5 ms·

Yes, and it was always the case for people in not-so-lucky countries. Still it's new for U.S. centric people, because USA had a good headstart.

by xiphias 11y ago

dragonbonheur 11y ago
It's not new for the USA. Slave owners did not have to work for a few generations while slavery lasted.
- barry-cotter 11y ago
  Founding or running a slave plantation both required a lot of work. Just because one thing about someone is repugnant doesn't mean that everything else is. Most plantation owners worked at their disgusting trade.
- dagw 11y ago
  My understanding is that most slave owners where 'middle class'. Sure they could afford a few slaves to help out with the heaviest work on the plantations, but certainly not enough to completely free them of having to work themselves.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    That still leaves some good thousands of rich slave owners. Places like Savannah weren't built for poor middle class...
    - dagw 11y ago
      I'm sure most where rich enough to have time and money to spend on leisure, but not rich enough to never have to work.
      - coldtea 11y ago
        With 10 slaves IN the house, taking care of cleaning and everything? At most they had to handle "administrative" tasks for their estate. Hardly work compared to what people (slaves or not) did at the time.
        dagw 11y ago
        With 10 slaves IN the house, taking care of cleaning and everything? Exact numbers aren't easy to come by, but at least based on numbers I've found for North Carolina[0] it seems that the majority of slave owners owned less than 10 slaves in total with 2-4 being most common number of slaves slave owners owned. Now obviously the slave owners work and working conditions was absolutely and obviously trivial compared to that of their slaves, but that is hardly the same is not working. My is working conditions are probably far more comfortable than that most of the plantation owners, but I still claim to work for a living. [0] http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-antebellum/5347 http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-antebellum/5347
        coldtea 11y ago
        >My is working conditions are probably far more comfortable than that most of the plantation owners, but I still claim to work for a living. Are they though? They weren't supposed to solve hard (thinking-wise) business and algorithmic problems, or sit tied to a PC and program 8-12 hours a day. If anything Southerners were considered leisurely compared to the Northerners.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  s/slavery/company town/
  - jdavis703 11y ago
    Not the same at all. Remember that slaves were kdinapped from their home, shipped thousands of miles, saw their women raped to make more "product" and had their descendants forced into the same system. If you want to opt out of the corporate system you can in today's world, without worrying that slaves catchers and their dogs will be sent after you, and you will be tortured if they catch you.
    - cLeEOGPw 11y ago
      So it's the same. Instead of spending money on shipping them thousands of miles, making sure their women are raped and hiring men to force their descendants into the system, you just give them some money and fill some blanks. Result is the same - cheap work done for you. I'd even say slaves were really expensive and required much oversight and trouble for the value they provided.

Yes, and it was always the case for people in not-so-lucky countries. Still it's new for U.S. centric people, because USA had a good headstart.

by xiphias 11y ago

Yes, and it was always the case for people in not-so-lucky countries. Still it's new for U.S. centric people, because USA had a good headstart.

dragonbonheur 11y ago

It's not new for the USA. Slave owners did not have to work for a few generations while slavery lasted.

barry-cotter 11y ago
Founding or running a slave plantation both required a lot of work. Just because one thing about someone is repugnant doesn't mean that everything else is. Most plantation owners worked at their disgusting trade.
dagw 11y ago
My understanding is that most slave owners where 'middle class'. Sure they could afford a few slaves to help out with the heaviest work on the plantations, but certainly not enough to completely free them of having to work themselves.
- coldtea 11y ago
  That still leaves some good thousands of rich slave owners. Places like Savannah weren't built for poor middle class...
  - dagw 11y ago
    I'm sure most where rich enough to have time and money to spend on leisure, but not rich enough to never have to work.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      With 10 slaves IN the house, taking care of cleaning and everything? At most they had to handle "administrative" tasks for their estate. Hardly work compared to what people (slaves or not) did at the time.
      - dagw 11y ago
        With 10 slaves IN the house, taking care of cleaning and everything? Exact numbers aren't easy to come by, but at least based on numbers I've found for North Carolina[0] it seems that the majority of slave owners owned less than 10 slaves in total with 2-4 being most common number of slaves slave owners owned. Now obviously the slave owners work and working conditions was absolutely and obviously trivial compared to that of their slaves, but that is hardly the same is not working. My is working conditions are probably far more comfortable than that most of the plantation owners, but I still claim to work for a living. [0] http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-antebellum/5347 http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-antebellum/5347
        coldtea 11y ago
        >My is working conditions are probably far more comfortable than that most of the plantation owners, but I still claim to work for a living. Are they though? They weren't supposed to solve hard (thinking-wise) business and algorithmic problems, or sit tied to a PC and program 8-12 hours a day. If anything Southerners were considered leisurely compared to the Northerners.
pdkl95 11y ago
s/slavery/company town/
- jdavis703 11y ago
  Not the same at all. Remember that slaves were kdinapped from their home, shipped thousands of miles, saw their women raped to make more "product" and had their descendants forced into the same system. If you want to opt out of the corporate system you can in today's world, without worrying that slaves catchers and their dogs will be sent after you, and you will be tortured if they catch you.
  - cLeEOGPw 11y ago
    So it's the same. Instead of spending money on shipping them thousands of miles, making sure their women are raped and hiring men to force their descendants into the system, you just give them some money and fill some blanks. Result is the same - cheap work done for you. I'd even say slaves were really expensive and required much oversight and trouble for the value they provided.