Reparations in the news: How much are you willing to personally pay?

How much are you willing to personally pay?

  • $10

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $20

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $30

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $40

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $60

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $70

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $80

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • $100 or more

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    4
My family did have "slaves" and one's family still owns quite the chunk of land in Sumter County.

He don't be needing no reparations. He's better off than 90% of the leftists on this board. :laugh:

True story.

He owns over 100 acres, easy.

I would guess they amassed around 220 acres. Of some of the best land in FL.

The land they own is better than Disney's land. Theirs has spring-fed creeks running through it. And also never was swamp and is prime land. Some of the best land in FL, a black family owns. True Story. Ofc that's FL American blacks, who might differ from the leftist version of "African-Americans" and all that bullshit.

They were NOT African 100+ years ago. They were and are Americans.

They may be black, but their roots are American. All the way.
 
Last edited:
All democrats are Legion. They few that actually work and pay taxes take every single deduction though. Fucking frauds.

Indeed. The "rich" already pay close to 97% of the federal income taxes in this country, but that's not enough, according to some. Naturally DEMOCRATS will find a way to avoid being taxed themselves, though, won't they?
 
Indeed. The "rich" already pay close to 97% of the federal income taxes in this country, but that's not enough, according to some. Naturally DEMOCRATS will find a way to avoid being taxed themselves, though, won't they?

They sure do.
 
They sure do.

Let's see how many swamp creatures in DEMOCRAT-dominated DC are paying "their fair share", shall we?

ITEP-Chart-2-V1-870x1024.jpg
 
Bah, them blacks that own my former family property deserve it! They don't need to be payin' no reparations.

Commies paint things in a different light as opposed to what they actually were.

My family damn sure ain't payin' no reparations. I don't even have to ask everybody. :laugh:

Whoo! How long you been in America, huh? Everything was squared with the giving of the land to who we did. It's their land now.

They are doing just fine, and they ain't no "African-Americans", but they are black Americans.

Go mess with them if you wanna..I would recommend against that. They own everything all around what was was my family's land except for 80 acres.

They got theirs and doubled it and then some. We still hold claim to 80 acres there.

They got what they had coming and bought out neighbors and doubled their land size+

I know who the neighbors are up there, and who their ancestors were. This is America.
 
Last edited:
.
After The War of Northern Aggression, the yankees stole a mule to give to some black folks so they could have their "40 acres and a mule". My family paid up 151 years ago.
 
Ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

  • The first four men (the DEMOCRATS) would pay nothing.
  • The fifth would pay $1.
  • The sixth would pay $3.
  • The seventh $7.
  • The eighth $12.
  • The ninth $18.
  • The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So, now dinner for the ten will only cost $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So, the DEMOCRATS were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six, the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share'?

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being 'PAID' to eat their meal. So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
  • The fifth man, like the DEMOCRATS, now paid nothing (100% savings).
  • The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
  • The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
  • The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
  • The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
  • The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the DEMOCRATS continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man "but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the DEMOCRATS in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered they didn't have enough money between all of them for even
half of the bill.

HA!! OUTSTANDING!
 
HA!! OUTSTANDING!

A history lesson for DEMOCRATS:

The 16th Amendment was introduced in 1913 to pave the way to an income tax by removing the proportional to population clause, thus saving the poor souls at the IRS from the unemployment line.

It was quickly followed by an income tax on people with an annual income of over $3,000. This tax touched less than 1% of Americans. Interestingly, the phrase lawful income was later changed to simply income in 1916.

World War I led to three acts that cranked up tax rates and lowered the exemption levels. The number of people paying taxes in the U.S. increased to 5%, and separate taxes were introduced for estates and excess business profits.

These taxes were rolled back following the war in five phases, and the economy experienced a huge boom. Government tax receipts reached $3.6 billion in 1918, the last year of the war. Despite lowering taxes, the government's take reached $6.6 billion in 1920.

Roosevelt's New Deal and WWII saw many taxes introduced or increased. The New Deal ran a heavy deficit that needed to be made up by revenue. By 1936, the top tax rate was a staggering 76% and the economy's output plummeted. Taxes were raised several more times with the exception of the 1938 Revenue Act—it contained a corporate tax cut that Roosevelt objected to, but was nevertheless passed.

By 1940, the need for the U.S. to prepare for war and support its allies led to even more aggressive taxation. People with incomes of $500 faced a 23% tax and the rates climbed up to 94%. By 1945, 43 million Americans paid tax and the yearly receipts were in excess of $45 billion, up from $9 billion in 1941.

The Revenue Act of 1945 rolled back $6 billion in taxes, but the burden of Social Security and an expanded government kept them from going much lower. The pay-as-you-go withholding system introduced as a wartime measure was never shut down.

Progress in lowering taxes was sporadic and confusing. Rather than rolling back rates, the tax code was being rewritten to allow deductions in certain circumstances or to lower rates on, say, private foundations while raising rates on corporate profits. This explosion in loopholes and fine print is one reason most people today can master the theory of relativity before the tax code.

The 1960s and 1970s were a time of massive inflation, with government deficits continuing to grow with the addition of Medicare to the expensive Social Security system. Inflation became a huge problem for taxpayers because taxes weren't indexed for it. This meant that although the real value of people's incomes was being decreased, they were also required to pay more taxes.

The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 represented a turning point for the tide for taxation, even though it was only temporary. Reagan lowered all the individual tax brackets by 25% and changed the way companies accounted for capital expenditures, encouraging investment in equipment. Reagan also sought to bring inflation under control.

He succeeded a little too well.

The government's budget was based on an accepted rate of inflation, and when the attempts to quash inflation kicked in too quickly, a deficit was created. Consequently, Reagan had to pare back some of his tax cuts in 1984, specifically on the corporate side, to try and make up the budget shortfall. Despite this, the IRS announced that in 1985 more than 400,000 Americans had reached the millionaire rank thanks to the high-level tax cuts.

In 1986, another tax reform act lowered the top rate from 50 to 28%, cutting corporate taxes from 50% to 35%. With more Americans now willing to take their wealth in taxable income, the overall tax receipts were relatively unchanged.

When Bill Clinton took over in the 1990s, the downward trend in taxes was at an end. Modest tax increases were ushered in 1993 and 1997 saw the introduction of negative income tax. Negative income tax was a hidden spending program whereby people who paid no tax could get funds through the tax system in the form of tax credits.

The 2001 tax cut introduced by George Bush once again dialed back the trend of tax increases but continued to increase tax credits that lead to negative income tax. Though not intended for it, this long-term tax cut helped shorten the recession following the dotcom crash, sparing the economy any specific stimulus measures.

The Bush tax cuts expired in 2010 under Obama.

In 2017, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which aimed to slash individual, corporate, and estate tax rates. The law cut tax rates across various income tax brackets. The TCJA lowered tax rates across income levels, but it also does away with many popular itemized deductions.



https://www.investopedia.com/articles/tax/10/concise-history-tax-changes.asp
 
I want reparations from blacks. My great grandfather fought for the North and helped free them. They owe me, and I want interest!
 
I'll let our Constitution. Read the 14th. Amendment.

Yeah no. How did yankees "liberate" black people in the South. That is something that never happened.

Go talk to old black people in GA and hear what they think about yankees, k?
That's who I learned about General Sherman from. True Story.
There is no Yankee love there. No.
 
Yeah no. How did yankees "liberate" black people in the South. That is something that never happened.

Go talk to old black people in GA and hear what they think about yankees, k?
That's who I learned about General Sherman from. True Story.
There is no Yankee love there. No.

I've sided with you fucks quite often.
You want to start another fucking war?
If you're that stupid, you liberals will get another ass kicking.
 
I've sided with you fucks quite often.
You want to start another fucking war?
If you're that stupid, you liberals will get another ass kicking.

iu


PS: I'm not a Social Marxist, I'm a Cracker. When they say "cracker", it's me they are talking about. :D
 
5d9e7d6c97fcf.image.jpg


Tulsa Metropolitan Ministries, in partnership with All Souls Unitarian Church, reached out to its member groups recently inviting them to participate in the symbolic gesture of raising $100,000, which will be paid as reparations to the remaining direct survivors of the 1921 massacre, and to support ongoing community-building efforts in Greenwood.

“Paying reparations to the survivors, descendants and Greenwood community is a civic responsibility,” said TMM Executive Director Aliye Shimi, who will be part of an online public discussion on the subject.

“Tulsa Metropolitan Ministries and Tulsa’s faith communities are calling on the city to move forward with repaying the debt made by the strategic destruction that was led by city leaders a century ago.”

The movement for massacre reparations had momentum following the 2001 release of the 1921 Race Riot Commission report to the state Legislature, which recommended direct restitution be made to survivors and their descendants.

However, it yielded no results, and a 2003 federal lawsuit seeking reparations was tossed due to the statute of limitations. A current state lawsuit filed last year argues that the massacre created an ongoing public nuisance, for which there is no statute of limitations.

The partners behind the interfaith effort say it shouldn’t take a lawsuit for the city to do what they believe is the right thing.

“Many of our faith communities see the issue of reparations for the Tulsa Race Massacre as a moral imperative,” Lavanhar said. “The debt of a racist massacre and 100 years of failing our Black citizens has been made and it needs to be paid in the centennial year.”


https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/racemassacre/interfaith-leaders-raising-100k-for-tulsa-race-massacre-reparations/article_79c1308a-ae96-11eb-80f3-9b5a7d23b9a8.html
 
Back
Top