Based on Ta-Nehisi’s essay, the philosophical argument against reparations for African Americans is found in home-mortgage market. Clyde Ross bought “on contract” for his house meaning if he missed a single payment, he would immediately forfeit his $1,000 down payment, all his monthly payments, and the property itself (CITATION). This is not right because it only happened to African Americans. Missing a single payment shouldn’t make him lose everything. If white people miss payments they get a notice or get money added on to the previous payment, if the payment is still not paid then it can be taken away. Based on this, African Americans are being discriminated against and their rights are violated. The practical argument against reparations for African Americans in Ta-Nehisi’s essay is found in home-mortgage market as well. …show more content…
As the seller, by doing this it wastes time by having to evict many families and finding a new family to go “on contact”. Also, it loses money by other families seeing the ways of the business and deciding they don’t want to be “on contract”. In Ta-Nehisi’s essay, the philosophical argument for reparations for African Americans is found in “A Difference of Kind, Not Degree”. Since half a century ago, the humiliation of whites only signs are gone, rates of black poverty have decreased, and black teen-pregnancy rates are at record lows (CITATION). As African Americans, by this happening their lives have changed for the better. Without the humiliation, harassment, contracts, and more made by the whites African Americans are able to live their lives the way they want to and not have fear or be told what to