. But if we are trying to assign a dollar value to a notion of reparations, one must consider the difference in their lives because of slavery. Put it this way, were they slaves having been sold and brought to America, or were they already slaves being sold off to America? I suspect the latter is more the case.

I do not think anyone is "subhuman", far from it actually. I have long held that one of the glaring flaws in the US Constitution was the interpretation of the term man/men as meaning white males rather than "humanbeing" and "mankind". That we passed a number of amendments to correct that that served only to leave others out of the party. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Sure, and that's coming. The industry has already lost tens of thousands of warm bodies to legal cannabis.

The reaction of the Prison Industry has been convincing people who vote that now we to imprison undocumented workers. (But almost never the Americans who hire them.)

A warm body is a warm body. The prison industry is an equal opportunity slave holder.

Do you have evidence of this?  Of people being imprisoned for the sole reason that they are undocumented workers?  Sure, there is a removal process that includes detention, but prison?

Of course, I support a much expanded near free immigration policy.  I certainly am not interested in paying to house illegal immigrants. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Thus the disconnect.

You actually believe that people convicted of nonviolent, non-theft violations are "criminals."

When you overstay your time at the parking meter, are you a "criminal"?

The reason you think that you are not a criminal, and the guy who sells cocaine without a tax stamp is a criminal is because you do have a history of staying too long in a parking space, but you don't have a history of selling untaxed cocaine.

Oh boy. Woof, that is a false equivalent, but I suspect you already know that. The problem with opioids or coke or whatever the drug d'jour has squat to do with collection of taxes. People who sell illegal drugs are in effect preying on those prone to addiction and as such as use of such detrimental to individuals and society as a whole.

So the question is really, by selling drugs are you trying to take advantage of another person to enrich yourself by destroying their lives? Solet me ask you this, is it okay by you that one person can exploit another's addiction in order to gain monetary enrichment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

So the question is really, by selling drugs are you trying to take advantage of another person to enrich yourself by destroying their lives? Solet me ask you this, is it okay by you that one person can exploit another's addiction in order to gain monetary enrichment?

Actually, I’m beginning to agree with you. So far all the Satlers have had to confront is museums refusing to take their money this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

You are confusing what I said with what you think I said.

I did not in any way wish to suggest that those enslaved were wrongly treated. Not in the least. What I asked was how being enslaved changed their lives. How was being brought to the new world vastly different then the lives they had been living. It is a given that slavery and slave trade wrong, unjust and dehumanizing. But if we are trying to assign a dollar value to a notion of reparations, one must consider the difference in their lives because of slavery. Put it this way, were they slaves having been sold and brought to America, or were they already slaves being sold off to America? I suspect the latter is more the case.

I do not think anyone is "subhuman", far from it actually. I have long held that one of the glaring flaws in the US Constitution was the interpretation of the term man/men as meaning white males rather than "humanbeing" and "mankind". That we passed a number of amendments to correct that that served only to leave others out of the party. 

The difference in their lives was we denied them freedom. You are trying to make it more confusing, more abstract, but it is fundamentally the crime against humanity for which we owe a debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

 

Do you have evidence of this?  Of people being imprisoned for the sole reason that they are undocumented workers?  Sure, there is a removal process that includes detention, but prison?

Of course, I support a much expanded near free immigration policy.  I certainly am not interested in paying to house illegal immigrants. 

It's profitable business ... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-winner-under-trump-the-private-prison-industry/

-- or --

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/21/565318778/big-money-as-private-immigrant-jails-boom

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Oh boy. Woof, that is a false equivalent, but I suspect you already know that. The problem with opioids or coke or whatever the drug d'jour has squat to do with collection of taxes. People who sell illegal drugs are in effect preying on those prone to addiction and as such as use of such detrimental to individuals and society as a whole.

So the question is really, by selling drugs are you trying to take advantage of another person to enrich yourself by destroying their lives? Solet me ask you this, is it okay by you that one person can exploit another's addiction in order to gain monetary enrichment?

People who sell drugs are selling them to a willing customer.

Now if they sell them to a child, that's a crime, obviously. If an adult has sex with a child, that's a crime. But adults are legally allowed to have sex with other adults, and adults are legally allowed to sell drugs to other adults ... unless that particular drug doesn't have a tax stamp.

Is it okay to exploit someone's addiction to gain money? Ethically? I don't want to be in that business. Do you?

But legally? It's 100% legal if the "drug" in question is taxed. So I can legally exploit my fellow American's addiction to alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, and sugar, alcohol and gambling, and Oxycontin, and alcohol, and pharmaceutical cocaine, alcohol, and morphine, and diet drugs and alcohol, and alcohol and alcohol. And also alcohol.

The only time it becomes a "crime" to sell someone these drugs is if I'm not a licensed seller or if the drug isn't taxed. And arguably, it is a crime, because those are taxes that are needed to pay for our counties, states and country. But when you overstay your time at the parking meter, you similarly steal money from the public. When you roll through a stop sign you endanger the public. And yet, you don't consider these crimes, you consider them a "false equivalence."

A quick question for you ... what are the most  expensive drugs to society in the USA?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mikewof said:

A quick question for you ... what are the most  expensive drugs to society in the USA?

Define "expensive drugs to society"?

I sense where you are going is to take this towards the cost of healthcare...……...

Was reading up on the subject the other day, cost of healthcare being topical and all. Did you know as a total percentage of healthcare costs, prescription drugs accounts for just 10% of total healthcare costs? Hospitals accounted for another 37% and doctors 27% IIRC. Point being, say you slashed drug costs by 50%, the reduction of healthcare costs overall would be just 5%. So I think your attempts to pull the discussion in that direction a non-starter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Define "expensive drugs to society"?

I sense where you are going is to take this towards the cost of healthcare...……...

Was reading up on the subject the other day, cost of healthcare being topical and all. Did you know as a total percentage of healthcare costs, prescription drugs accounts for just 10% of total healthcare costs? Hospitals accounted for another 37% and doctors 27% IIRC. Point being, say you slashed drug costs by 50%, the reduction of healthcare costs overall would be just 5%. So I think your attempts to pull the discussion in that direction a non-starter.

You brought this up. You asked me about exploiting other people's addictions.

And yet, that's what we do all the time in the USA. By far, the most expensive drugs in the USA are sugar, tobacco and alcohol. The "glamor" drugs of meth, heroin, oxy ... the rehab centers are filled with far more alcoholics than any other kind of drug abuser.

I bring this up because you actually seem to believe that someone who sells cocaine to a willing user is criminal, while someone who sells alcohol to a willing user is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mikewof said:

You brought this up. You asked me about exploiting other people's addictions.

And yet, that's what we do all the time in the USA. By far, the most expensive drugs in the USA are sugar, tobacco and alcohol. The "glamor" drugs of meth, heroin, oxy ... the rehab centers are filled with far more alcoholics than any other kind of drug abuser.

I bring this up because you actually seem to believe that someone who sells cocaine to a willing user is criminal, while someone who sells alcohol to a willing user is not.

I beg to differ, caffeine is the number one addictive drug in the US and the world I suspect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I'm not sure that you do. Additions aren't about Miami Vice.

Sorry, I don't know a great deal about Miami Vice and its "additions"

I do know people addicted to drugs will do all sorts of things to get those drugs and people who sell drugs use that to their advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Sorry, I don't know a great deal about Miami Vice and its "additions"

I do know people addicted to drugs will do all sorts of things to get those drugs and people who sell drugs use that to their advantage.

Additions!

If typos are the window to a man's soul, then my soul is filled with rows and rows of jellybeans on the kitchen table where I learned to add(ition), subtract and multiply. (I never really learned how to divide, I kind of fake that one by multiplying inverse fractions.)

People addicted to drugs will do all sorts of things to get those drugs and people who sell drugs use that to their advantage.

I just retyped what you wrote because it's 100% accurate and concise. You are spot-on, sir!

Now, what is a "drug"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

I beg to differ, caffeine is the number one addictive drug in the US and the world I suspect.

I didn't write about the addictive nature of the drug in the previous post to which you replied, I wrote about the public health costs.

Is air pollution a drug? That's responsible for about $40 billion/year of public health costs due to COPD, asthma, etc..

Is alcohol a drug? It's easily the most lethal drug, nothing else even comes close, except for one other drug ...

Is refined sugar a drug? Lessee ... current public health costs of overconsumption of sugar is about $250 billion/year. It shits all over air pollution, even beats tobacco.

 

Is the societal cost of the drug the reason that it should be legal or illegal? Given the toxicity of the refined sugar compared to cocaine, why are the cocaine dealers in prison while the sugar dealers hold our highest offices?

There are some 500,000 Black and Latino and Caucasian men and women, and even a few children, in prison. Statistically, they present no more of a risk to society than a licensed driver who using a cell phone behind the wheel, or the owner of a polluting factory, or a little shop that sells cupcakes. And yet, we enslaved poor people in compliance with The Constitution of the United States for well over a hundred years, with no end in sight.

You and I and everyone else in this country who believes that slavery is reprehensible, is in fact, at this moment, part of owner a slave. How much of a slave do you own Bill? Just to use round numbers, there are about 500,000 slaves in the USA, and they are held equally by 350,000,000 people, thus every 600 Americans owns a complete slave, currently imprisoned for a non-crime in the U.S. Prison System.

I assume you are a good guy, right? What do you say, you and I and 588 of our best friends, join together and buy our slave out of slavery, and then the adorable little fella free and back into the nature? How much would we need to buy that slave back from his current owners? Lessee ... it costs the taxpayers about $30,000/year to enslave him. Assume he's an average capital investment of five years, thus his life is worth about $150,000. That's not too much if all 600 of use share the cost, it would only come to $250 each. If we financed that over 3 years, with the human as collateral, then we can buy that poor fellow out of slavery for a few pennies a day.

Of course, we would never do that, would we? We like to have slaves so much, that we are even able to convince ourselves that refined cocaine is more dangerous than refined sugar, just so that we can keep our slaves. See Bill, that's the truth of the Thirteenth Amendment, it didn't end slavery, it just took away the slaves from the wealthy and turned every American man, woman and child into timeshare slave owners.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

You have successfully derailed the entire conversation at this point Michael.

In your mind I've derailed it because you prefer not to discuss the continuing reality of slavery in the USA. it's easy to ask about reparations as if slavery is over. But it isn't, is it?

About half a million Americans are currently enslaved. This thread is about slavery, and the idea of confronting existing slavery is a whole lot less interesting than an academic discussion over the history of slavery.

The only thing that has derailed in the feel-good wankfest over the "history" of slavery. It ain't just history. It's now. The engine of slavery is currently the criminalization of non-taxed pharmaceuticals. Over a hundred years ago, the engine was loitering and Blacks doing things that the Whites didn't want them to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, put down the crack pipe. Please seek help. 

I have long championed prison reform in the form of extensive rehabilitation in exchange for sentence reductions for all non-violent offenders. In fact even somewhat violent offenders but with a longer minimum stay should be on the table. But to suggest those who break the law are somehow enslaved is just plain whacked. Now stop foaming at the mouth and get some rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Michael, put down the crack pipe. Please seek help. 

I have long championed prison reform in the form of extensive rehabilitation in exchange for sentence reductions for all non-violent offenders. In fact even somewhat violent offenders but with a longer minimum stay should be on the table. But to suggest those who break the law are somehow enslaved is just plain whacked. Now stop foaming at the mouth and get some rest.

It's adorable when someone has to reset resort to the "put down the crack pipe" thing because they aren't willing to actually defend their positions.

The Thirteenth Amendment is clear, if you're an American, you should read it. According to The Constitution, they are in a state of "involuntary servitude." Call that "whacked" if it bothers you, but the punishment is clear.

I asked you to define "drugs" and you seemed to steer away from it. The undeniable reality is that well-off people get to abuse and sell drugs with impunity even when those drugs are demonstrably more harmful than illegal drugs. But when uninsured people in poverty use and sell their drugs, then they will often see legally sanctioned "involuntary servitude."

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 2:07 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Did you choose where you were born and to whom?

Once one becomes an adult one must make their own life decisions.   Life is a big game.   It’s a game of setting goals, determining plans to achieve those goals, and working those plans.  Every individual has a different game to play.  If you don’t play you can’t win.  

Have your parents held your game back?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 10:02 PM, SloopJonB said:

I started by choosing my parents and my place of birth well.

Illiterate Cape Breton coal miners were off the potential parental table early on - just for example.

What stopped you after becoming an adult?   

What’s wrong with illiterate coal miners as long as they love their children and raise them properly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So anywho..... back to my call for a colorblind society as the best way forward for all.  Was just reading the NYT article about the Dem’s dilemma with impeachment and they specifically reference “Lawmakers of Color”.    

Quote

Lawmakers of color, such as Representatives Maxine Waters of California, Al Green of Texas, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, seem to be leaning in the farthest. Ms. Tlaib had a pointed message for those who want to leave the decision to voters, or worry that impeachment would diminish their electoral prospects.

Why do they need to be distinguished from lawmakers of non color?  How does their skin color have sweet fuckall to do with whether they think impeaching the POTUS is a good or bad thing?  

See, its this continual gratuitous use of racial discriminators when its not only not required but it’s irrelevant to the conversation that sets us back and destroys any hope of getting past this shit.  A Black, Latino, Samoan or white lawmaker’s opinion on this matter should carry completely equal weight. 

Lawmakers of Color???  YGBSM!!!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just your uppity white ignorance talking JB. Color is important. Race is important. Creed is important. Gender and Gender Identification  is important. How else would we make important decisions on our direction forward unless we consider it through those lenses?  What better qualifier? What greater distinction? What more important posture? My God man, how would they know how to vote!!!!

A color blind society……. surely you jest!!!

(purple font people, purple font)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

"The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together." -Thomas Sowell

When do we get our reparations?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jzk said:

"The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together." -Thomas Sowell

When do we get our reparations?

 

 

 

If you feel you are an oppressed minority in the country of Tunisia, go for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raz'r said:

If you feel you are an oppressed minority in the country of Tunisia, go for it.

Not to mention being oppressed by Indian Americans right here in the USA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jzk said:

"The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together." -Thomas Sowell

When do we get our reparations?

 

 

That's very VERY unlikely to be true.

What he's saying is that the number of US merchant sailors was greater than the number of field hands on plantations; and not only that, the small percentage of US merchant sailors that went into the Med... and the small percentage of THAT small percentage that got captured by the Barbary pirates..

Does not even have a slight whiff of truthiness.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

That's very VERY unlikely to be true.

What he's saying is that the number of US merchant sailors was greater than the number of field hands on plantations; and not only that, the small percentage of US merchant sailors that went into the Med... and the small percentage of THAT small percentage that got captured by the Barbary pirates..

Does not even have a slight whiff of truthiness.

- DSK

No, that is not what he is saying.  His quote is right there for you to read. 

“The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jzk said:

No, that is not what he is saying.  His quote is right there for you to read. 

“The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together.”

So, it's not just Americans, but "whites" of any origin, enslaved by them. Are Arabs and Indians "white"by this standard?

Without a fairly serious reference, I am still saying this is utter nonsense.

The entire population of the Barbary States in those days was not only less than the number of slaves in the North American Colonies, it was probably a small fraction of that number. The best reference I can find is for a few of the coastal cities, none of which were more than half the size of the major American ports. And the interior of these countries is desert.

For this assertion to be true, the Barbary Pirates would have had to enslave approximately five to ten times their own population. That would be a notable historical achievement.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, it's not just Americans, but "whites" of any origin, enslaved by them. Are Arabs and Indians "white"by this standard?

Without a fairly serious reference, I am still saying this is utter nonsense.

The entire population of the Barbary States in those days was not only less than the number of slaves in the North American Colonies, it was probably a small fraction of that number. The best reference I can find is for a few of the coastal cities, none of which were more than half the size of the major American ports. And the interior of these countries is desert.

For this assertion to be true, the Barbary Pirates would have had to enslave approximately five to ten times their own population. That would be a notable historical achievement.

- DSK

Yeah, on one hand there is Thomas Sowell, who mentions in that video that he has an entire bookcase in his home of books about slavery in various parts of the world.  

On the other hand, there is you, who has really nothing at all.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Yeah, on one hand there is Thomas Sowell, who mentions in that video that he has an entire bookcase in his home of books about slavery in various parts of the world.  

On the other hand, there is you, who has really nothing at all.  

Thomas Sowell is generally a smart man but just because he says something does not make it true.

As for "what I have," it's a dozen or so facts that indicate what Sowell says is not true.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

Thomas Sowell is generally a smart man but just because he says something does not make it true.

As for "what I have," it's a dozen or so facts that indicate what Sowell says is not true.

- DSK

Thomas Sowell is a very accomplished, smart, well researched economist.  If he says something, there is a good chance it is solid. 

But certainly not infallible.

Then there is your 10 minutes of research that you didn't even cite.  It doesn't mean you are wrong, just that there is a 99.99% chance that you are wrong. 

Further, it would seem the burden is on you at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always believed that someone else's failure to do the right thing in now way alleviates me of my obligation to do the right thing. That there were whites enslaved by Barbary pirates, regardless of the numbers, should have zero impact in our discussions about what we should do. We should examine  what is right to do based on our own ethics and moral code with no consideration to what others do. You do the right thing because it is right, not because it is convenient, and not because everyone else is. If just one of the officers who were with Chauvin took that approach, then George Floyd would be alive today and able to hug his daughter and his daughter able to hug him. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LenP said:

I always believed that someone else's failure to do the right thing in now way alleviates me of my obligation to do the right thing. That there were whites enslaved by Barbary pirates, regardless of the numbers, should have zero impact in our discussions about what we should do. We should examine  what is right to do based on our own ethics and moral code with no consideration to what others do. You do the right thing because it is right, not because it is convenient, and not because everyone else is. If just one of the officers who were with Chauvin took that approach, then George Floyd would be alive today and able to hug his daughter and his daughter able to hug him. 

Yes, we should absolutely not have slavery today in the US.

But, slavery does exist in the world right now.  What should we do about that?  What is the right thing to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing the total of all white people, from anywhere (not just Americans, or anything like that), captured & sold into slavery by the Barbary Pirates... to the number of people sold into slavery in the US, excluding those sold by Americans to other places, like the Carribean, South America, and so on, and excluding those born into slavery in the US...?

And you think that's a fair comparison that proves anything?  Well... I guess Sowell's got your number, anyways. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, frenchie said:

Comparing the total of all white people, from anywhere (not just Americans, or anything like that), captured & sold into slavery by the Barbary Pirates... to the number of people sold into slavery in the US, excluding those sold by Americans to other places, like the Carribean, South America, and so on, and excluding those born into slavery in the US...?

And you think that's a fair comparison that proves anything?  Well... I guess Sowell's got your number, anyways. 

I very strongly suspect that the numbers are nowhere close. The population of slaves in the US in 1800 about 900,000

The population of the Barbary States is not that well known but they did not have as many coastal cities and ports as the US, and none were as big as ours, a generous guesstimate would be 500,000 possibly half that

Still, could be true. Said to be stranger than fiction. Still irrelevant, too

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slavery has a very long history and goes on still. I am 100% sure Africans sent to the Americas don't win the global slave contest. Probably no one even comes close to the Roman Empire.

That does not mean it wasn't wrong just because others did it too and we (Americans) KNEW it was wrong. Also many forms of slavery were based on bad luck, tribe A fought tribe B and the surviving losers were the slaves. We decided slavery was ordained by God because the Africans were inferior beings who NEEDED to be enslaved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

We decided slavery was ordained by God because the Africans were inferior beings who NEEDED to be enslaved.

This has always been the belief/ justification throughout history, since 6800 B.C. when the world's first city-state emerged in Mesopotamia. The history of slavery is brutal and heart wrenching. Modern day slavery in places like the failed state of Libya is no less brutal (feather in the cap of Hilary and Oh-bomb-ya, we miss you!)   

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Slavery has a very long history and goes on still. I am 100% sure Africans sent to the Americas don't win the global slave contest. Probably no one even comes close to the Roman Empire.

That does not mean it wasn't wrong just because others did it too and we (Americans) KNEW it was wrong. Also many forms of slavery were based on bad luck, tribe A fought tribe B and the surviving losers were the slaves. We decided slavery was ordained by God because the Africans were inferior beings who NEEDED to be enslaved.

Well it's revisionist morality to decide that all slave holders were guilty of a horrible crime against humanity. For the vast majority of human history, slavery was legal and accepted practice. Hell if it weren't for slavery, we wouldn't have about half of the Bible, which was written by slaves or descendants of recently enslaved peoples, moralizing about how people should treat each other including slaves.

Slavery in the US did have some peculiarities. In most (pretty much all, AFAIK) slave-holding societies, a slave owner could fuck his slaves all he wanted. But the children were not automatically slaves themselves. In the US south, it was common for some slave-owning men to sell their own children and count it as part of the profit of the system. And JZK says slavery is the opposite of capitalism!

On the subject of revisionist morality- let's pretend we can fast-forward 200 years, to a future where humanity is fighting for survival against the scorching desert our planet has become. Running an internal combustion engine would be seen as a horrific crime against humanity. Would they hate all of us who own and drive cars & lawnmowers, and consider us vile criminals? Curse us and deface our monuments?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an analogy, that is somewhere between 50% and 75% fail. There is some grumbling about removing monuments to people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who happened to be slave owners but their fame is nothing to do with slavery. That is not what the vast majority of the "remove the monuments" movement is about.

MOST of it has to do with the Civil War, which involved traitors making war on Americans and killing them to preserve their slave labor economy. THOSE people deserve no monuments and especially not monuments put up long after the Civil War to make sure uppity Negroes knew their place. In Ocracoke (or maybe Cape Hatteras??) there is a graveyard for German WWII sailors who died fighting near there. The locals had no problem giving enemy sailors a decent burial, but they didn't go and put up a big statue of Admiral Donitz there either :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

As an analogy, that is somewhere between 50% and 75% fail. There is some grumbling about removing monuments to people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who happened to be slave owners but there fame is nothing to do with slavery. That is not what the vast majority of the "remove the monuments" movement is about.

MOST of it has to do with the Civil War, which involved traitors making war on Americans and killing them to preserve their slave labor economy. THOSE people deserve no monuments and especially not monuments put up long after the Civil War to make sure uppity Negroes knew their place.

Agreed. It's a good point of discrimination. However some people go pretty far over the line both ways. Some think that a 1920s monument to Nathan Bedford Forrest erected by Daughters Of The White Knights Secret Society is a sacred cultural shrine. And just this morning I heard a young black man saying very earnestly that the names of slave owners on buildings around the Clemson campus... which itself is offensive because it's foundation was on a former slave plantation... who were in no way connected to the Confederacy... should be removed, possibly with violence, definitely with "defacing ceremony" which he didn't really define.

George Washington freed his slaves in his will. He left the details to Martha, who got it done although it took a while. Thomas Jefferson's will stated that his slaves should be freed but he was too far in debt and he did not specifically lay that obligation on his executor, null result. General Ulysses S. Grant, in his pre-general days, rented slaves as day labor and in his own words "worked them like mules."

It's not up to me to decide what (or who) is offensive to black people. I'm just suggesting that moral revision is not a good principle.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really a lie promulgated by the modern US Reich 

that slavery here ended in 1865. 

Tens of thousands of black Americans were pressed into unpaid labor 

for the flimsiest of crimes until well into the 1940's. 

Read this Pulitzer Prize winning book 

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/slavery-by-another-name-douglas-a-blackmon/1013844428

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2020 at 7:32 PM, jzk said:

Not to mention being oppressed by Indian Americans right here in the USA.

 

On 6/10/2020 at 9:17 PM, Steam Flyer said:

So, it's not just Americans, but "whites" of any origin, enslaved by them. Are Arabs and Indians "white"by this standard?

Without a fairly serious reference, I am still saying this is utter nonsense.

The entire population of the Barbary States in those days was not only less than the number of slaves in the North American Colonies, it was probably a small fraction of that number. The best reference I can find is for a few of the coastal cities, none of which were more than half the size of the major American ports. And the interior of these countries is desert.

For this assertion to be true, the Barbary Pirates would have had to enslave approximately five to ten times their own population. That would be a notable historical achievement.

- DSK

My family came to the US from Europe in the 20th century to avoid their probable slaughter.   My grandfather joined the Navy and fought for the destruction of their ‘homeland’.   Two things my grandparents (maternal and paternal) NEVER spoke of were anything having to do with where they came from and religion.

It was not ‘utter nonsense’.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rok Dog said:
On 6/10/2020 at 10:17 PM, Steam Flyer said:

.... For this assertion to be true, the Barbary Pirates would have had to enslave approximately five to ten times their own population. That would be a notable historical achievement.

 

My family came to the US from Europe in the 20th century to avoid their probable slaughter.   My grandfather joined the Navy and fought for the destruction of their ‘homeland’.   Two things my grandparents (maternal and paternal) NEVER spoke of were anything having to do with where they came from and religion.

It was not ‘utter nonsense’.   

???

So, if you can show any evidence that the Barbary Pirates enslaved more white people than the North American colonies and later the U.S. enslaved black people, I'd like to see it. That's what I was referring to as "utter nonsense."

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

???

So, if you can show any evidence that the Barbary Pirates enslaved more white people than the North American colonies and later the U.S. enslaved black people, I'd like to see it. That's what I was referring to as "utter nonsense."

- DSK

They probably didn't, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:
9 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, if you can show any evidence that the Barbary Pirates enslaved more white people than the North American colonies and later the U.S. enslaved black people, I'd like to see it. That's what I was referring to as "utter nonsense."

 

They probably didn't, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

 True.

They also invented the Xebec, which was the fastest most weatherly type of vessel in the world for several generations. A hull form similar to modern planing dinghies (if you squint real hard).

I found a reference to numbers of prisoners held by Tripoli, the largest of the Barbary State port cities... 200 enslaved prisoners, referenced by an American who was captured and ransomed in the 1790s. How many ports did they have? How many slaves were in America at the time?

Without at least some kind of real evidence, this is one of those assertions I am simply not giving any credence, I don't care what authority says it. Authorities are often wrong!

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if I've mentioned this before on here, because several other forums have slavery  threads as well.

But..

If you are of white european Descent you are a decendant of slaves, the Doomsday book of 1086 records that about 10% of the population were slaves or serfs (serf having only slightly more rights than a pure slave). probably the same applies to the rest of Europe

in the generations since then intermarriage has meant that you are all descendants of slaves and slavers.

Also if you are a descenant of a slave in the US , you could also be the descendant of a slaver, not just because slavers had fun with their female slaves, but exslaves some times became slave owners themselves. Also of course in africa white Europeans didn't go in capturing them, themselves they were captured by other tribes and sold.

An example, a famous TV Chef in the UK went on "who do you think you are" a tv Ancestry programme, to find that generations were from slaves in the West Indies. when he got further into his history, and went to Africa, a name linked to to his family meant in an African language... Slaver...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Q said:

I don't know if I've mentioned this before on here, because several other forums have slavery  threads as well.

But..

If you are of white european Descent you are a decendant of slaves, the Doomsday book of 1086 records that about 10% of the population were slaves or serfs (serf having only slightly more rights than a pure slave). probably the same applies to the rest of Europe

in the generations since then intermarriage has meant that you are all descendants of slaves and slavers.

Also if you are a descenant of a slave in the US , you could also be the descendant of a slaver, not just because slavers had fun with their female slaves, but exslaves some times became slave owners themselves. Also of course in africa white Europeans didn't go in capturing them, themselves they were captured by other tribes and sold.

An example, a famous TV Chef in the UK went on "who do you think you are" a tv Ancestry programme, to find that generations were from slaves in the West Indies. when he got further into his history, and went to Africa, a name linked to to his family meant in an African language... Slaver...

When do I get my reparations check then???

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ishmael said:
15 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

When do I get my reparations check then???

Shortly after you mail it to yourself.

I like it.  Two birds, one stone.....

Link to post
Share on other sites