Slavery reparations?

[Asclepias]

No, it was just to have you experience what they felt, because you've never suffered and complain NON-FUCKING-STOP about getting paid for nothing!!!!

Who asked to experience it? That suggestion came from you. I'm not complaining about anything. Me pointing out the merits of reparations bothers you. I get it. Dont call it complaining though.

Except you haven't pointed out the merits of paying people who not only didn't suffer, but who actually benefitted from their ancestors having been brought over here. You just constantly whine about some fictitious number you want to be paid.

But I did. I clearly showed there is a precedent set by the Japanese. Some of the Japanese that were paid reparations were descendents of the original people that were harmed. Your refusal to digest and understand that is your problem and shows a clear lack of intelligence.

 

[Asclepias]

Damn! One of you buffoons finally caught me. You retards are stupid. I got you so riled up
your dumb cave ape asses couldn't even think straight for pages and pages. Nice playing with you guys. Try and think before getting emotional next time.

AssClap gets smoked having made a simply stupid statement predicated on his boundless supply of misinformation.

And what does the pussy do?

Rather than own it or even own up to it, the bitch tries (in a particularly transparent way) to turn HIS massive fuck-up around on the one who exposed his ignorance.

AssClap is very emotionally invested in his clearly unsupportable position. ["Reparations!" ]

Poor deluded loser asshole cock-smoking pussy that he is. He is presently in full meltdown mode.



It remains pretty funny to observe.

Hes such a fucktard, and he doesn't even have the courage to admit his mistake. Asclepias is pathetic, ignorant and weak. Hes a pitiful excuse for a man.

Dont be mad your dumbass didnt catch it and toddpatriot did. You fools were in such a tizzy over reparations you couldnt even think straight.

 

[Asclepias]

Damn! One of you buffoons finally caught me. You retards are stupid. I got you so riled up
your dumb cave ape asses couldn't even think straight for pages and pages. Nice playing with you guys. Try and think before getting emotional next time.

Any luck calculating how much each slave should have received for reparations?
Or are you as bad at math as you are at reading the Constitution?

He's dancing because the bottom fell out of his bullshit case.

​

Where did the bottom fall out my case? No one has yet taken on the challenge. Why do you think I had to play with that clown bedowin? You guys were getting boring. Anyone want to step up and take the Pepsi challenge?

 

[Chaussette]

Who asked to experience it? That suggestion came from you. I'm not complaining about anything. Me pointing out the merits of reparations bothers you. I get it. Dont call it complaining though.

Except you haven't pointed out the merits of paying people who not only didn't suffer, but who actually benefitted from their ancestors having been brought over here. You just constantly whine about some fictitious number you want to be paid.

But I did. I clearly showed there is a precedent set by the Japanese. Some of the Japanese that were paid reparations were descendents of the original people that were harmed. Your refusal to digest and understand that is your problem and shows a clear lack of intelligence.

Don't worry your poor little head, I knew about the Japs, but you still haven't explained THE MERITS of doing this, that's what I asked. Anyways, only the interned and their spouses, immediate children and parents are eligible, not every descendant until the end of time. AAAWWWWW, so close!!!!


Civil Liberties Act of 1988 :: Topaz Japanese-American Relocation Center Digital Collection

 

[Asclepias]

Except you haven't pointed out the merits of paying people who not only didn't suffer, but who actually benefitted from their ancestors having been brought over here. You just constantly whine about some fictitious number you want to be paid.

But I did. I clearly showed there is a precedent set by the Japanese. Some of the Japanese that were paid reparations were descendents of the original people that were harmed. Your refusal to digest and understand that is your problem and shows a clear lack of intelligence.

Don't worry your poor little head, I knew about the Japs, but you still haven't explained THE MERITS of doing this, that's what I asked. Anyways, only the interned and their spouses, immediate children and parents are eligible, not every descendant until the end of time. AAAWWWWW, so close!!!!


Civil Liberties Act of 1988 :: Topaz Japanese-American Relocation Center Digital Collection

The merits are that the descendants of the slaves get the unpaid reperations due to their ancestors. The debt is on the books collecting interest. Its not benefiting anyone but the government that allowed the wrong in the first place.

Since the Japanese that passed were not around to collect the reparations the funds naturally went to their descendants. Show me were there is a time limit on when reparations can be paid and that the person has to be alive for those reparations to be paid to their descendents. You wont find that. This is not the only precedent either. I'm just waiting for someone to be able to come up with something to refute my assertion.

 

[Chaussette]

But I did. I clearly showed there is a precedent set by the Japanese. Some of the Japanese that were paid reparations were descendents of the original people that were harmed. Your refusal to digest and understand that is your problem and shows a clear lack of intelligence.

Don't worry your poor little head, I knew about the Japs, but you still haven't explained THE MERITS of doing this, that's what I asked. Anyways, only the interned and their spouses, immediate children and parents are eligible, not every descendant until the end of time. AAAWWWWW, so close!!!!


Civil Liberties Act of 1988 :: Topaz Japanese-American Relocation Center Digital Collection

The merits are that the descendants of the slaves get the unpaid reperations due to their ancestors. The debt is on the books collecting interest. Its not benefiting anyone but the government that allowed the wrong in the first place.

Since the Japanese that passed were not around to collect the reparations the funds naturally went to their descendants. Show me were there is a time limit on when reparations can be paid and that the person has to be alive for those reparations to be paid to their descendents. You wont find that. This is not the only precedent either. I'm just waiting for someone to be able to come up with something to refute my assertion.

Read the link, it has the act (page 5), "descendants" isn't named. And the debt doesn't stay on the books collecting interest forever, as you would wish. And it was capped at $20K. Seriously, check it out, it's in a form that's not easily quotable to this board, but it's there.

 

[Asclepias]

Don't worry your poor little head, I knew about the Japs, but you still haven't explained THE MERITS of doing this, that's what I asked. Anyways, only the interned and their spouses, immediate children and parents are eligible, not every descendant until the end of time. AAAWWWWW, so close!!!!


Civil Liberties Act of 1988 :: Topaz Japanese-American Relocation Center Digital Collection

The merits are that the descendants of the slaves get the unpaid reperations due to their ancestors. The debt is on the books collecting interest. Its not benefiting anyone but the government that allowed the wrong in the first place.

Since the Japanese that passed were not around to collect the reparations the funds naturally went to their descendants. Show me were there is a time limit on when reparations can be paid and that the person has to be alive for those reparations to be paid to their descendents. You wont find that. This is not the only precedent either. I'm just waiting for someone to be able to come up with something to refute my assertion.

Read the link, it has the act (page 5), "descendants" isn't named. And the debt doesn't stay on the books collecting interest forever, as you would wish. And it was capped at $20K. Seriously, check it out, it's in a form that's not easily quotable to this board, but it's there.

Is a child a descendant? The word does not have to be in the document specifically because it was paid out during that time. Why would they put a provision in there for descendants if it was being paid out? The same applies to interest.

Now if the money had never been paid out and one of the descendants made a claim on it then it would be the same thing and payable to that descendent with interest. Are you saying that it would not?

 

[Chaussette]

The merits are that the descendants of the slaves get the unpaid reperations due to their ancestors. The debt is on the books collecting interest. Its not benefiting anyone but the government that allowed the wrong in the first place.

Since the Japanese that passed were not around to collect the reparations the funds naturally went to their descendants. Show me were there is a time limit on when reparations can be paid and that the person has to be alive for those reparations to be paid to their descendents. You wont find that. This is not the only precedent either. I'm just waiting for someone to be able to come up with something to refute my assertion.

Read the link, it has the act (page 5), "descendants" isn't named. And the debt doesn't stay on the books collecting interest forever, as you would wish. And it was capped at $20K. Seriously, check it out, it's in a form that's not easily quotable to this board, but it's there.

Is a child a descendant? The word does not have to be in the document specifically because it was paid out during that time. Why would they put a provision in there for descendants if it was being paid out? The same applies to interest.

Now if the money had never been paid out and one of the descendants made a claim on it then it would be the same thing and payable to that descendent with interest. Are you saying that it would not?

I'm not saying it would not, the act does. Read it.

 

[Asclepias]

Read the link, it has the act (page 5), "descendants" isn't named. And the debt doesn't stay on the books collecting interest forever, as you would wish. And it was capped at $20K. Seriously, check it out, it's in a form that's not easily quotable to this board, but it's there.

Is a child a descendant? The word does not have to be in the document specifically because it was paid out during that time. Why would they put a provision in there for descendants if it was being paid out? The same applies to interest.

Now if the money had never been paid out and one of the descendants made a claim on it then it would be the same thing and payable to that descendent with interest. Are you saying that it would not?

I'm not saying it would not, the act does. Read it.

I'm not reading that whole thing. Please quote a few words from the relevant part that says in the event the reparations are not paid then it is forfeited by the descendants. Click on the text tab and you should be able to quote from it.

 

[Chaussette]

Is a child a descendant? The word does not have to be in the document specifically because it was paid out during that time. Why would they put a provision in there for descendants if it was being paid out? The same applies to interest.

Now if the money had never been paid out and one of the descendants made a claim on it then it would be the same thing and payable to that descendent with interest. Are you saying that it would not?

I'm not saying it would not, the act does. Read it.

I'm not reading that whole thing. Please quote a few words from the relevant part that says in the event the reparations are not paid then it is forfeited by the descendants.

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not saying it would not, the act does. Read it.

I'm not reading that whole thing. Please quote a few words from the relevant part that says in the event the reparations are not paid then it is forfeited by the descendants.

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I'm not reading that whole thing. Please quote a few words from the relevant part that says in the event the reparations are not paid then it is forfeited by the descendants.

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

The Japanese were not slaves.


Damn you are one stupid fuck!

 

[Chaussette]

I'm not reading that whole thing. Please quote a few words from the relevant part that says in the event the reparations are not paid then it is forfeited by the descendants.

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

 

[Asclepias]

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

Maybe you missed the news. It makes sense to say immediate children for the Japanese because it was paid immediately. Reparations for Blacks would not say that.

For example

Senate Oks $2.1 Million For Rosewood Reparations - Sun Sentinel

The package includes $1.5 million to be divided among the 11 or so survivors of the massacre, $500,000 to compensate Rosewood families who were run out of town for the property they lost and $100,000 in college scholarships for Rosewood descendants and other minorities.

 

[Foxfyre]

If you want to stay ignorant, go ahead, (it's on page 5), but then at least stop using the japs situation as a precedent for your own bullshit claim.

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

The Bible says that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children even unto the fourth and fifth generations. Interpretation: what happens in previous generations can have very long term consequences..

The problem when it comes to reparations is who owes somebody else a debt? Again, I lost ancesters in a war that freed the slaves. I had no ancesters who had any part in enslaving anybody. So should I be held liable and be required to help pay reparations for people living now, almost 150 years after that war ended? Or should black people be required to compensate me for what happened to my ancesters on their behalf?

Ascepias said if a person can prove he descended from slaves he should be compensated. But by whom?

The black Africans who captured and sold people into slavery?
The British slave traders?
Those who bought or inherited the slaves in Mexico? Canada? The USA? Elsewhere including black people who owned slaves?
And should those black people who did not descend from slaves be required to pay reparations for those who did?

It all becomes quite absurd after awhile. And I think is perpetuated by silly greedy people, both black and white, who just want others to pay whether deserved or not.

 

[Asclepias]

I just read it. It clearly specifies that since the payment is being made there is a expiration date. The question I asked you was if the payment was not paid out would a descendant be disallowed from claiming it? The payment was made so no one can now come and make a claim. The ex-slaves reparations payments were never made. Therefore any reparations granted would go to descendents just like in the case of the Japanese.

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

The Bible says that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children even unto the fourth and fifth generations. Interpretation: what happens in previous generations can have very long term consequences..

The problem when it comes to reparations is who owes somebody else a debt? Again, I lost ancesters in a war that freed the slaves. I had no ancesters who had any part in enslaving anybody. So should I be held liable and be required to help pay reparations for people living now, almost 150 years after that war ended? Or should black people be required to compensate me for what happened to my ancesters on their behalf?

Ascepias said if a person can prove he descended from slaves he should be compensated. But by whom?

The black Africans who captured and sold people into slavery?
The British slave traders?
Those who bought or inherited the slaves in Mexico? Canada? The USA? Elsewhere including black people who owned slaves?
And should those black people who did not descend from slaves be required to pay reparations for those who did?

It all becomes quite absurd after awhile. And I think is perpetuated by silly greedy people, both black and white, who just want others to pay whether deserved or not.

Since we are only talking about the US slavery, the answer would be the US government.

1. for participating in the slave trade.
2. for continuing to enslave the children of the original slaves.
3. For benefitting to the point of becoming an economic power and not providing monetary compensation for the work of all slaves.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

The Bible says that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children even unto the fourth and fifth generations. Interpretation: what happens in previous generations can have very long term consequences..

The problem when it comes to reparations is who owes somebody else a debt? Again, I lost ancesters in a war that freed the slaves. I had no ancesters who had any part in enslaving anybody. So should I be held liable and be required to help pay reparations for people living now, almost 150 years after that war ended? Or should black people be required to compensate me for what happened to my ancesters on their behalf?

Ascepias said if a person can prove he descended from slaves he should be compensated. But by whom?

The black Africans who captured and sold people into slavery?
The British slave traders?
Those who bought or inherited the slaves in Mexico? Canada? The USA? Elsewhere including black people who owned slaves?
And should those black people who did not descend from slaves be required to pay reparations for those who did?

It all becomes quite absurd after awhile. And I think is perpetuated by silly greedy people, both black and white, who just want others to pay whether deserved or not.

Since we are only talking about the US slavery, the answer would be the US government.

1. for participating in the slave trade.
2. for continuing to enslave the children of the original slaves.
3. For benefitting to the point of becoming an economic power and not providing monetary compensation for the work of all slaves.

You are a total dumbass!

The US government doesn't have any money unless they take it from the taxpayers and that includes your stupid black ass!!


I swear the more you post the more ridiculous you sound.

 

[Asclepias]

The Bible says that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children even unto the fourth and fifth generations. Interpretation: what happens in previous generations can have very long term consequences..

The problem when it comes to reparations is who owes somebody else a debt? Again, I lost ancesters in a war that freed the slaves. I had no ancesters who had any part in enslaving anybody. So should I be held liable and be required to help pay reparations for people living now, almost 150 years after that war ended? Or should black people be required to compensate me for what happened to my ancesters on their behalf?

Ascepias said if a person can prove he descended from slaves he should be compensated. But by whom?

The black Africans who captured and sold people into slavery?
The British slave traders?
Those who bought or inherited the slaves in Mexico? Canada? The USA? Elsewhere including black people who owned slaves?
And should those black people who did not descend from slaves be required to pay reparations for those who did?

It all becomes quite absurd after awhile. And I think is perpetuated by silly greedy people, both black and white, who just want others to pay whether deserved or not.

Since we are only talking about the US slavery, the answer would be the US government.

1. for participating in the slave trade.
2. for continuing to enslave the children of the original slaves.
3. For benefitting to the point of becoming an economic power and not providing monetary compensation for the work of all slaves.

You are a total dumbass!

The US government doesn't have any money unless they take it from the taxpayers and that includes your stupid black ass!!


I swear the more you post the more ridiculous you sound.

Everytime you post your intelligence light dims and almost flickers out. What did you think you were revealing Sherlock? Thats how the Japanese got paid. Through tax payers money. Guess what? They paid into that as well. Make sure your brain turns a complete cycle before you start typing next time.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well no, that's not what it says. It specifies that only immediate children, spouses and parents are included. An amendment in 1992 added non-asian spouses to the compensation list. Nothing anywhere about descendants. And there's also a cut off date. And out of 120,000 people interned, only 81,000 or so were compensated. $20K payout. No interest mentioned. The word "descendant" doesn't appear once. Sorry.

The Bible says that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children even unto the fourth and fifth generations. Interpretation: what happens in previous generations can have very long term consequences..

The problem when it comes to reparations is who owes somebody else a debt? Again, I lost ancesters in a war that freed the slaves. I had no ancesters who had any part in enslaving anybody. So should I be held liable and be required to help pay reparations for people living now, almost 150 years after that war ended? Or should black people be required to compensate me for what happened to my ancesters on their behalf?

Ascepias said if a person can prove he descended from slaves he should be compensated. But by whom?

The black Africans who captured and sold people into slavery?
The British slave traders?
Those who bought or inherited the slaves in Mexico? Canada? The USA? Elsewhere including black people who owned slaves?
And should those black people who did not descend from slaves be required to pay reparations for those who did?

It all becomes quite absurd after awhile. And I think is perpetuated by silly greedy people, both black and white, who just want others to pay whether deserved or not.

Since we are only talking about the US slavery, the answer would be the US government.

1. for participating in the slave trade.
2. for continuing to enslave the children of the original slaves.
3. For benefitting to the point of becoming an economic power and not providing monetary compensation for the work of all slaves.

The U.S. government did not do any of that, however. The U.S. government in fact forbade any new slave states, but did not give itself the authority to require that the existing slave states free their slaves; otherwise there would be no USA as we know it and your ancestors might never have been freed at all. It was also the U.S. government who decreed that the slaves would be freed.

But again, I lost ancesters in the war to save the union and end slavery. If possibly your ancesters had not captured the slaves to sell into slavery in the first place, those ancesters would not have died young and that could have significantly changed my life.

Why shouldn't you have to pay me?

 

[Godboy]

^ I agree. I think we are owed something for the lives that were lost while freeing the slaves that were made slaves by Africans. Its funny, the Africans invented slavery, and they are the only people who still practice it today. Africa is an awful place, and its people are even worse.