[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Slaves were a cheap commodity. If you have a cheap pair of shoes that can be replaced for 20 or 30 bucks, do you bother with taking extra good care of them, or do you just wear them until they’re no good anymore, toss 'em out and get a new pair?[/quote]
So cheap in fact that EVERYBODY owned some – just like family pets, huh?
Hahahahaha!
You really have no clue.[/quote]
Obviously I meant cheap for those who had a need for them. Slaves were owned by the rich and were nothing more than property and an investment in their plantations. Given this, yes slaves were cheap, especially given the return on the investment that they represented.
By the way, you still haven’t answered those questions I posed to you earlier. Still letting Murray Rothbard do your talking for you? Or are you going to answer them yourself, which would require you to think for yourself? Perhaps you haven’t answered them because you have no answer.[/quote]
You’re lame. How long does it take to profit from a slave? Keep in mind they are not born with the ability to labor. They required production to a bare minimum of laboring capacity.
They were no cheaper than tractors are today. Moron.
No one does my thinking for me. I have done my homework but you are lazy and you fail.[/quote]
Your failure to answer those questions is revealing. You have no answer, plain and simple. If you did, you would provide them in your own words, not a pdf file written by someone else that probably does not contain the words “Abraham Lincoln”. You’re right, I’m lazy. I don’t have the work ethic required to sift through that file and search for your answers for you.
So come on, what are YOUR answers to those questions? If you’re so smart, they should roll right off your tongue and directly address each one with clarity and precision. Let’s see what you’ve got.