by garraeth on 4/2/21, 2:04 PM with 55 comments
by fr2null on 4/2/21, 3:49 PM
I would think that it makes more sense to select based on 'wealth' (income, capital, etc.) instead. Since people of colour are disproportionately represented in the poorer population, this would help to reduce the income gap between races (since more people of colour are accepted into the program), without excluding the few white families that could also really benefit from this.
by djohnston on 4/2/21, 3:40 PM
by cbm-vic-20 on 4/2/21, 4:26 PM
by ralusek on 4/2/21, 3:48 PM
If you were to, say, implement a program to help poor people, rather than "people of color," then to the extent that "people of color" are overrepresented among the poor, then so, too, would the solution disproportionately assist "people of color."
The benefits would be:
1.) we don't enter an infinite teeter totter of people arguing on behalf of the victimization of their identity groups
2.) we actually arrive at an equilibrium more rapidly
3.) we don't institutionalize the concept of race, and reinforce the idea that the color of your skin is a concept worthy of being categorized by
4.) we stop treating race as a proxy stand in for privilege, or competence (which is exactly what racists do), and instead target the direct thing that race was proxying
5.) by targeting the actual thing we're trying to remediate, we help all people affected by it, rather than limiting ourselves to the identity groups with the best PR. we also don't unnecessarily target people who belong to those identity groups and aren't actually in need of assistance, but are perceived to be simply by association through the color of their skin
Just to reiterate: assume 1/6 people in a city were "people of color." Assume that 4/6 people who were poor in the city were "people of color." If you add a policy to help the poor, without considering race at all, 4/6 of the people that you help are going to be "people of color," despite them only being 1/6 of the population. It automatically targets the people who are affected disproportionately...
by PeekPoke on 4/2/21, 2:06 PM
by iudqnolq on 4/2/21, 3:53 PM
> Guaranteed income is often used interchangeably with Universal Basic Income (UBI) — the difference between the two is that *guaranteed income has qualifications* or requirements to participate.
by TheMagicHorsey on 4/2/21, 5:57 PM
A fundamental issue with UBI is getting broad support for it. The U part of UBI is universal for a reason. By making the income universal you get broader support. All human beings want the guarantee of some baseline support to fall back on in bad times ... even the wealthiest people can imagine losing everything. That's why they would support UBI.
But if you make the U stand for "Us Only" as in some small chosen group ... then there will not be broad support. It will literally be seen as taking from Sean to pay Shanice. It won't be sign as a baseline right for everyone.
Oakland has basically set back UBI by doing this nonsense. First of all, I'd like everyone to stop calling Oakland's program UBI. Its not UBI. Its just a bribe to shore up this particular politicians base in a city that is majority Black voters.
I'm so glad I've moved away from the Bay.
by dehrmann on 4/2/21, 5:01 PM
by ev1 on 4/2/21, 5:22 PM
by nailer on 4/2/21, 4:35 PM
by throwaway210402 on 4/2/21, 3:44 PM
As stated elsewhere, this is by definition institutional racism.
by triceratops on 4/2/21, 4:47 PM
Tl;dr It's funded by private donations, run by local organizations, and is a pilot to conduct research. It's not taxpayer money being handed out preferentially, and it's not UBI.
"Oakland Resilient Families is 100% funded by philanthropic donations. To date we have raised $6.75 million, at least 80% of which will be distributed directly to families over the next 18 months."
"Is this the same thing as a Universal Basic Income (UBI)?
No. UBI is meant to go to everyone and provide enough of a payment to cover all basic needs, whereas a guaranteed income is meant to provide an income floor but not meant to be a replacement for wages and can also be targeted to those who most need it. UBI would provide everyone - regardless of income - with equal cash support (often instead of existing social benefits). Oakland Resilient Families is intended for low-income BIPOC families and therefore is by definition not “universal.” Additionally, a central research focus for this project is to determine how a guaranteed income can enhance and expand the existing social safety net rather than replace it."
"The 600 randomly selected families will fall into two groups. Both groups will receive the same amount of money, participate in optional research surveys and interviews, and measure a similar set of outcomes related to economic and household wellbeing. The primary differences between the two groups lie in how they are structured in terms of location, income level, and research design."
The headline is carefully crafted to generate maximum outrage. I don't agree about aid being based on anything other than need. But at the same time, it's not for me to say how other people spend their money.
by throwawaysea on 4/2/21, 4:22 PM
by mayormcmatt on 4/2/21, 5:15 PM
1) White flight take jobs and money out of the area, into towns and cities over the hills, and also into more affluent parts of the city 2) "Redevelopment" carves up the neighborhood: hwy 980 isolates West Oakland from downtown; 880 (former Cyprus Freeway) slices the neighborhood in half; BART lops off an additional portion near the port. (I can't emphasize how badly this messed up the neighborhood.) 3) The Black Panthers started a few blocks from here, on Peralta Street, as a way for the residents to defend themselves from police abuse and empower the community; they are all but destroyed by the Feds' COINTELPRO. 4) Not specific to the neighborhood, still The War on Drugs is worth mentioning. Need I say more about that?
These things that happened a generation or two ago, they still resonate down through to the present in this community. I see it outside my window: my black and brown neighbors scrape to get by. This UBI program isn't supposed to fix it all, it's just a small step in the direction of balance.