Clueless

Discussion in 'MKJ Off-Topic' started by xuscx, Jul 22, 2020.

  1. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 27, 2020
    Missouri? Random.

    I never mentioned anything about the number. I merely stated, most did not own slaves....but once again, you move the goalposts, put words in my mouth like a dishonest Leftist bastard.
     
  2. GaryB

    GaryB Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    4,935
    Likes Received:
    673
    Jul 27, 2020
    You are incorrect. Based on statistics compiled from the 1860 Parker-Gallman sample reported in Foust (1975), p. 161, slaveless farms accounted for 4.0 percent of cotton farms in the US.
     
  3. 901 Club

    901 Club Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    11,866
    Likes Received:
    20,524
    Jul 27, 2020
    One can concede that slavery was an integral part of the antebellum economy and still be against "reparations" now.
     
  4. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 27, 2020
    You’re saying 96% of the cotton farms had slaves?

    BWAHAHAHAAAAAAA
     
  5. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 27, 2020
    Notice how he moves the goalposts to specifically “cotton”?

    Im done with this dishonest sack of shit.
     
    TheRealAirbns likes this.
  6. GaryB

    GaryB Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    4,935
    Likes Received:
    673
    Jul 27, 2020
    I agree. I doubt that reparations would be enough to resolve the structural issues needed to elevate poor Blacks. But, it is ludicrous to believe that the wealth gap can continue to increase without repercussions.
     
  7. GaryB

    GaryB Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    4,935
    Likes Received:
    673
    Jul 27, 2020
    Yes, the topic involves cotton. The cotton gin revolutionized the textile industry, increasing the need for slaves. If you want to expand the discussion to rice and tobacco, the other two products produced in the south, we can discuss it. But, neither product is relevant to the issues that BLM are protesting about today.
     
  8. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 27, 2020
    You moved the debate. Again. At least be honest about it.
    The Fact remains, less than 6% of whites owned slaves or had an immediate need for them.

    As for BLM, the group, they don’t care about blacks. They have one goal, and one goal only......destroy America.
     
    TheRealAirbns likes this.
  9. GaryB

    GaryB Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    4,935
    Likes Received:
    673
    Jul 27, 2020
    The discussion is about systemic racism. If you examine the US economy at the brink of the civil war, the South and the New England states were dependent on slave labor.

    According to the St Louis Fed, in 1817, there were 17 steamships carrying cotton from New Orleans to New England mills. By 1860, the number had grown to 3500 vessels. In 1800, the US was exporting zero cotton to London. As I stated by 1850, 1.8 million slaves were responsible for harvesting over 2 million bales of cotton. On average, Southern cotton plantation added 200,000 slaves each decade between 1810 and the start of the civil war.

    Here is my question for you? Where did the slaves come from? In 1807, the U.S. Congress abolished the foreign slave trade, a ban that went into effect on January 1, 1808. So, how did the south more than double the number of slaves over the next 50 years?

    They bought the slaves from the North. On average, Virginia brokered the sale of almost 20,000 Blacks into slavery each year for 50 years. Records indicate that Maryland alone sold an estimated 185,000 blacks into slavery during this period, making millionaires out of many families.

    Think about it for a second, our largest export is cotton and because of the invention of the cotton gin, the demand for slaves is unlimited. Then, Congress sees fit to cut off foreign slave trade, causing the value of slaves (and free blacks) in the US to skyrocket. Thus, the country ends up with an underground railroad going both directions (See the movie 12 years a slave). And, those folks from the north that expressed their distain for slavery, became the same folks that sold their own slaves to Virginia Brokers for incredible profits.

    Does this story help you to understand how racism became institutionalized, where even those that got rid of their slaves (Ulysses S Grant is said to have been paid to free William Jones) were guilty of profiting?
     
  10. TheRealAirbns

    TheRealAirbns Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    9,942
    Likes Received:
    28,215
    Jul 27, 2020
    Hmm. This would seem to be inaccurate.

    Massachussetts had de facto abolished slavery with John Adams' 1779 constitution. New York voted in 1799 to gradually abolish it, with the last slave in New York freed in 1827. New York was the second to *last* New England state to abolish slavery, with New Jersey, the last.

    New Jersey freed its slaves in 1804 in a process of gradual emancipation similar to New York's, but kept a form of mandatory indentured servitude until 1865 and the 13th amendment, when its last 16 slaves were freed.

    By the time of the Civil War, then, virtually all of New England had been free for at least 35 years. So this story about the North selling slaves to the South would have been a difficult thing to have achieved, since the North didn't have any.

    In terms of "dependent on slave labor," New England states weren't - unless you mean, somehow, indirectly. And if you're going to play that game, I could just as easily claim that without cotton, a free New England would have adapted and developed some other path to wealth. Freedom with minimal government interference is like that.

    So, would you like to switch to another "story?"
     
    DJ4SC likes this.
  11. TheRealAirbns

    TheRealAirbns Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    9,942
    Likes Received:
    28,215
    Jul 27, 2020
    Dependent is such an interesting word. Surely, if they hadn't had slaves, they would have hired laborers, right? The point being, they used slaves and developed an economy with dependencies on them because it was legal and available, not because it was necessary.

    None of this has anything at all to do with today's black lives narrative. First, because BLM's objectives have to do with marxism, not improving the lives of blacks. Same with Antifa's and any of the other anarchist/neo-marxist groups' involved. Second, because the claims of contemporary bad Police behavior and institutional racism aren't supported by any facts, without engaging in the kind of unreasonable statistical silliness and bullshit you're continually trying to pull off.

    Basically, you're off on one of your bizarre, constantly changing jags, pursued with no other objective than to rope people in and drag them down one of your rabbit holes in your peculiar trolling manner.
     
    SCBIGTIME and August West like this.
  12. DJ4SC

    DJ4SC Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    28,117
    Likes Received:
    38,622
    Jul 27, 2020

    Lol, of course he would.
     
    TheRealAirbns likes this.
  13. TroyBill

    TroyBill Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    7,890
    Likes Received:
    16,039
    Jul 27, 2020
    That is a false story. He took time off and making special appearance at court to make sure Jones was free in 1859. He never got a dime for him despite the fact he was experiencing very tough financial times. He was never comfortable with having a slave. He could have sold him for the going price of $1000 at the time but did not.
     
  14. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 28, 2020
    I guess you never heard of indentured servants? Or, here’s a mindblower....farm owners working their own farms! I know! Crazy, right?

    Point still stands, and you’ve yet to refute it....there’s no such thing as systemic racism. Citing archaic laws doesn’t change that fact.

    Man has been enslaving man since the beginning of time. The Italians, Irish, Indians, etc were all used at some point.

    And the Grant story is BS. Like everything else you post.
     
  15. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 28, 2020
    Great take....nailed it
     
  16. GaryB

    GaryB Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    4,935
    Likes Received:
    673
    Jul 28, 2020
    Instead of attempting to deny the selling of Northern Blacks into slavery, you should spin it to suggest that Northern Democrats were the sellers. I used the citations at the end of this document for sources: http://www.inmotionaame.org/print.cfm;jsessionid=f8302801371595909359803?migration=3&bhcp=1

    Ever the apologist....

    The textile, shipping, and financial industry developed in New England was the direct result of slavery. (source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1171357.pdf?seq=1 )

    Then, you should write your Congressman to get the stormtroopers out of Portland.

    You haven't figured it out yet. Liverpool UK was a fully integrated business model. They provided the ships for slavery and shipping cotton to the Americas; and then, they setup and funded the building of the textile industry in New England, including the buying of the end product.

    If you look at China's Silk Road initiative, they are doing the exact same thing today.

    If you read Hamilton by Chernow, he goes into a fair amount of detail regarding investment capital and the formation of debt as capitalism emerged in the 18th Century. Your argument that it was a matter of choice and substitution presupposes that financing existed from other places.

    I believe it is very important for Trumpers to change the narrative and on a message board where the average IQ seems to be under 50, it might work. There is one overwhelming fact to support the existence of institutional racism, the average Black family has 1/12 the net worth of a white family.

    You are referring to the hand written document (https://www.nps.gov/people/william-jones.htm ); but it was very common at the time for arrangements to be made with the slave for payment. It is one of the great mysteries about Grant and his relationship with slavery.

    I thought you gave up responding to my posts?
     
  17. August West

    August West Points Member


    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2019
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    8,110
    Jul 28, 2020
    I felt the the need to put you in your place again.

    Ill let you know the next time I feel like doing that.
     
  18. TheRealAirbns

    TheRealAirbns Junior Member


    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2017
    Messages:
    9,942
    Likes Received:
    28,215
    Jul 28, 2020
    There aren't any "stormtropers" in Portland.

    So where'd these alleged slaves you're claiming the North sold to the South come from, if the North didn't have any slaves?

    Let me restate what I said: most of your narrative on this point is flat out wrong. Several entire paragraphs you wrote simply aren't true, including the whole bit about the North selling hundreds of thousands of blacks to the South in the years leading up to the Civil War.

    You asked where the increase in Southern blacks came from? The average female slave had between nine and ten children. That's where. If you'd bothered to read virtually *any* text on slavery, you'd know that.

    And you're ever the dissembler and prevaricator.

    No, the *indirect* result of slavery, just as I said. If it had been direct, the North would have had black slaves working in those factories and industries.. They didn't. Because the North didn't have slaves. And if it hadn't been textiles, the North likely would have developed other industries, because, again, free people tend to do that.

    No, it doesn't. My statement was merely that people are resourceful, as the development of these trade routes and trade structures suggests, and if it hadn't been cotton and slavery, it would have been something else without slavery. After all, the UK wasn't trading just in textiles. In 1865, it was trading in all sorts of goods from across the globe. Financing for something instead of cotton and textiles would have been just as available.

    Says the guy who can't seem to present an argument without lying. Your impression of people's IQs is a reflection of your own inadequacies, not theirs.

    As for the narrative, maybe you insurrectionists should find a narrative that's actually true. Truth might not be a particularly high priority for people like you, but it is for most normal people.

    Nope, sorry, you're wrong. Worse, this is intellectually lazy and sloppy. You've assumed a cause, merely because the number exists (assuming it's even accurate, coming from you). You continue to make mistakes like this that are simply bizarre for an economist. You must not have been a very good one.

    This little episode of me not being bored by you is winding down. Your game just isn't that interesting.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2020
    SCBIGTIME likes this.

Share This Page