5 ms·
You are not helping people because of their race, so why use that to select who gets help? There are rich black people as well as there are poor white people.
by _casperc 14y ago
You are not helping people because of their race, so why use that to select who gets help? There are rich black people as well as there are poor white people.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- rayiner 14y agoThink of this mathematically. We did something very wrong at time T = 0. It is a matter of fact that economic wrongs are self-perpetuating and long-lived. Thus, at time T = 450, you can isolate, statistically, some economic disadvantage in any black person who can trace their lineage back as being affected by that original wrong at T = 0. It doesn't matter how rich they are--they would be incrementally richer had that wrong not occurred. At the same time, the poor white person benefited from that original wrong, and you can isolate, statistically, some economic advantage to him tracing back to that original wrong. It doesn't matter how poor he is, he would be incrementally poorer had that wrong not occurred.
- iy56 14y agoThe harms and benefits you are talking about are not quantifiable in a commonly-agreed-upon way. I think that's a prerequisite for the kind of analysis you want to do.
- rayiner 14y agoThis is a common flaw in reasoning--just because harms or benefits are not easily quantifiable does not mean that they should be assumed to be zero.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- iy56 14y agoI didn't say it was zero. I said it precludes principal component analysis (or whatever variant you prefer).
- tedunangst 14y agoWhat percentage of the US population is descended from people who primarily immigrated after 1865?