Prometheus 6

Via Marginal Revolution, where, of course, it turned into a discussion of how Black folks don't deserve reparations for slavery. Beware the 60 page pdf on the other side of the link.

The Righteous and Reasonable Ambition to Become a Landholder:
What Would have Happened if Former Slaves
had Received Land after the Civil War? *
Melinda Miller
Department of Economics
University of Michigan
November 19, 2007

Abstract:
Although over 140 years have passed since slaves were emancipated in the United States, African-Americans continue to lag behind the general population in terms of earnings and wealth. Both Reconstruction era policy makers and modern scholars have argued that racial inequality could have been reduced or eliminated if plans to allocate each freed slave family “forty acres and a mule” had been implemented following the Civil War. In this paper, I develop an empirical strategy that exploits a plausibly exogenous variation in policies of the Cherokee Nation and the southern United States to identify the impact of free land on the economic outcomes of former slaves. The Cherokee Nation, located in what is now the northeastern corner of Oklahoma, permitted the enslavement of people of African descent. After joining the Confederacy in 1861, the Cherokee Nation was forced during post-war negotiations to allow its former slaves to claim and improve any unused land in the Nation’s public domain. To examine this unique population of former slaves, I have digitized the entirety of the 1860 Cherokee Nation Slave Schedules and a 60 percent sample of the 1880 Cherokee Census. I find the racial gap in land ownership, farm size, and investment in long-term capital projects is smaller in the Cherokee Nation than in the southern United States. The advantages Cherokee freedmen experience in these areas translate into smaller racial wealth and income gaps in the Cherokee Nation than in the South. Additionally, the Cherokee freedmen had higher absolute levels of wealth and higher levels of income than southern freedmen. These results together suggest that access to free land had a considerable and positive benefit on former slaves.

A couple of folks over there are arguing against land grants to ex-slaves, quoting Thomas Sowell, and posting ignorant stuff like this:

Samir_Nurmohamed: ""free stuff" it sounds like the recipient is receiving free chocolate. Reparations are drastically different (if you were not aware)."

So, Samir, help me understand the difference between "free stuff" and "reparations". Consider the several trillion dollars given to U.S. African-Americans the past century for:

- housing;
- food stamps;
- college and vocational education;
- medical care;
- welfare payments.

Should those trillions of dollars - a huge wealth transfer - be considered "free stuff" or "reparations"?

Posted by: John Dewey at Dec 11, 2007 12:39:04 PM

...as though that stuff wasn't available to everyone in the country that was broke. Other idiocies like "my ancestors didn't own slaves" as though they didn't come here to gather up some of that slavery-enabled wealth. They didn't think of it that way, but you can't buy the assests without assuming the liabilities. Failure to understand that is behind our current mortgage crisis.

And my favorite comment:

It's been 150 Years. Get over it.

Posted by: skitzo at Dec 11, 2007 1:33:05 PM

Like the citizens of the Confederate States of America have gotten over it.

It hasn't even been fifty years. We have not seen a full generation of white folks that has not collectively acted against the interests of Black Americans...as evidenced by the bullshit comments quoted above.

And in those shitty bats drop by, read this

The Reparations Discussion: Day 1

The Reparations Discussion: Day 2

The Reparations Discussion: Day 2a

The Reparations Discussion: Day 3

...before asking a damn thing up in here.