...yep, that's what its going to take. But ancestry means nothing. The moral question is not how do we determine it equitably, but should it be determined at all, for any reason? We should not be responsible for the sins of our grandfathers, any more than we should demand credit for their achievements and successes. That's why all good Progressives are for a robust inheritance tax, right? Why should my kid not go to college while Daddy Warbucks gets to send his larvae to the Ivy League? The outrage at the latest college admissions scandal documents this. If you give the rich the opportunity to buy their way to the top, they'll STILL figure they have the right to cheat. After all, people with money ARE the master race, aren't they?
Ask them, they'll tell you they have the work ethic, the determination, the ambition, the ability to postpone rewards, etc etc. They're just better...its in their blud.

There is a compromise, though. Everybody gets reparations, but everybody foots the bill, too. The progressive income tax soaks those who can most afford it, while competitive examinations (or if necessary, a lottery) distribute it to those who need it the most. Those who can't hack it should get no special favors just because their ancestors were either robbed blind, or doing the robbing.

Hereditary aristocracies are phoobah, so is hereditary victimhood. From each according to his ability (to pay) I can live with. To each according to his need is where I draw the line. All we really need is that the game not be rigged, and the umpires are fair. If some of us are better, faster, smarter, stronger than others, then so be it. The time for Reparations, like Affirmative Action, is long past. Forty acres and a mule may have been humane in the 19th century, but its not going to work today.

I am a firm believer and solid booster for free markets, I just have yet to see one. And you're not about to see them in laissez-faire societies.

"In the absence of proper government, the strong will ALWAYS take from the weak."