Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
supermike80

Are reparations becoming a reality? What are the board thoughts on this?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, boots11234 said:

I understand that life isnt fair.  That black people historically have been treated unfairly by the democratic party.  Getting a payday will not change this and only make things worse.    

But the article does not propose a payday. Are you sure you read the article? If you did I’ll ask again: what specific items in the article do you disagree with? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also your snide mention of the Democratic Party as the creator of black ills in history is a little shopworn at this point, don’t you think? 

Share this post


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

Imagine, our newest immigrants, legal or otherwise, having to pay reparations to families who have been in this country for 20 generations.

Doesn’t matter. It’s the cost of the ticket to ride the American dream. 

Share this post


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

Also your snide mention of the Democratic Party as the creator of black ills in history is a little shopworn at this point, don’t you think? 

No actually I don’t. You not wanting to accept this fact doesn’t change the validity of it. I do find it interesting you’d like us all to move beyond this however. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 3:56 PM, timschochet said:

Interesting testimony today by Ta-Nehesi Coates. As usual, this guy always makes me think, but I usually end up ultimately disagreeing with him. 

 

On 6/19/2019 at 5:35 PM, Mister CIA said:

For something completely different, seek out some interviews of the guy sitting next to him, Coleman Hughes.  Brilliant guy

Here is testimony from both:

https://youtu.be/F5AQyWAWHU4

I think Hughes is still an undergrad (or maybe very recent college graduate). I find him to be a consistently impressive intellect.

Share this post


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

Or let’s be frank: in a way that doesn’t lead to political disaster for the Democratic Party. 

Why?  If they believe in them so much then stand behind them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, boots11234 said:

No actually I don’t. You not wanting to accept this fact doesn’t change the validity of it. I do find it interesting you’d like us all to move beyond this however. 

I don’t care if we move beyond it. I’m happy to discuss it with you in depth if you’d like. But first I’d like for you to answer my question about specific parts of the article that you disagreed with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boots11234 said:

I understand that life isnt fair.  That black people historically have been treated unfairly by the democratic party.  Getting a payday will not change this and only make things worse.    

Extremely worse.  It would just widen the racial divide and cause more animosity. 

Share this post


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

okay now what?  I read it and it still doesnt change my opinion. 

I didn’t ask for you to. But you wrote that you couldn’t wrap your head around why other people might disagree with you on this. Can you do that now? 

Share this post


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

I didn’t ask for you to. But you wrote that you couldn’t wrap your head around why other people might disagree with you on this. Can you do that now? 

The article doesnt change a thing.  Sure some people decades ago were treated bad but that doesnt mean we should try and make things right with some vague sort of payment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, pantherclub said:

The article doesnt change a thing.  Sure some people decades ago were treated bad but that doesnt mean we should try and make things right with some vague sort of payment.

"I can't understand how anybody could possibly hold that position" basically disqualifies you from competently disagreeing with it. Before you can competently disagree with a position, you have to understand what the arguments are in favor of it. Then you can say "I understand the arguments both for and against the position; I think the arguments against it are stronger."

Tim wasn't asking whether Coates changed your mind about reparations. He was asking whether, having read the article, you now understand how somebody could hold the position it advances.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

"I can't understand how anybody could possibly hold that position" basically disqualifies you from competently disagreeing with it. Before you can competently disagree with a position, you have to understand what the arguments are in favor of it. Then you can say "I understand the arguments both for and against the position; I think the arguments against it are stronger."

Tim wasn't asking whether Coates changed your mind about reparations. He was asking whether, having read the article, you now understand how somebody could hold the position it advances.

I read the article last time he posted it during the same discussion and now you are just playing word games.  Unless you are directly benefiting from this I dont see why anyone would be in favor of it.  It doesnt change.

Share this post


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

I read the article last time he posted it during the same discussion and now you are just playing word games.  Unless you are directly benefiting from this I dont see why anyone would be in favor of it.  It doesnt change.

You said you can't wrap your head around the argument for reparations. That should give you pause. If you can't wrap your head around an argument, how in the world can you be confident that it's wrong?

You can competently dismiss an argument only after you've wrapped your head around it; not before.

That's not a word game. It's a basic requirement for discussing anything productively.

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

You said you can't wrap your head around the argument for reparations. That should give you pause. If you can't wrap your head around an argument, how in the world can you be confident that it's wrong?

You can competently dismiss an argument only after you've wrapped your head around it; not before.

That's not a word game. It's a basic requirement for discussing anything productively.

Jesus dude. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 8:47 PM, timschochet said:

Are you relying on the same sources you did about migrants returning for their court dates? How unfortunate for you that was. 

He's right. Ask Trump who he most wants to run against.  The answer is Biden. They will bury him with videos of himself saying stuff that wasnt even great when he said it much less now. And they will manage to suppress minority turnout. If they do they win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

I still can't wrap my head around slavery, personally. 

The argument seems to be that if you can’t wrap your head around it you can’t be confident that it’s wrong.

I can’t wrap my head around that though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jonessed said:

The argument seems to be that if you can’t wrap your head around it you can’t be confident that it’s wrong.

I can’t wrap my head around that though.

You don't think you need to understand an argument before you know that it's wrong?

Share this post


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

I read the article last time he posted it during the same discussion and now you are just playing word games.  Unless you are directly benefiting from this I dont see why anyone would be in favor of it.  It doesnt change.

So you've read it twice now? Then let me ask the question I asked boots which he has refused to answer: what specific points in that article did you disagree with?

Share this post


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

So you've read it twice now? Then let me ask the question I asked boots which he has refused to answer: what specific points in that article did you disagree with?

there are no specific points just the general concept that just because someone was treated wrong that generations later they shoukd be compensated and that makes everything okay.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pantherclub said:

there are no specific points just the general concept that just because someone was treated wrong that generations later they shoukd be compensated and that makes everything okay.  

But he doesn't make that claim anywhere in the article. Are you sure you read it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

You don't think you need to understand an argument before you know that it's wrong?

Of course, but you can fully understand an argument without fully understanding why someone else might support it.  The latter involves perspective and that may involve experiences that you can’t relate to, or they could just plain make irrational decisions.

I think he was just over-generalizing anyway so it’s kind of a pointless tangent.

 

Share this post


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

But he doesn't make that claim anywhere in the article. Are you sure you read it?

godalmighty you did, sometimes i seriously wonder if you drink during the day 

Edited by pantherclub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean to be skeptical about boots and pantherclub- if they say they read Coates' article, we should probably take their word. But it's disconcerting that neither of them seems willing to discuss any of the specific points made in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pantherclub said:

godalmighty you did

I did? What are you talking about?

FWIW I'm not even sure I support reparations. I just think it's a bit more complicated than the simplistic arguments I'm reading here. That's why the Coates article is so important.

Share this post


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

I did? What are you talking about?

FWIW I'm not even sure I support reparations. I just think it's a bit more complicated than the simplistic arguments I'm reading here. That's why the Coates article is so important.

Mother of God tim this is why people get frustrated with you.  I initially said I dont have a clue why anyone would think reparations would be a good idea, you linked that article for like the 4rth time with you assuming that would explain why it was needed.  Guys like boots and I dont agree with the general premise.  So by you linking the article in response to why I dont think there should be reparations you are insinuating that said article explains why reparations are necessary.

Share this post


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

I don't mean to be skeptical about boots and pantherclub- if they say they read Coates' article, we should probably take their word. But it's disconcerting that neither of them seems willing to discuss any of the specific points made in the article.

Dude, there is nothing specific per se about the article its the general concept that slavery into jim crow into whatever else the article is talking about sets up the infrastructure of today therefor admitting the plight of AA  is a direct result and we should compensate them somehow on general principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pantherclub said:

Dude, there is nothing specific per se about the article its the general concept that slavery into jim crow into whatever else the article is talking about sets up the infrastructure of today therefor admitting the plight of AA  is a direct result and we should compensate them somehow on general principle.

I don't think you read it.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jonessed said:

The argument seems to be that if you can’t wrap your head around it you can’t be confident that it’s wrong.

I can’t wrap my head around that though.

No, I can't wrap my head around someone beating, killing, and enslaving other humans. Selling their children to the highest bidder. All to increase their personal wealth.  Because it's THAT wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sheriff Bart said:

No, I can't wrap my head around someone beating, killing, and enslaving other humans. Selling their children to the highest bidder. All to increase their personal wealth.  Because it's THAT wrong. 

Jesus dude nobody is saying it isnt.  Nice strawman

Share this post


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

okay, do you want to quiz me?

Not really. What I wanted to do is engage you in a real conversation about this. But I probably should have known better. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Not really. What I wanted to do is engage you in a real conversation about this. But I probably should have known better. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Thats what I thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

I still can't wrap my head around slavery, personally. 

"I don't want to have pay people do work for me -- I'll force them to work for me for free instead!"

Why is this so hard to understand?

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I share tim's and MT's annoyance with the "I don't understand how anybody could possibly believe X" trope, but I've trained myself to decode this is as "I disagree strongly with X."  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Also your snide mention of the Democratic Party as the creator of black ills in history is a little shopworn at this point, don’t you think? 

Well it is true and we have to admit our sins as well.  That is why I am all for reparations

Share this post


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

Jesus dude. 

Just stay down

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a perfect idea - but I could support reparations in the way of free community/vocational college

And I am against flat out free college

Edited by The Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 9:29 AM, Maurile Tremblay said:

 

Here is testimony from both:

https://youtu.be/F5AQyWAWHU4

I think Hughes is still an undergrad (or maybe very recent college graduate). I find him to be a consistently impressive intellect.

Fantastic public commentary from both guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be in favor of a program that benefits society as a whole.  Free college, free child care, free public transportation and such.  I don't feel like handing out money will solve any issues facing the black community.  Lower income people generally don't use their money wisely and a cash payout will only continue the cycle.

If we do go the free college, child care, transportation route, I'd also like to see mandatory voter ID laws across the board.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 3:41 PM, timschochet said:

I did? What are you talking about?

FWIW I'm not even sure I support reparations. I just think it's a bit more complicated than the simplistic arguments I'm reading here. That's why the Coates article is so important.

I dont think the coates article is important at all. In fact it illustrates how reparations right now is such an ambiguous and non committal topic. 

Reparations—by which I mean the full acceptance of our collective biography and its consequences—is the price we must pay to see ourselves squarely. "

"Reparations would mean the end of scarfing hot dogs on the Fourth of July while denying the facts of our heritage. Reparations would mean the end of yelling “patriotism” while waving a Confederate flag. Reparations would mean a revolution of the American consciousness, a reconciling of our self-image as the great democratizer with the facts of our history."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.