English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-09-20 03:25:23 · 10 answers · asked by Shay J 1 in Business & Finance Renting & Real Estate

The United States

2006-09-20 03:29:10 · update #1

10 answers

It undercut the fair value of wages.

No company with hired labor could compete.

The same thing is happening right now with prison labor and UNICOR. Every time a federal prison is built in a community, several companies go out of business.

2006-09-20 03:30:03 · answer #1 · answered by dredude52 6 · 0 0

Slavery, mostly used in the South, produced agricultural products dependent on human labor.

From a strictly economic view slavery was not cost efficient. The cost of production of a bale of ginned cotton was enormous. Slaves had to be fed, housed, clothed, guarded and managed in ways that drove up costs. In fact, slavery was about to be abandoned for economic reasons until Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and automated the process.

Labor intensive economies drive up the cost of goods and services.

In the North factories were increasing output using less labor and more machines. Goods could be produced cheaper, faster with a higher profit.

If the entire country depended on slave labor alone the result would have been a negative impact on the gross national product.

Of course there were moral issues involved with slavery, but that would be the subject of another question and another answer.

2006-09-20 10:38:16 · answer #2 · answered by Bruce Frazier 2 · 0 0

united states is a Democracy. with a political and social system like that, slavery is inconsistent. in a capitalist economy, if wages are zero, supply of labor should be nil. at least subsistence level wages should be paid to motivate labor to seek voluntary work.
which method works better in your office? Boss who is a Dictator or a Boss who is an Executive with a human face- compassionate yet disciplined and committed to profit to the company .
USA is a great a state for it had people like Abraham Lincoln.

2006-09-20 10:56:13 · answer #3 · answered by greywiseyoung 1 · 0 0

Slavery was always a bad thing, nobody should never have been a slave. I don't think slavery helped the economy at all, everyone here is building America now, we are working together. Slavery was just a power trip, but that is just my opinion. It was horrible what people have done to each other, remember slaves had loving families, too, that they were taken away from. Peace.

2006-09-20 10:31:16 · answer #4 · answered by spiritcavegrl 7 · 0 0

Slavery wasn't bad for the country's economics. The exact opposite. That's why the south was willing to fight to keep them and segregate form the north. Slavery was excellent for the economy. Free labor. Still wrong, but it was good for the plantation owners.

2006-09-20 10:28:46 · answer #5 · answered by jdecorse25 5 · 0 0

From a purely economics view, I guess it can only be seen as bad for the workers. If companies/people could find people to work for free, it certainly helped fill positions and gaps in the market. But I guess motivation and efficiency was bad for slaves and so hiring ppl and paying them a wage might actually offset the cost of hiring them in terms of how much extra work they put in?

2006-09-20 10:28:33 · answer #6 · answered by Adam L 5 · 0 0

We still have slavery,it has changed in its form.Every time you borrow money you become a salve to the banks,they determine how much time you spend with your families.The banks own you!People 4 people 602-487-2173

2006-09-20 18:15:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Was slavery it is still slavery and it is still going on today. Forget the past. They call it refugee or Asylum

2006-09-26 17:36:37 · answer #8 · answered by sarell 6 · 0 0

Which country did you have in mind?

2006-09-20 10:27:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Which country? make yourself clearer

2006-09-20 10:27:43 · answer #10 · answered by Ya-sai 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers