6 ms·

In the US there is in fact a disparity in wealth between black households and white households in aggregate as a consequence of slavery, a lack of reparations f

by _6hmp 5y ago

In the US there is in fact a disparity in wealth between black households and white households in aggregate as a consequence of slavery, a lack of reparations for slavery, Jim Crow laws, and ongoing discrimination (see, redlining). So it's not a racist argument that paying for job opportunities could perpetuate racial disparities in the workforce. It's a reasonable one. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/disparities-in-wealth-by-race-and-ethnicity-in-the-2019-survey-of-consumer-finances-20200928.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/disp...

jlawson 5y ago
Strange to use "redlining" as an example of "ongoing" discrimination. It was banned by the Fair Housing Act of 1968 - 53 years ago. This reminds me of when people use the murder of Emmett Till to argue how evil white people are. He was furtively killed in 1955 - 66 years ago. When the best latest examples are this old it kind of cuts against the whole accusation. It's like saying Joe is such a jerk, look, he kicked a dog 50 years ago.
- _6hmp 5y ago
  I meant it in the sense of the long now. 53 years ago isn't long ago in the arc of human history. There are people alive who grew up where they grew up or live where they live because of it. The rest of your post doesn't merit a response as it has nothing to do with what I wrote.
  - jlawson 5y ago
    "The long now" isn't the right model for how humans actually live in the world. In reality, people find their level very quickly and historical circumstances don't hold people down for long. Lots of examples: -Vietnamese boat people arrived in the mid-70's with nothing. They quickly became successful and still are. -Jews lost so much in WW2, including half their families. They quickly became successful after the war and still are. They didn't sit around in ghettos forever. -Nigerian immigrants to America often come with little wealth and yet do better than American whites economically. -Iranian immigrants arrived after the 1979 revolution with nothing. Now they do very well - better than average whites. If "the long now" was real, none of these would be possible and all immigrant groups who arrived poor in the last 50 years would still be poor. This is actually a really important thing to learn because it's critical in your mental model of the world. You think some event 50+ years ago will keep families in poverty for literal multiple generations - it's not true at all. Families rise and fall much much quicker than this. If someone is in poverty that long (in the context of a somewhat free society) it is because of internal issues, not circumstances. Society at large treats slave-descended blacks no worse than African-immigrant blacks (or other nonwhite immigrants); the difference in outcomes comes from their own internal issues. The sooner we can acknowledge the actual source the problem the sooner we can make progress on solving it.
- aluminum96 5y ago
  In practice redlining is alive and well. https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/10/why-bay-area-neighborhoods-are-still-racially-segregated/ https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/10/why-bay-area-neighborho...
- lyjackal 5y ago
  Familial wealth has a compounding follow on effect in opportunity and wealth growth. A huge part of current economic disparities is likely attributable to these policies, and subsequent discrimination that's reinforced by entrenched poverty.
- bccdee 5y ago
  Redlined neighbourhoods are still overwhelmingly black. Redlining destroyed property values and scared away businesses, creating ghettos that still exist today. The fact that many of the processes which created an unjust society are no longer in motion doesn't automatically make that society just again.
  - jlawson 5y ago
    It does mean those processes are no longer "ongoing".
ALittleLight 5y ago
It is a racist argument because you assume things about black software engineers because they are black. That is, you assume a black software engineer has no money because he's black rather than that he does have money because he's a software engineer. Imagine you and your coworkers are planning to go out to eat for lunch. One coworker says that you should go to a steakhouse. You say "No, coworker X probably won't be able to afford that because he's black. We should go somewhere cheaper instead." Is that racist? I think so, and I think it's the same logic being used here.
- _6hmp 5y ago
  You're conflating introducing a new system for how companies hire with direct social interactions. How companies hire is fraught with bias so we should be attentive to not amplifying it. Your example is an obvious false equivalency.
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    In one situation you assume black peers won't be able to afford lunch. In another situation you assume they won't be able to afford gambling on hiring outcomes. If this is a false equivalence you'll need to explain how.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

by _6hmp 5y ago

jlawson 5y ago

Strange to use "redlining" as an example of "ongoing" discrimination. It was banned by the Fair Housing Act of 1968 - 53 years ago. This reminds me of when people use the murder of Emmett Till to argue how evil white people are. He was furtively killed in 1955 - 66 years ago. When the best latest examples are this old it kind of cuts against the whole accusation. It's like saying Joe is such a jerk, look, he kicked a dog 50 years ago.

_6hmp 5y ago
I meant it in the sense of the long now. 53 years ago isn't long ago in the arc of human history. There are people alive who grew up where they grew up or live where they live because of it. The rest of your post doesn't merit a response as it has nothing to do with what I wrote.
- jlawson 5y ago
  "The long now" isn't the right model for how humans actually live in the world. In reality, people find their level very quickly and historical circumstances don't hold people down for long. Lots of examples: -Vietnamese boat people arrived in the mid-70's with nothing. They quickly became successful and still are. -Jews lost so much in WW2, including half their families. They quickly became successful after the war and still are. They didn't sit around in ghettos forever. -Nigerian immigrants to America often come with little wealth and yet do better than American whites economically. -Iranian immigrants arrived after the 1979 revolution with nothing. Now they do very well - better than average whites. If "the long now" was real, none of these would be possible and all immigrant groups who arrived poor in the last 50 years would still be poor. This is actually a really important thing to learn because it's critical in your mental model of the world. You think some event 50+ years ago will keep families in poverty for literal multiple generations - it's not true at all. Families rise and fall much much quicker than this. If someone is in poverty that long (in the context of a somewhat free society) it is because of internal issues, not circumstances. Society at large treats slave-descended blacks no worse than African-immigrant blacks (or other nonwhite immigrants); the difference in outcomes comes from their own internal issues. The sooner we can acknowledge the actual source the problem the sooner we can make progress on solving it.
aluminum96 5y ago
In practice redlining is alive and well. https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/10/why-bay-area-neighborhoods-are-still-racially-segregated/ https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/09/10/why-bay-area-neighborho...
lyjackal 5y ago
Familial wealth has a compounding follow on effect in opportunity and wealth growth. A huge part of current economic disparities is likely attributable to these policies, and subsequent discrimination that's reinforced by entrenched poverty.
bccdee 5y ago
Redlined neighbourhoods are still overwhelmingly black. Redlining destroyed property values and scared away businesses, creating ghettos that still exist today. The fact that many of the processes which created an unjust society are no longer in motion doesn't automatically make that society just again.
- jlawson 5y ago
  It does mean those processes are no longer "ongoing".

ALittleLight 5y ago

It is a racist argument because you assume things about black software engineers because they are black. That is, you assume a black software engineer has no money because he's black rather than that he does have money because he's a software engineer. Imagine you and your coworkers are planning to go out to eat for lunch. One coworker says that you should go to a steakhouse. You say "No, coworker X probably won't be able to afford that because he's black. We should go somewhere cheaper instead." Is that racist? I think so, and I think it's the same logic being used here.

_6hmp 5y ago
You're conflating introducing a new system for how companies hire with direct social interactions. How companies hire is fraught with bias so we should be attentive to not amplifying it. Your example is an obvious false equivalency.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  In one situation you assume black peers won't be able to afford lunch. In another situation you assume they won't be able to afford gambling on hiring outcomes. If this is a false equivalence you'll need to explain how.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]