I had decided to abstain from commenting on this subject further. Pretty much every reply I have received is a variation of 'fake news' or 'racist cunt'.

As you've asked a good question in a civil manner (how novel!), it's only fair to respond in kind.

To answer your question; I believe removing restrictions is more helpful than adding divisive policies that benefit one race over another. I would argue that abolishing slavery, universal suffrage, and anti-discrimination laws have done far more to solve systemic racism than racial affirmative action.

Also, off the top of my head, I can't think of a situation where it wouldn't be even better if affirmative action policies were focused on factors outside of race. Affirmative action based on geographical location or economic prosperity would help the most people in need and capture many more who would otherwise fall through the gaps.

Thank you for your constructive comment.

I suppose it's not too bad. People typically use their wage as they get it, paying for rent/food/utilities. Many of these costs would be covered by the programme, which means they can potentially come out of it a year later with the full 60k.