He said he supports reparations for African-Americans who are descendants of slaves, pointing to his baby bond legislation, which would give newborns savings accounts worth tens of thousands of dollars by the time they’re 18 to address the racial wealth gap.How does this fit with my previous discussion?
Tne New Yorker had a discussion of the proposal late last year. Apparently the professor Darity who's been pushing reparations has come up with this plan as more politically feasible than reparations. Notably the plan apparently applies to all infants, regardless of race, but with the money put into the bonds dependent on the family's income.
From the article:
His plan is not as precisely targeted toward people of color as it might be: because the federal government cannot determine the value of the assets held by any given American family, the amount children receive is determined by their parents’ wages, a scale on which black families tend to appear better off than they actually are. Even so, Booker’s staff has calculated that the average white child would accrue about fifteen thousand dollars through the program, and the average black child would gain twenty-nine thousand dollars—making it the largest asset for most black families.My point in the previous post was there was a tension between apologizing to blacks and redressing their situation. Booker's plan might be cost-effective in boosting the prospects of infants in low-income families, but it seems to me to lose the emotional impact of reparations.
No comments:
Post a Comment