Proponents of reparations tie wealth discrepancies to the effects of slavery, not the legal discrimination that followed during the next century. As a debating point, this is sensible, because it eliminates the need to deal with other kinds of discrimination that prevailed during the same period. But do the facts bear it out?
No. It is undoubtedly true that the former slaves had no property when they were freed in 1865. It is equally true, however, that tens of millions of immigrants who came to this country after 1865 carried their possessions in a suitcase, at most. Their success, relative to black people, in building wealth after their arrival cannot be attributed to that kind of a head start. It was undoubtedly due to the education and skills they had acquired before they immigrated.
The wealth gap is, therefore, partly attributable to an initial skills gap, but mostly to a significant difference in the degree and intensity of legal discrimination (i.e., discrimination against the Irish existed, but did not have the same effects as segregation) during the period between 1865 and 1965. A logical system of reparations consequently has to be based on the events that occurred during that period, or must focus on an outcome other than the wealth gap. The current proposal fails that test.