Hacker News Reader

Comment by unnouinceput | Hacker News Reader

Quote: "America got rich selling cotton picked by enslaved Black people"

I stopped there. I am here to read news about tech, not propaganda lies. Also flagged this.

What caught me out was the random argument that undocumented (see: illegal) immigrants should receive social security benefits. By the very definition of how documentation works this would be impossible, so I’m assuming the author is advocating for extending citizenship en-masse.

Yet until 1996, any worker who payed into social security (which includes many undocumented immigrants) was entitled to its benefits. The source the author linked makes this clear.

> When the Social Security program began paying benefits in 1940, there were no restrictions on benefit payments to noncitizens.

> In 1996, Congress approved tighter restrictions on the payment of Social Security benefits to aliens residing in the United States. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA)23 prohibited the payment of Social Security benefits to aliens in the United States who are not lawfully present, unless nonpayment would be contrary to a totalization agreement or Section 202(t) of the Social Security Act (the alien nonpayment provision).24 This provision became effective for applications filed on or after September 1, 1996. Subsequently, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 199625 added Section 202(y) to the Social Security Act. Section 202(y) of the act, which became effective for applications filed on or after December 1, 1996, states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no monthly benefit under [Title II of the Social Security Act] shall be payable to any alien in the United States for any month during which such alien is not lawfully present in the United States as determined by the Attorney General."

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20161117_RL32004_1ac9e9...

Also, many (maybe all?) documented non-citizen immigrants are eligible for social security if they meet the other criteria, so there's no reason to assume the author is arguing "for extending citizenship en-masse". Nor even that they are arguing for more visas being granted at all

Keep in mind that "undocumented" is a term-of-art. They may in practice be extremely well documented, in every regard except for an active visa.

A significant portion of "illegal" immigration is folks who have overstayed a legitimate work visa (and hence obtained a social security number during the visa application process), and there's also the whole bucket of folks who applied for a social security card under the DACA (which protections have since been mostly rescinded).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration#Terminolog... "undocumented" is a euphemism since "illegal immigrant" sounds like the person is illegal (vs having done an illegal action), but it has the unfortunate effect of leading to exactly this kind of confusion.

So-called "undocumented immigrants" can be quite well documented and even pay social security taxes: https://www.marketplace.org/2019/01/28/undocumented-immigran...

It's not random when you consider the clear motives behind this visualization.

The south literally tried to secede over exactly that state of affairs, starting the USA civil war. Not particularly controversial...

The issue is that only the south got rich. Not "America".

The north got rich off factories and wage earning labour. To equate the wealth of America to the south is a falsehood. And not a helpful one. It misleads you into missing the travesty of slavery: it did not build a nation. It gave leisure to a couple lucky families at the expense of hundreds per plantation.

The industry and wage earning of the north is what built America.

So the South produced cheap goods… where did they go? Who benefitted from being able to buy underpriced agricultural products?

Predominately England though France did benefit some as well.

Well yes, because the South supplied the majority of the world’s cotton, and the European powers were larger economies at the time.

But the textile mills in the Northern states also got their cotton predominantly from the South. Not to mention the tobacco, rice, etc.

> The industry and wage earning of the north is what built America.

uhhh... who is gonna tell him? that those industries in the north imported goods from the south.

The white liberal has been attacked way too hard throughout history despite literally being the good guy of history for hundreds of years. I’m so glad to see us finally defending our heritage. John Brown was a white liberal and a lot of black people cite him as “the realist white man who ever lived”.

Americas racism was primarily southerners being racist. It took white liberals to liberate everyone else, and we have to thank and celebrate the white liberal, not shit on them yet again.

You missed my point. US was not rich due to slavery, quite the contrary, after abolishing slavery, after (sic!) civil war, it became no. 1 economy in 1871.

Here is the list of GPD countries in 1861, before the start of civil war:

1 - China - $199.6 billion

2 - India - $125.7 billion

3 - United Kingdom - $85.8 billion

4 - France - $72.3 billion

5 - Germany (Prussia and other states) - $52.4 billion

6 - Russian Empire - $49.6 billion

7 - United States - $44.2 billion

8 - Japan - $33.0 billion

9 - Austria-Hungary - $30.1 billion

10 - Ottoman Empire - $17.5 billion

Source: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/development/the-world-economy_...

have you ever heard of jim crow? and also hockey stick growth? hockey stick growth is the common hacker news ideology, i know you know what i'm talking about.

this is the history of labor in america, therefore relevant in an infographic that deals with the race and class dynamics of labor. sorry that you got offended by the truth.

Yeah, I knew where this was going but did stick around long enough to confirm it.

I guess there's a certain type of audience this works with, but I'm not part of it.

What, you don't believe white people were rolling around in chairs in the 1600s? lol.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com