im not racist..., i just have a color tv! Options

[ghjgfkgfk]

nevermind the topic title...

anyway.
it's okay to be racist...if you're doing it to a white person.

why is 'nigger' more offenstive than 'wigger' or 'cracker'?

have you noticed those 'black shows' show white people as very dumb and stupid. what if it was the other way around? you would have 476583x33 people saying the show is racist.

i don't get it when people say 'PROUD AND BLACK/-insert race here-".
it's just a skin color! why be proud of a skin color?
yuo're race is not something you work for or earn, you are born into it. you can't help it. what's there to be proud of there?

the reason there is a black history month and not a white history month, is because we need more than a month to explain to our children the stupidity of white men.

i'll call someone an african america the day i get call a 'middle eastren american"

This post has been edited by airam: Aug 6 2004, 06:15 PM

[ComradeRed]

20,000 for 5 years of imprisonment... that's with 50 years of interest.

Let's see... hte very last Japanese were let out in 1948 (so actually, 7 years of imprisonment -- 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948). The average year there was 1945.

7 years ... times the average inflation-adjusted per capita GDP in 1945 (around $11,500 -- it's actually just a tad more, but $11,500 is easier to work with).

So $11,500 times 7 years is $80,500 -- for math's sake, we'll just call that $80,000.

So really, a fair compensation would have to be at least $80,000. But they actually got $20,000. So really over 50 years (note: they were compesnated in 1996. Really, it should be 51 years since 1945 the average year -- but 50 is much easier to work with), they were paid a negative interest rate. Funny, let's calculate that:

$20,000 = $80,000x^50, where x = The inflation rate they were paid.

Slapping that into the trusty old TI-89, yields that X = about 0.973. In other words, they were paid -2.7% inflation each year.

Now, let's apply that same formula to determine fair slave compensation.

Slavery existed from 1620 to 1865. Slavery in the United States existed from 1776 (the beginning of the United States) to 1865. We will change 1776 to 1775 for mathematical clarity -- it won't make a differnece. In other words, our country had slavery for 90 years. The average year is 1820. The per capita GDP in 1820 was about $2,500 (inflation-adjusted -- the actual number is a little lower because the per capita GDP was alwayas lower in the South). The average slave had a life expectancy of about 35 years (not including infants who died before reaching the age of 2). So 35 times $2,500 is $87,500. But of course, the slaves weren't working the whole time. Let's say they would start working at age 10, which for the time period, is reasonable. That yields really 25 times $2,500 which is $62,500.

So a fair compensation for a slave would be $62,500. However, this is only for ONE slave. Let's take your average slave living from 1810 to 1840. Between then and now, there would have been 6 generations. If, in each generation, 2 slaves (or descendants of slaves) produced an average of 2.9 children (which is supported by historical data, but may acutally be an underestimate), then after 6 generations there would be 9 children (so 4 and a half per slave).

So that $62,500 has to be divided by four and a half. This yields $13,888. We'll make that $14,000.

So really, the fair compensation PER SLAVE DESCENDANT is now $14,000, not $62,500. $62,500 is the amount PER SLAVE.

However, the governemnt doesn't pay fair value. It pays -2.7% interest, as shown earlier in my example with the Japanese. And everyone ought to be compensated evenly, nyet comrade? So let's apply -2.7% interest.

Slavery (in the US) lasted from 1775 to 1865. The average year is 1820. Now it's 2005. That's 185 years.

So the amount of compensation you SHOULD get for slavery is:

$14,000 after 185 years of negative interest. Mathematically, that is: $14,000(.973)^185. My TI-89 puts that at $88.51.

We'll round that up to $90. Thus every black person in America who can prove he was the descendant of a slave between 1776 and 1865 should recieve $90.

That's enough to buy two or three AKs if you know where to shop. And since there are 25 million African-Americans in the United States ... let's say 80% were slave descendants. The total cost of paying 20 million people $90 each is $180,000,000 -- that amount of money is nothing in light of the total budget.

And remember, $90 is actually a high estimate. I rounded to give slaves the benefit of the doubt EVERY TIME. And this I did as an amateur with a pocket calculator with access to only rough data. If government economists were to do this, teh result would almost certainly be lower -- perhaps $75 or $80 per person. Have fun with that. Don't spend it all in one place (especially on drugs!).

Now let me end with the famous quote from Samuel Clemens:
"There are three kinds of lies in this world: Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

Really, you shouldn't get any money at all -- because YOU were never a slave. And as I brought up in my previous posts, the VAST majority of whites did not own slaves. Yet their descendants will be paying for you if the government chooses to compesnate. If you want compensation -- sue the pirates. You can go hire a lawyer with the $90 we gave you.

[BTW: Can you believe I am studying Econometrics??]