Blur the redline

The narrative I've seen pushed is that slavery robbed blacks of inherited wealth, nevermind that most of us don't get that either.

Mind you that the Pilgrims that came over were also somewhat poor, as they had technically been kicked out of Europe for being too "radical"
As well as whites also being slaves in Europe for a time

Well- in fairness- many people don’t inherit wealth- And also in fairness- it is possible for a family to go from poverty to middle or even upper class wealth in 1-3 generations. In fact many black families have gone from working class or poverty to middle class or beyond since maybe the 1970’s or so.

But what you have to remember- poor whites were always in the “ghettos” and housing projects. So we’re poor blacks. But as a race- you didn’t REALLY start to see significant integration of blue collar neighborhoods until the 1970’s and 1980’s- suburbs were really 1980’s and 1990’s. Asides entertainers and the like- you would find whites in posh zip codes and gated communities- but there weren’t a lot of black property owners in Malibu.

Racism created a QUESTION. When you see someone with opportunity and privilege- I’m not talking 2020 where we can argue what is or isn’t white privilege or if it even exists-I’m talking 50,60+ years ago- when there is no sane argument that being white wasn’t a HUGE advantage- poor or rich whites were better off than their black peers at that time.

The tl:dr and summation here- is that the lack of opportunity and the way the system and society often unfairly beat down on the economically less well off- those are universal. Economic discrimination is its own thing and poor whites face the same ECONOMIC barriers to education, networking, success, and general life as poor blacks.

BUT- they NOT- and in the history of America did not suffer the RACIAL barriers that blacks in America have faced and face now. (I am not referring to ETHNIC prejudice against CERTAIN whites in the early Americas and 20th venture pre WW1. That DID happen- it was terrible. But it also didn’t carry on with the intensity and systemic oppression blacks faced until less than a lifetime ago- and arguably still do.)

People confuse and conflate these things. ethnic, economic, religious. racial discrimination. Whites face economic discrimination. That is colorless except for green. Whites faced or face ethnic discrimination. A “white” Jew may still face loss of opportunity or other barriers, back east Italians and Irish still to this day can be racist against each other or by others. A poor white jew, Irish, etc May fave ethnic AND economic discrimination. But a poor black man will likely face all 3.

The struggle for recognition of these things and to make them right is a struggle that should be shared. It’s telling that you’ll seldom find the person who says “well I’m Irish, and my family was discriminated against, and we are poor...” out fighting for change in the system or fighting of past wrongs along with the person they are trying to silence by mentioning that “it isn’t JUST black people...”

If they no longer feel a need to fight because things are well enough for them that they aren’t terrified of being shot by cops while their hands are in the air, or being “too Irish” for their workplace- then why bring up those past injustices in a discussion about PRESENT times? If they just don’t want to fight or don’t think its worth it or whatever- that’s fine. But... other people aren’t content to eat a shit sandwich that was handed to them. But either way the “white people have XYZ problems too..” argument falls apart quickly.

If one is upset about economic discrimination- then get out there and fight it. If there’s already a huge group doing it- join them. Demand human rights. The “all lives matter” crowd missed the memo- that’s how you know it’s bullshit. They didn’t start up until someone else said they needed help, and they didn’t try to join BLM in pursuing solutions for everyone. They tried to take- to take focus and make themselves the center of attention.

Poor people have it bad. Through all of history more or less, of any race or configuration. Being poor sucks. But in America- you are much more likely to be born poor of you are born into a family that hasn’t had the opportunities and equal footing to build something for themselves.

That’s pretty much the nuance. It IS illegal. Technically- a “loan” isn’t just when I give you $100 and say “pay me back.” For tax and other purposes- including trying to get someone to pay you back- a major factor is EXPECTATION. A loan requires, among other things, a defined payment plan and a date that repayment is expected. If a “reasonable person” expects to be paid back- they will stipulate when and how that is supposed to happen- a contract requires a “meeting of the minds-“ if I assume $1 a week for 40 years is fine- and you assume I’ll pay you a lump sum in a week from today... that isn’t a meeting of the minds.

This is in part, specifically to prevent skirting tax laws- not that it stops it from happening all the time- wether it’s a car or a house or even a “small loan of a few million” to start a business- often times these “loans” are not loans- or in legal speak are “forgiven” which has its own tax legalities. There are limited scope exceptions such as a ONE TIME non taxable gift from a spouse to a spouse below a certain amount- but as a rule- this is generally not legal.

It’s just often VERY difficult to track money. For example- how do you know that if person A transfers $100k to person B- that person A is loaning or gifting that money- or that they are paying back a loan FROM person B?

See- personal finance isn’t very well tracked or regulated. There is no law that says you have to keep money in a bank- you can store it in a mattress if you like. You are also allowed to sell personal items freely- and largely without tax. So- say you buy a beanie baby for $5 and sell it for $4- no tax. Technically- if you buy it for $5 and it becomes collectible- so you sell it for $100- you owe tax on the $95. However- there are ways to offset this, and if you do a “cash sale” there is no way to confirm what you sold the item for.

So a person with 10 years working at $40k a year has made let’s say- $120k in cash they’ve touched. Meaning that if suddenly $100k shows up- how can you say they didn’t sell their possessions and save frugally?

Exceptions for personal gifts are a BIG one. the numbers change but in general- each parent can “gift” a child (things like allowances are “gifts” usually..) about $14k a year. So two parents can do $28k a year for kids under 18. So... if mommy and daddy give you $100k to buy a house- how can anyone say that money wasn’t “allowance money” saved for you over the years?

That is technically legal. If I as a parent- make my minor child save their allowance, and give them below the taxable limit and within the bounds of a parental gift to a child- they still don’t have to pay tax on the money when they turn 18. It’s tax free. And since that can be hard cash in a coffee can in a closet- there’s no way to verify that the money sat for 20 years or was just drummed up yesterday.

“But if those parents really didn’t have the money sitting around they’d need to move assets, sell things like stocks or property, withdraw from a bank account. That would leave a trail!” It would. It would. But- so what? They could easily say they used the actual cash for their own purposes- and even if that is “theft,” are you going to press charges for your fake allowance after your parents just gave you $100k? You could also easily again- fake a loan from you for $100k of your fake allowance to your parents- and say they are paying you back.

In the end- what is happening is obvious to everyone- but you need to PROVE it is happening and you usually can’t do that- and if you can.... the cost and complexity of each case, times the number of people who break these tax and finance laws constantly... plus the fact that to most people- the illegal way to do things is customary- we assume that’s how it is SUPPOSED to work- it’s usually not worth going after these things.

So tl:dr, don't worry about other people's money because it's hard to track and you probably break rules through sheer ignorance, too?

Well.... yes and no I guess. One could read it many ways. We could of course just say “worry about you not other people...” we could also say “regime the tax laws and laws on non taxable gifts to minors..” we could even say: make comprehensive changes to tax code, and make changes to personal finance laws or even completely digitize money or major purchases to increase accountability and overall security..” of course- it still doesn’t matter. You an argue that stricter personal finance laws and real estate laws help fight crime and terrorism and such- some say digitized money almost would end most low level crime since fencing goods becomes almost impossible since there’s no reconciliation of how you suddenly care to posses an item which your finances don’t show you legally acquiring when you sell it or use it...

But even without crypto currency there are barter systems or unofficial currencies that can emerge. In Japan for example- a game called “pachinko” is played with steel balls that you win- and usually can exchange for prizes. Organized crime uses the balls (or more usually the prizes you exchange them for) as a type of currency and will secretly exchange balls for real cash to allow illegal gambling to happen in the open- just the exchanges are clandestine. So if you hand in a certain stuffed bear that is X balls- that bear is worth $X in real cash to them.

I’m not advocating a particular view point. I’m just saying that in general- there isn’t an “easy” fix and the “easiest” fix that is most secure still is t perfect- has a bunch of benefits (like making “automatic taxes” more achievable) But is a blow to personal freedom and privacy.