wrote in message
ups.com...

Allen wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
ISTR reading back in the 1970s of a family who proved an ancestor
did not receive his full pay from his service in the Continental Army
during the Revolutionary War. HIs family received back pay with
interest.

...

I'm personally not in favor of reparations for long-dead actions
but mostly becuase they are impractical, not because they are
unjust.

Another Poster brought up the issue Native American claims. ...

Who would pay the reparations?

Recall that I wrote:

I'm personally not in favor of reparations for long-dead actions
but mostly because they are impractical, not because they are
unjust.

Yet you continue to champion the cause.

All your examples include awards from a
governing body (backpay from the army, violating a government treaty). I
don't believe the U.S. Government ever owned any slaves.

The US Goverment permitted ownership of slaves and even arrested
freed slaves and returned them to slavery. That's roughly analogous

to allowing settlers to violate the treaty boundaries and then
sending the calvary in to protect them.

The legality of slavery makes it impractical to sue for those
injustices, this differentiates it from the treaty issue. It does not
make such a
suit unjust.

So if it were not impractical you are in favor of having your tax dollars go
to some group of yet to be identified persons in some yet to be determined
amount? My ancestors came to the United States after he Civil War. Are we
included in the payor group?

I don't understand what you are trying to achieve by your stance.

Allen