search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Backtalk T


PATRICE ONWUKA / GUEST COLUMNIST Reforms, Not Reparations


he news cycle has been littered with talk about reparations lately. The concept of cash transfers to every descen- dant of slaves in America is no longer a pipe dream


of a few disillusioned academics on the periphery but a mainstream policy idea now being debated in California. Now, the Biden administration is lending credence to


the reparations movement by revising census demographic questions to segment the Black population between those who are immigrants, or descended from immigrants (like this writer), and those who trace their ancestry back to American plantations. We must ask a fundamental question: What outcome do


they seek with reparations? If the goal is ensuring that everyone has equal access to opportunities and economic mobility, a massive cash infu- sion may not be the right solution. Reparations will not wipe poverty out for good or make


the generational fi nancial situations of the most disadvan- taged Black Americans materially better in the long run. If that were the case, fi ve decades of government cash and


non-cash transfers would have eliminated ghettos and other impoverished areas ages ago. Government policies have a debilitating impact on the


economic prospects of Black Americans that reparations won’t solve. Smart reforms can empower individuals without further


dividing Black people from white people and even among each other. California has pioneered a reparations task force to help


the state compensate Black residents for past racial animus and continued injustices. Black residents comprise about 6.5% of California’s popu-


lation, and their household median income is $63,000, below the state median income of $83,000. A reparations plan would be staggering. San Francisco is considering paying Black residents


$5 million each as well as a guaranteed income of at least $97,000 and personal debt forgiveness costing each non- Black family at least $600,000. Economists estimate that Black residents statewide are


owed $800 billion — more than 2.5 times the state’s annual $300 billion budget — for overpolicing, housing discrimina- tion, and disproportionate incarceration rates. Add to that a recommended $1 million per older Black


resident for poor health outcomes. All of this cash would only be an “initial down payment,” suggesting a never-ending gravy train. The fi nancial implications of sinking the state’s entire


98 NEWSMAX | MAY 2023


budget (and likely some from the federal government) into reparations are nightmarish. In turn, the businesses and residents that would fl ee Cali-


fornia because they could not aff ord or would refuse the tax increases would drain the state of taxpayers, employers, and economic activity. Cash alone will never solve the fi nancial issues that Black Americans face, and it can trigger new problems. These payments would create the same kind of disincen-


tive to work that excessive stimulus checks sparked during the pandemic. Without fi nancial education to make good choices, that money will quickly be spent.


E


nergy should be directed at encouraging work and removing obstacles from an individual experiencing


economic mobility. That begins with a solid educational foundation. If 67% of California’s Black children do not read or write


at grade level and just 77% of Black students graduate high school, Black kids are already set on a downward trajectory. Investing in educational choices and programs that help


those struggling to catch up is critical. Next, these kids must be enlightened on fulfi lling and lucrative careers that do not require a four-year college degree. Encourage schools and businesses to partner in provid-


ing hands-on learning, training opportunities, and post- high school vocational programs that open up pathways to millions of middle-skilled occupations. States like California and private employers should audit


their positions to remove college degree requirements from positions that simply do not need them and instead focus on skills and experience. In addition, excessive occupational licensure is a costly


and time-consuming hurdle for many minorities to work in particular career fi elds or start their own businesses. According to the Institute for Justice, California is the


third most burdensome state for these government hurdles. In some occupations, those with criminal records are


unfairly prohibited from even obtaining a license, especially in fi elds unrelated to their previous criminal activity. Want to address recidivism? Start by giving people a


chance to work. By pursuing smart reforms, from education to the work-


force, we can unleash opportunity for all disadvantaged Americans without triggering the unintended consequences that will only set them back further.


Patrice Onwuka is a political commentator and director of the Center for Economic Opportunity at the Independent Women’s Forum.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100