bhelliom
|
|
response 76 of 79:
| 
Apr 11 20:17 UTC 2002 |
It's rather complicated, Brighn. I wonder if those forced to pay
reparations may get a discount. They'll probably only be held
repsonsible for 3/4 of each individual slave.
It is true that is simple human nature to think more of one's own
suffering than someone else's. Some of the cases brought forth here go
beyond that even, to suffering not borne by those filing suit, but
linking that past suffering to more recent suffering, whether the
individuals personally suffered or not.
When suits like this are filed against corporations, it is not just the
corporations that suffer. I agree with fitz that the potential is
there. Corporations may have the money to pay, but may downsize anyway
to keep the payout from negatively altering their financial . . .
<damnit, my brain just short-circuited. What's the right word I'm
looking for?>
|
fitz
|
|
response 79 of 79:
|
Apr 14 08:46 UTC 2002 |
Interestingly, the AP reported April 13 that the IRS erroniously paid more
than 30 million dollars in slave reparations for fiscal 2000 and 2001. It
wants its money back, now, and has warned those with claims still
outstanding that that there will be a $500 fine for not withdrawing the claims
immediately.
Aside from claiimants working a scam, there were a number of good-faith claims
resulting from a misunderstanding that stemmed from an article about the
modern-day cost of the famed forty acres and a mule once offered freed slaves.
In addition to the paid claims, the IRS is looking for at least one IRS
employee who facilitated the pay outs..
|