Housing Benefits if you are more than 50% Hawaiian

[DiverMike 5]

So what is up with this? No other state in the union has benefits only available to people who can prove at least 50% of their ancestors were born in that state. The benefit is based on the 1921 Federal law signed by Harding providing for the rehabilitation of the native Hawaiian people through a government sponsored homesteading program. Hawaii has been a state since 1958. Shouldn't they be assimilated by now? It seems contrary to the American way to give preferential treatment because of where someone's grandparents were born.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[JerryBaumchen 1,372]

Hi Mike,

Quote

Hawaii has been a state since 1958.

Just to keep you honest; it was in 1959.

http://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/hawaii/

Jerry Baumchen

[stayhigh 2]

try sending your kids to Kamehameha school.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[BartsDaddy 7]

stayhigh

try sending your kids to Kamehameha school.

After attending 2 years of elementary school in Hawaii. I would not let any of my kids go to school on the islands.
It's a shit education and hugely prejudiced.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[cvfd1399 0]

Is the place overrun with meth heads like dog the bounty hunter showed on TV?

[BartsDaddy 7]

I lived there long before meth was popular. We moved back to the mainland in 1971.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[funjumper101 15]

DiverMike

So what is up with this? No other state in the union has benefits only available to people who can prove at least 50% of their ancestors were born in that state. The benefit is based on the 1921 Federal law signed by Harding providing for the rehabilitation of the native Hawaiian people through a government sponsored homesteading program. Hawaii has been a state since 1958. Shouldn't they be assimilated by now? It seems contrary to the American way to give preferential treatment because of where someone's grandparents were born.

Your opinion of the matter seems to be based on a substantial lack of knowledge of the history of the Hawaiian Islands and how the USA came to be in possession of them.

Are you in favor of blowing off the treaties the US Government established with Native American Tribes that happened on or before 1921? If not, why not?

The US Government has the right to abrogate any treaties or agreements that become inconvenient, correct? Times change. The US Government can't be expected to follow every agreement to the letter of the law when there is money or power at stake. That would be totally against well established practices.

[Andy9o8 2]

What you complain about was enacted by a law passed by Congress. It, like any other law, can be repealed by another act of Congress. If you feel the policy behind the law has become so obsolete that you strongly object to its continuation, then by all means, write to your US Congressman and Senators urging them to sponsor such legislation.

[Amazon 7]

cvfd1399

Is the place overrun with meth heads like dog the bounty hunter showed on TV?

All reservations are like that or didn't you get the memo's

http://www.doi.gov/tribes/benefits.cfm

[DiverMike 5]

Are we really doing Native Hawaiian's a service by treating them differently now? I am all for helping people who need it. It is one of the few useful services of government (the other main one being protection).

As far as 'blowing off treaties' with Native American Tribes- I personally am against any preferential treatment based on where your grandparents were born. So, yes I believe the treaties have outlived their usefulness.

Just my humble opinion. I don't care enough to write my congressman.

Just curious, what is your opinion of slave reparation? Morally it isn't any different than preferential treatment of Native Born Americans and Hawaiians. Legally, since there isn't a 100+ year old treaty, African Americans who are descendants of slaves do not receive preferential treatment.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

African Americans who are descendants of slaves do not receive preferential treatment.

So many straight lines; so little time.

[DiverMike 5]

I know I'm setting up a straw man argument, but humor me. If it is morally correct to treat descendants of one group of people differently because great-great-grandpa government was abusive to them, where do you draw the line?

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Andy9o8 2]

DiverMike

I know I'm setting up a straw man argument, but humor me. If it is morally correct to treat descendants of one group of people differently because great-great-grandpa government was abusive to them, where do you draw the line?

Fair question. I suppose it would be at the point where the multi-generational ripple effect effectively ceases.

[turtlespeed 221]

Andy9o8

***I know I'm setting up a straw man argument, but humor me. If it is morally correct to treat descendants of one group of people differently because great-great-grandpa government was abusive to them, where do you draw the line?

Fair question. I suppose it would be at the point where the multi-generational ripple effect effectively ceases.

Even if it causes more harm than good?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Andy9o8 2]

turtlespeed

******I know I'm setting up a straw man argument, but humor me. If it is morally correct to treat descendants of one group of people differently because great-great-grandpa government was abusive to them, where do you draw the line?

Fair question. I suppose it would be at the point where the multi-generational ripple effect effectively ceases.

Even if it causes more harm than good?

I'd presume that for any example reasonable people could disagree as to whether it does or does not.
You know, and then there will always be the assholes adding to the noise.

[bigbearfng 18]

“Please do not feed the squirrels. If you feed the squirrels, they'll become overweight and prone to disease. Their population will grow, and they'll lose their ability to forage for food on their own. They will expect you to feed them and will attack you if you don't. They'll become like little welfare recipients, and you wouldn't want to do this to them.”
- A sign in the Rocky Mountain National Park which aptly summarizes the welfare problem

[turtlespeed 221]

bigbearfng

“Please do not feed the squirrels. If you feed the squirrels, they'll become overweight and prone to disease. Their population will grow, and they'll lose their ability to forage for food on their own. They will expect you to feed them and will attack you if you don't. They'll become like little welfare recipients, and you wouldn't want to do this to them.”
- A sign in the Rocky Mountain National Park which aptly summarizes the welfare problem

Word my brotha.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[funjumper101 15]

DiverMike

Are we really doing Native Hawaiian's a service by treating them differently now? I am all for helping people who need it. It is one of the few useful services of government (the other main one being protection).

As far as 'blowing off treaties' with Native American Tribes- I personally am against any preferential treatment based on where your grandparents were born. So, yes I believe the treaties have outlived their usefulness.

Just my humble opinion. I don't care enough to write my congressman.

Just curious, what is your opinion of slave reparation? Morally it isn't any different than preferential treatment of Native Born Americans and Hawaiians. Legally, since there isn't a 100+ year old treaty, African Americans who are descendants of slaves do not receive preferential treatment.

The heinous treatment of the descendants of African slaves did not end when the Civil War ended. Once again your lack of knowledge of US History is showing. Are you familiar with the Jim Crow laws? Are you familiar with the deed restrictions that prevented blacks, Asians, and Hispanics from buying real estate in many areas? Restrictions that were in place for generations? Restrictions that were kept in place in California via a proposition that won in a statewide election in the early 60s. Restrictions that deliberately segregated people of color to certain area that did not see the real estate value appreciation that places like Leavittown, NJ did after being sold exclusively to white people. The USA has a long sordid history of treating those who aren't of white, Northern European ancestry quite badly.

If you and your family/ancestors had been singled out for generations by discriminatory laws that restricted your freedom to live where you wanted, and thus prevented you and your family from progressing economically and educationally, would reparations for such treatment be appropriate?

This is a test to see just how well you can step in to someone else's shoes and walk a mile in them. Empathy is something that is profoundly lacking in most people these days.

If you view the issue from the perspective of those that have been shit upon for generations, reparations start to make sense.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

bigbearfng

“Please do not feed the squirrels. If you feed the squirrels, they'll become overweight and prone to disease. Their population will grow, and they'll lose their ability to forage for food on their own. They will expect you to feed them and will attack you if you don't. They'll become like little welfare recipients, and you wouldn't want to do this to them.”
- A sign in the Rocky Mountain National Park which aptly summarizes the welfare problem

What a great description of the defence industry, and the car industry and the financial industry.

[rehmwa 2]

SkyDekker

***“Please do not feed the squirrels. If you feed the squirrels, they'll become overweight and prone to disease. Their population will grow, and they'll lose their ability to forage for food on their own. They will expect you to feed them and will attack you if you don't. They'll become like little welfare recipients, and you wouldn't want to do this to them.”
- A sign in the Rocky Mountain National Park which aptly summarizes the welfare problem

What a great description of the defence industry, and the car industry and the financial industry.

social entitlement programs,, yes

Dekker's list - yes yes and yes

also education, drug, and medical too, and a whole list of more and more public and private industries



seems like more and more people are 'getting it'. Feed the beast, the beast grows (and it votes for you in the next election, but only if you give it bigger portions) - doesn't matter if it's a lefty beast, or a righty beast. This is probably the only true and testable "Rule" of economics and human nature (individual and mass population dynamics)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

Once again your lack of knowledge of US History is showing.

The only mistake I have made in this thread about US History was incorrectly identifying when Hawaii became a state. I was off by one year and JerryBaumchen corrected me without sounding like a dick.

Quote

If you and your family/ancestors had been singled out for generations by discriminatory laws that restricted your freedom to live where you wanted, and thus prevented you and your family from progressing economically and educationally, would reparations for such treatment be appropriate?

I would say "Yes" to a degree. Certainly to the person(s) who were singled out. "Maybe" to the children depending on the affect it had. "No" to the grandchildren.

Just my opinion - yours may vary.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Andy9o8 2]

DiverMike

Quote

If you and your family/ancestors had been singled out for generations by discriminatory laws that restricted your freedom to live where you wanted, and thus prevented you and your family from progressing economically and educationally, would reparations for such treatment be appropriate?

I would say "Yes" to a degree. Certainly to the person(s) who were singled out. "Maybe" to the children depending on the affect it had. "No" to the grandchildren.

Just my opinion - yours may vary.

I'd say that would be reasonable with Caucasian ethnic groups. Witness the early 20th Century discrimination in the US against Irish, Italians and Jews, most of which was either overcome or became effectively irrelevant after 2 or 3 generations. Why so quickly? - because those groups are all Caucasian. The Asians have largely overcome it, too; for although they're "not quite white", they're "whitish" (ya know?); and what the hell, these days that's good enough.

But it's clearly taking longer than 3 generations with black people. First, because societal discrimination against black people seems to have lasted longer against them because of non-Caucasian appearance. (An Italian-American walking down the street will simply be seen as white, while a black person.. well, you see my point.) Second, because the social, economic and educational underclass comprised of impoverished African Americans is so entrenched in American society that it's going to take some more generations to overcome it.

[turtlespeed 221]

Andy9o8

***

Quote

If you and your family/ancestors had been singled out for generations by discriminatory laws that restricted your freedom to live where you wanted, and thus prevented you and your family from progressing economically and educationally, would reparations for such treatment be appropriate?

I would say "Yes" to a degree. Certainly to the person(s) who were singled out. "Maybe" to the children depending on the affect it had. "No" to the grandchildren.

Just my opinion - yours may vary.

I'd say that would be reasonable with Caucasian ethnic groups. Witness the early 20th Century discrimination in the US against Irish, Italians and Jews, most of which was either overcome or became effectively irrelevant after 2 or 3 generations. Why so quickly? - because those groups are all Caucasian. The Asians have largely overcome it, too; for although they're "not quite white", they're "whitish" (ya know?); and what the hell, these days that's good enough.

But it's clearly taking longer than 3 generations with black people. First, because societal discrimination against black people seems to have lasted longer against them because of non-Caucasian appearance. (An Italian-American walking down the street will simply be seen as white, while a black person.. well, you see my point.) Second, because the social, economic and educational underclass comprised of impoverished African Americans is so entrenched in American society that it's going to take some more generations to overcome it.

I believe it to be more of their own culture holding them back. Maybe if they let go of the stereotype and just became citizens, instead of the "poor me" attitude, there would be less to even bother with.

Maybe we could keep people like Jessie Jackson from being their role models, and that might help too.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

I believe it to be more of their own culture holding them back. Maybe if they let go of the stereotype and just became citizens, instead of the "poor me" attitude, there would be less to even bother with.

Kind of like that lady waiting fer her gun permit in stead of finding other means to protect herself you mean?

[funjumper101 15]

DiverMike

Quote

Once again your lack of knowledge of US History is showing.

The only mistake I have made in this thread about US History was incorrectly identifying when Hawaii became a state. I was off by one year and JerryBaumchen corrected me without sounding like a dick.

Quote

If you and your family/ancestors had been singled out for generations by discriminatory laws that restricted your freedom to live where you wanted, and thus prevented you and your family from progressing economically and educationally, would reparations for such treatment be appropriate?

I would say "Yes" to a degree. Certainly to the person(s) who were singled out. "Maybe" to the children depending on the affect it had. "No" to the grandchildren.

Just my opinion - yours may vary.

I am a dick on this board, mostly due to the fact that it gets to being a reich wing echo chamber here without folks like me and Amazon. I am deliberately unpleasant and controversial, calling out those that are parroting the current talking points. I make the reich wingers squirm when I refer to a conservative black man as an oreo. That is what black people call them. "Fat white cunt" got quite the reaction. Whining about racism ensued. It was far more sexist than racist, but that went right by the reich wingers.

It is pretty clear to anyone who has been paying attention to the news and reading from sites like Reddit's Bad Cop No Donut site that blacks and Hispanics are treated much worse that white folks, and have been for generations.
This official oppression continues to right now. Slate had a story recently from a teacher in DC. Her middle school students that were stopped, frisked, and their backpacks search by LEOs frequently, as in once or twice a week. They considered this normal and cooperated as though what was being done to them was legal, ethical, and right. It is NONE of those things. It is ongoing harassment, plain and simple. The exercise of power over those who have none. These are the kids that grow up to be thugs and criminal. If the pigs shat on me the way they do those kids, I would hate the bastards, and the government they worked for.

In terms of Hawaiian history, the natives got totally fucked over by white people. We took their land and blew up their system of governance. Look up Liliuokalani Even the brief Wiki entry has useful information about how the native Hawaiians got jacked. It has nothing to do with when Hawaii became a state. That happened long after we fucked over the natives and took their land from them. Reparations for the descendants of the natives makes sense. We cheated them out of their legacy. They should be compensated.