U.S. firms sued over slavery

CNN Money (AP) ^ | March 25, 2002

[Slip18]

Okay, we pay them reparations, then subract the cost of the housing, food, travel expenses, et cetera. I think it would break even.

I'm wondering why this group isn't asking for reparations from the Africaners who sold them in the first place.

[FreeAtlanta]

No money there. First rule of ridiculous lawsuits, you only attack deep pockets.

[da_toolman]

[philosofy123]

Do you think after the last night Academy Award show, which displayed black Artists to have much more weight then their 10%-15% demographic representation in this country?

Minorities in other countries dream about having equal treatment. If 85% of our population were racists, there will be no statistical chance of minority actors in lead, much less winning the Oscar!

The race belly aching needs to take a rest!

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

If a group sues based on slavery injustices, how is that different from financial benefits now given for Native Americans by US gov. or for WWII victims' families by Swiss and German banks and companies? Sounds like the same thing doesn't it?

No. In the cases you mentioned the victims were still alive.

[weikel]

Yeah my ancestors were loyal union guys I demand repartations now LOL.

[Seeking the truth]

Wonder if Je$$e is behind this one?

[jpsb]

"This nation has pay it's debt, in the blood of the millions killed to rid itself of the eveil of slavery. No further payment is required."

[conserve-it]

I wouldn't put it past these companies to settle. Cowardice reigns supreme these days.

[DallasMike]

You can't sue a company for doing something that was legal at the time. You can't make laws retroactive.

I agree with your sentiment; however, there are hundreds of companies that have been successfully sued for violating today's environmental laws 50 years before they were enacted.

[Bikers4Bush]

I hear you. But 150 years is a lot different than 50 years.

I doubt many companies keep specific enough records that far back.

[Salman]

If a group sues based on slavery injustices, how is that different from financial benefits now given for Native Americans by US gov.

According to treaty obligations when they traded land for peace.

or for WWII victims' families by Swiss and German banks and companies? Sounds like the same thing doesn't it?

The money from Swiss banks is not a reparation, it is properly the property of the depositors' descendants.

With Germany it was a reparation imposed because they lost the war. That's what a "reparation" used to mean, a payment imposed on the loser of a war.

[Labyrinthos]

You can't sue a company for doing something that was legal at the time. You can't make laws retroactive.

Really? Tell that to GE Corp, which is being held liable for the cost of cleaning PCB's from the Hudson River, even though the law at the time allowed GE to dump the PCB's in the Hudson in the first place.

[DoctorMichael]

.........and so it begins...........

[Destructor]

It has begun!