Topic: Joe Biden is President of the United States of America - page 21. (Read 12713 times)

I would not pay individuals but instead try to fix systemic racism and discrimination in housing, education, employment, voting etc, because any potential positive effects of monetary payments would be nullified by that. Neither is happening so it's a pointless discussion. Hopefully I'll live to see the day when the concept of discrimination is no longer a political issue but I'm not gonna hold my breath because that's bad for my respiration.

If you have a solution to reparations , I'm all ears. Again, how do you determine who gets it? How do you determine who was impacted directly by slavery, and how do you determine the stipend? Is it a check, a tax deduction? Do people like Kamala Harris get them? And then what about Native Americans, who have a lower median income than black people? Do they get reparations as well? There's literally no way you could feasibly implement this.

And by the way, I'm agreeing with Bernie Sanders here, which I'd never thought I'd say - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/1/18246394/bernie-sanders-reparations-slavery-2020-harris-booker-warren


Reparations for slavery: Giving African Americans money for atrocities no one alive has committed. Does this mean Native Americans are now being discriminated against because their land was stolen and you're not giving them any money? Yes, absolutely. Native Americans were given petty sums of money for genocide and I'm pretty sure not every Native American alive today has reaped all the benefits either. UBI, everyone gets a stipend, no matter your skin color. Is it fair? Yes. Why is that a hard concept to grasp? That's not even remotely controversial.

LOL pigs have that too. Roof over the head, free meal, free vaccinations and good company/comradery what more could anyone what, a dream come true.

wtf?

Yeah you made it clear during the George Floyd events. Such audacity to demand respiration, can't have that.

This is why I'm against respirations. You go down the list, and you will find tons of groups who were oppressed over the years. Native American genocide seems to not be talked about enough if we're going to have a discussion on the historically oppressed. And the question is, is there a "statute of limitations". At what point do you step back and realize that atrocities happened so long ago in the past that it isn't feasible to compensate decedents of those who were oppressed? And reparations for black people would just create more turmoil between races. Hispanics have a lower median income than white people and Asians in the US. If you start cutting checks to black people, will there not be animosity by white people Asians?

I'd rather have a UBI than reparations, because at least you aren't discriminating on basis of race.

I don't see this. God, what are they doing with America? why did they allow something like this to happen? it turns out that my guess is right, they are just an atheist who has a goal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partus_sequitur_ventrem

1600s they made a law: If a slave gives birth, the child is a slave, with the same owner as their mother.  You could save a lot of money by fucking your slaves instead of paying for new ones imported from Africa.  By the time the Constitution was written, most slaves were 3rd or 4th generation Americans.

Members of all racial groups underwent enslavement at one time or the other. However Democrats want to paint that slavery was only committed against the Africans and whites were the only perpetrators. Nothing can be farther from the truth.

The worst atrocities were carried out by the Arabs, who had established a lucrative slave trading business in Eastern Africa for almost a millennium. However, unlike the Atlantic slave trade, very few descendants of East African slave trade exist. Because the male slaves were immediately castrated and made eunuchs, while any children born to the female slaves were killed as soon as they were born. Fore more than 5 centuries, the Tatars and Turks enslaved millions of East Slavs (Russians, Ukrainians, Poles.etc). Barbary pirates raided Southern Europe, taking huge number of Italian, Spanish and Greek slaves.

Repatriations would still be OK, if they are being paid to individuals who were enslaved once. But that is not the case. The demand is that descendants of a particular ethnic group must be uniformly paid handouts, irrespective of whether they are descended from slaves or not.

Here it gets murky. Take the case of the Amazonia region. During the late 19th century, hundreds of thousands of defenseless natives were enslaved by the rubber companies. The owners of these rubber companies were whites. But the slave raiders were blacks (mostly descended from freed slaves) who were imported from the island of Barbados. These black employees committed spine chilling atrocities against the defenseless natives. They would rape children as young as 3 or 4 years and they would cut the limbs off the children if their parents could not gather enough rubber. One of their favorite past time was to lift infants by their legs and smash their head against rocks. If the democrats have their way, then these barbarians and their descendants will be proclaimed as worthy of repatriations and the remnants of the native slaves will be declared as "oppressors".


A grand total of $1.3 billion. That is for 2.43 billion acres of land, and tens of millions of deaths.

There were reparations paid to Native Americans - in the continental as well as separately for Hawaii and Alaska.  Also to the Japanese that were locked up in camps during WW2.

^^^ How about reparations to Irish Americans? When America Despised the Irish: The 19th Century’s Refugee Crisis - https://www.history.com/news/when-america-despised-the-irish-the-19th-centurys-refugee-crisis.

If they want to start paying reparations, then they should first pay them to the descendants of American Indians who underwent genocide when the Europeans first colonized North America. I am talking about incidents which occurred during the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Isolated incidents of genocide against the natives continued into the early decades of 20th century (check the case of Ishi, the last of the Yahi tribe).

And the first people to be enslaved in the United States were the native Americans in the 16th century, especially the Calusa, Timuqua and other Floridan tribes by the conquistadors. History of African American slavery in the United States started at a much later date. The first slaves from Africa were imported to the United States only in 1619.

Now what is the logic in saying that repatriations should be paid to only one ethnic group, while the group which was the most effected (native Americans) should be disqualified from receiving any of this amount? African Americans increased in number, and they account for 45 million individuals currently. On the other hand, the natives were almost wiped out. Pure-blooded natives number less than a million, and 99% of the languages which were spoken by them before 1600 are now extinct.

@Gyfts: Joseph Robinette Biden should pay reparations to both Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, while Obama and Harris should pay reparations between themselves. 

Larry Elder SHUTS DOWN Reparations Bill at Congressional Hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hEWdc_GA_Y

https://nypost.com/2021/03/01/biden-adviser-says-white-house-to-start-acting-on-reparations/

Hmm, respirations. What strikes me as odd is that Obama had the house and the senate, but there was never any bills related to reparation passed. Wonder what changed since then. Seems like a terrible move, for multiple reasons.

How do you define "African American" to encapsulate all those that were negatively impacted to the US's history of slavery/racism. Elon Musk, mind you, is considered an African American (he was born in South Africa). Do you start conducting DNA tests?

How do you determine the stipend? No one alive today has been a slave. In fact, slavery has been outlawed for over a hundred years. So how do you calculate the amount that is owed based on what happened in the past?

I look forward to Joe Biden not being able to figure any of this out. Congrats to US tax payers on footing the bill, though.

.........what am I doing here? I’m going to lose track here.
https://youtu.be/c08m3ad60l0

Ohhh, nice speculation. I like how the statements are all from personal perspectives without actually giving a nice touch of reliability. Though nice speculation. NEXT.

Joe Biden is President of the United States of America

The question, of course, is, how much longer?


Is FAKE Prez. Biden about to be exposed and removed?

Pretty sure that’s been our concerns in this market for awhile. While they may be able to drive the price down, it wont change the utility of Bitcoin (or of any cryptocurrency for that matter) I’m not sure how long they could change the narrative on Bitcoin through banning exchanges, taxing things, and so on and so forth, but it’s still something to be scared of.

One reason that I’m not super spooked is that the second biggest donor to Joe Bidens Campaign was the founder of FTX Sam Bankman-Fried. He donated approx $5M to his campaign.

While Biden could really do whatever he wants, having lobbying efforts on our side is bound to help a bit. We haven’t seen any signals so far of any crypto regulations or even anti crypto people in places where they could regulate.

My main concern is that she's going to be anti-Bitcoin to the point where she can regulate the hell out of it driving the price down. Imagine if she pushed for taxing P2P crypto transactions (not that it's feasible ofc but for the sake of discussion), she could single handedly derail BTC and other cryptos. If she started to push for regulation of US based exchanges, that would also have an effect.

Her comments are not too consequential alone, but it's enough to make me be cautious of the Biden administration in regards to crypto currency.