Slavery reparations

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Sava
Dude, you seriously need to stop watching so much TV if the things you watch get you this upset. Here's a suggestion. GO OUT IN THE REAL WORLD AND SEE HOW THINGS WORK.

With all due respect (HA!), if you truly believe that "in America today, honesty and hard work will get you success," then you're the one who needs to go out in the real world and see how things work.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Guynemer
For the love of holy blue ****, will you please stop trying to compare this to things like "Jews getting reparations from Egyptians" and other idiotic ****? Some things aren't slippery slopes. Moreover, this isn't about suing a nation or a nebulous entity like "Egyptians."

This is about suing corporations that profited from slave labor. Corporations that STILL EXIST TODAY, corporations that never paid for that labor. Stop trying to pretend that you don't understand the difference.

Those corporations' success in the 20th Century had nothing to do with slave labor pre-Civil War. Go learn about running a business and corporate management, and then you can graduate into the "I know what I am talking about" crowd.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Sava


Those corporations' success in the 20th Century had nothing to do with slave labor pre-Civil War. Go learn about running a business and corporate management, and then you can graduate into the "I know what I am talking about" crowd.

It has nothing to do with these corporations' 20th Century success, Sparky. It has everything to do with their 19th Century success. Or haven't you been paying attention?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Guynemer
This is about suing corporations that profited from slave labor. Corporations that STILL EXIST TODAY, corporations that never paid for that labor.

Guy, since they are suing for lost wages, the statute of limiations on that type of suit should have run out long ago even if we accept the legality of suing over an act that was commonplace over 100 years ago.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


Guy, since they are suing for lost wages, the statute of limiations on that type of suit should have run out long ago even if we accept the legality of suing over an act that was commonplace over 100 years ago.

That might be true--I honestly wouldn't know. I was just trying to make it clear what this was and was NOT about. If there is a statute of limitations on this sort of thing, well, they might be up ****'s creek. Perhaps they're hoping for the PR hit to convince them to make the sort of concessions Orange mentioned oh-so-long ago.

BTW Orange... does this mean the honeymoon is over?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Perhaps they're hoping for the PR hit to convince them to make the sort of concessions Orange mentioned oh-so-long ago.

Perhaps, something along these lines:

http://www.aetna.com/business_issues/insurancepolicies.htm

Scroll down until you see the words, Diversity Initiatives, and start reading.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


Perhaps, something along these lines:

http://www.aetna.com/business_issues/insurancepolicies.htm

Scroll down until you see the words, Diversity Initiatives, and start reading.

I'm glad they're doing those things; any sane person would. Nothing but applause for those programs. But I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that they do more, considering how gigantic that corporation is--and how they profited off the lost wages of slaves. And regardless, it doesn't specifically address the lost wages, if there is some sort of loophole in the statute of limitations (if there is one for this sort of thing). (And, again, my line of argument basically only applies to my "ideal" lawsuit, which doesn't appear of have a snowball's chance in hell of ever becoming a reality.)

[Adam Smith]

Guynemer:

But I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that they do more, considering how gigantic that corporation is--and how they profited off the lost wages of slaves

Lets be clear about this....Aetna does not owe anybody back wages. All they did was make a profit on a few insurance policies, probably a tiny portion of their total business, and at least one step removed from the slaves themselves. While I can understand that you are arguing about an "ideal lawsuit", the indefensibly large dollar amount and apparent lack of connection between plaintiffs and defendants makes this look more like a shake down or a PR stunt to me.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Guynemer:
Lets be clear about this....Aetna does not owe anybody back wages.

True dat. However, they did directly profit from those slaves in question. A gray area, certainly. Not quite the same thing as the slaves who built the railroads for the companies that became CSX. (EDIT: had a vocabulary brainfart.)

[C0ckney]

I loved the way everyone (lo Tingkai) ignored the really important part of this post. Guess it's a question you feel uncomfortable answering...

Originally posted by Sava


The problem is... the companies being sued had nothing to do with slavery. Sure, its the same company, but the people who run and work for them are not the direct descendents of the people who were responsible for the slavery.

And where do you think the money for the reparations will come from. Many honest, hard working Americans will lose their jobs as a result if these blacks get their reparations. The whole idea makes me sick. These people suing for reparations don't care or bother to think about the consequences if they win. They won't be handing out justice to the people who caused the suffering of their ancestors, they will be destroying the lives of tens of thousands of people. If they win, these companies will have to cut tens of thousands of jobs.

In a perfect world, everyone deserves reparations for injustices in the past. BUT IT SIMPLY ISN'T PRACTICLE.

Unfortunately, you and other people who support these reparations are too short sighted to see the full range of the consequences of them.

Sava

[Caligastia]

Tingkai wont be posting for a couple of days, he got banned for being an immature communist ****head.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by C0ckney
I loved the way everyone (lo Tingkai) ignored the really important part of this post. Guess it's a question you feel uncomfortable answering...



Sava

Actually that was covered quite some time ago by KrazyHorse, if you'd care to look back. Basically--tough for those investors and whatnot. Free market system, they should've known better. None of that is any excuse for not giving the descendants of slaves what they are owed.

[MrFun]

Stop ignoring my posts!!

[Caligastia]

Did someone say something?

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by Guynemer


Actually that was covered quite some time ago by KrazyHorse, if you'd care to look back. Basically--tough for those investors and whatnot. Free market system, they should've known better. None of that is any excuse for not giving the descendants of slaves what they are owed.

So let me get this straight. You don't see a problem with this $1.4 trillion dollars being taken from companies run by people who had nothing to do with the slave trade, thereby screwing the employees and shareholders who also have no connection what so ever to slavery. And being given to people who weren't slaves, or aren't even children of slaves (and in most cases we're talking 4 or more generations, not to mention the fact that many blacks in the US aren't even descended from slaves) for something which happened 150 years ago, that seems pretty ****ed up to me.