Indians and bankers mismanage money?

Column:  More money won’t fix economy

Raliegh TiarhtThere seems to be a greater ideological problem to be seen here; that being that throwing money at a problem will fix the problem.

The federal government has been doing this for years, wasting away taxpayers’ dollars.

A great example would be how the government has dealt with American Indians. The government has given them more and more money expecting that it will fix the deep-seeded issues at hand, but it hasn’t.

Yet, government spends more money expecting a different result and nothing changes.

There are numerous examples of 18-year-old American Indian kids being given thousands of dollars as their reparation money, or as money for natural resources on reservation land.

However, they were never taught how to use the money. The result is that American Indians are out of that money that could have been used to benefit them.

It is normally wasted because of them not being taught how to use it.

Though the federal government knows of many examples of these failures, they continue throwing money at the problem, expecting a different result.

Comments

Steve
Wed Apr 8 2009 11:23
This is a completely incompetent write up in regards to Native Americans. I still await my thousands of dollars from the Federal Government that I can mismanage since I was “never taught how to use the money”. I applaud the notion of attempting to bring about a more informed opinion, yet, over generalizing Native Americans as those who do not understand the fundamental responsibility of a budget is naïve and offensive.

Jen
Wed Apr 8 2009 10:48
I agree with the notion that throwing money at complex problems rarely works without imparting other resources (policy, infrastructure, imagination, assessment). For decades, the BIA and other entities have ignored tribes' most basic needs for services and other resource investments. The rate of child poverty throughout Indian Country is a moral disgrace. Our child poverty rate in America is among the highest in the industrialized world.

So in that sense, Raleigh, thank you for bringing attention to the fact that our American Indian brothers and sisters need more than just government money to lead richer, fuller lives. They need to be treated with dignity and respect, by trusting them with the basic resources afforded to other U.S. funded communities, here and abroad. American Indians deserve a larger investment from their government than just a check.

Monacan2122
Wed Apr 8 2009 09:40
Really...... Please put your crayons away....... REALLY??

What ignorant and uninformed racist drivel !!!

Don Williams
Wed Apr 8 2009 08:54
There are no reparations to Indian Country. Any payments distributed to the tribes is compensation, from the treaty for ceding lands or from lease of land and/or resource extraction. Sounds like Tiahrt wishes to revoke treaties and expropriate the land for federal use.

As the Native Americans do not tell you how to spend you money, why are you attempting to tell them how to spend their money?

Thom H
Wed Apr 8 2009 08:37
With over 560 American Indian tribes, I would like Raleigh to substantiate his claim that "There are numerous examples of 18-year-old American Indian kids being given thousands of dollars as their reparation money, or as money for natural resources on reservation land." It is a "fact" that exists only in his mind. Journalism is supposed to be more than writing words in a blog. It is supposed to be founded on verifiable facts. Tiahrt has none here.

Don Johnson
Sat Apr 4 2009 12:07
I'm going to have to agree with Nick. This is a terrible column. I think it's pretty clear that the worst money-managers here are the Volante's editors for paying this 16 year old to write for them. And it's "deep-seated," not "deep-seeded."

Nick Estes
Fri Apr 3 2009 20:08
Wow, it's great that you compare the national debt with Indian people. Your ignorance is astounding! Not only do lump all Indian people categorically into bad money-managers, but also in your logic you compare Indians to national problems.Guest Column:  American Indians are not AIG

Nick EstesIn response to Raleigh Tiahrt’s opinion column last week about government bailouts: His comparison of American Indians to the poor money-managers of AIG is degrading and uninformed.

To say that American Indians cannot manage all the money being “thrown” at them is a fallacy and inherently anti-Indian.

Yes, throwing money at a problem has not worked and will not work. But, the “reparations” money that Tiahrt claims is being given away to 18-year-old American Indians in the thousands of dollars is but a fantasy.

Obviously all the “reparations” money that the federal government has “thrown” at America’s historic “Indian problem” should make South Dakota one of the richest states in the nation, given our large Indian population.

Embarrassingly, it couldn’t be farther from the truth. Buffalo County, or Crow Creek Indian Reservation, is currently the poorest county in the nation. In the top 10 poorest counties, five are located in South Dakota and all are on Indian reservations.

Yes, there are casino tribes that give thousands of dollars a month to enrollees in per capita payments.

Not all tribes are that way. Most tribes have casinos, but make little revenue. And the few tribes that greatly profit from casino money have very small enrollment numbers. Casinos are a private enterprise of the tribe and the revenues do not come from the federal government.Comment:  I don't know if there are "numerous examples" of 18-year-olds getting thousands of dollars. Tribe usually don't publicize their per capita payments and the media usually doesn't report on them. But here's one example: 18-Year-Olds Get $45,000 Each.

Tiarht has the kernel of an idea in his column: that money isn't enough to solve every tribal problem. The lack of money is one issue, but how it's spent is another. But everything else in his column--calling payments "reparations," saying Indians don't know how to manage their money--misses the mark.

For the most part, the respondents nailed Tiarht. But one of their arguments misses the mark too. They note how poverty-stricken Indian country is--as if that alone proves Tiarht is wrong. Tiarht might respond with something like, "Well, that's my point. Indian country is poor because Indians aren't spending the money they get wisely."

So Tiarht's critics win this mini-debate, but neither side really has addressed the other's claims. People have written whole books on whether money can cure various social ills. I believe the answer is yes, if it's spent on targeted, effective programs and not just thrown at problems.

For more on the subject, see Indians as Welfare Recipients.