Posted on 03/23/2021 10:54:59 PM PDT by blueplum
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The mayor of Oakland, California, on Tuesday announced a privately funded program that will give low-income families of color $500 per month with no rules on how they can spend it.
Oakland's project is significant because it is one of the largest efforts in the U.S. so far, targeting up to 600 families. And it is the first program to limit participation strictly to Black, Indigenous and people of color communities.
The reason: White households in Oakland on average make about three times as much annually than black households, according to the Oakland Equity Index. It's also a nod to the legacy of the Black Panther Party, the political movement that was founded in Oakland in the 1960s.
“Guaranteed income has been a goal of the Black Panther platform since its founding,” said Jesús Gerena, CEO of Family Independence Initiative, which is partnering with the program in Oakland. “Direct investment in the community in response to systemic injustices isn't new.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Can’t wait until the PRIVATE founder tries to take it away!!!!
not to forget, the main purpose of those obama phones was so poor people who had no internet access could look for, apply for, and take calls saying ‘hi, you’re hired’. Now they’re used mostly to watch and record videos to try to get twitter clicks
The remark to which I replied was as follows: "Oakland launches guaranteed servitude to thy unwilling neighbor."
In response, I pointed out that the first sentence of the article states that the program is privately funded. It is therefore incorrect to speak of "servitude."
Regards,
“Where the white poor folk at”? Any in Oakland or aren’t they allowed there?
Rep. Marxist, white-hater Maxine Waters (D-CA) political district though I understand that even she doesn’t live in the ‘hood with all her “Bros and sistas”.
Wonder how much graft money she’ll donate to the “cause”. Maybe a few used wigs and pig-repellant perfumes.
An issue back in the day, rearing its head yet again.
In response, I pointed out that the first sentence of the article states that the program is privately funded. It is therefore incorrect to speak of "servitude."
You then replied with:
Guaranteed: to make certain of, to undertake as surety for another person.
I had no problem with the word "guaranteed." Rather, as I have repeatedly said, it is a misnomer to characterize this voluntary, privately-funded program in Oakland as any form of "servitude" insofar as no one is being forced to provide funding.
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.