the math behind the slave trade, and why it was doomed

[cheka.]

one of my history books states that at the time of the writing of the US constitution the slave trade was highly profitable. it calls the area around lagos, nigeria 'the slave coast'. there were hundreds of tribes in the area that would capture and sell competing tribe members. at peak they were exporting 20,000 head per year.

traders would buy them for 2 pounds sterling and sell them for 30 times that amount to buyers in brazil, west indies, and US

check my math --

one pound of sterling is 12 ounces x $15 per ounce = $180 per pound. so two pounds is $360. that's the purchase price per head (in today's dollars)

sell price on good delivery to brazil/west indies/US is 30 x $360 = $10,800 per head (in today's dollars). so a breeding pair would be around $20,000.

mechanization, imo, would have killed ALL imports. example - one can buy a nice tractor for $10,000 that can do the work of a herd of slaves. tractors became available 1900-ish

i propose that even breeding one's own slaves at zero cost (as opposed to buying imports) would still be a losing venture. the upkeep costs on a tractor/other equip are so much less than caring for a herd of slaves.

slavery was on its way out. there needn't be a war for that.

any/all comments appreciated - esp those that challenge my work {--->)

[Jerrylynnb]

An interesting anecdote from my father-in-law (who was truly one-in-a-million).

When he was merely 17, he joined the Civilian Conservation Corpse (CCC) in Arizona, where hundreds of unemployed men would come from all over the USA as destitutes.

They built roads, dams, bridges, cleared forests, and other outdoor projects. They were paid a pittance, and the work WAS HARD, but they at least got fed, had a bunk to sleep in, and survived until the war in Europe finally broke out and work picked up here in the states.

During one day when they were sitting around after lunch for a moment or two, one elderly black man (who must have been over 80 at the time, 1932), had his shoe off and was tending to a festered toe, and spoke out to all listening,

"I once brought five hundred dollar[s] on the block - now, I [would] not be worth a plug nickel"!

He had been captured as a youth in Africa and auctioned off on the slave-trading "block" over here. His comment was made in 1932, and my father-in-law said he looked to be around 80 something, so, it had a ring of truth to it. The thing that my father-in-law was surprised about, was that this elderly black man seemed to be boasting about the high price he got auctioned off for in his youth - like it was a sense of pride that he had once been worth so much.

Here we are, more than a century distanced from the goings on back then. It may take some insight, reading, and a good ability to envision the unfamiliar, to get a glimpse of how things really were back then. The war wasn't about slavery - it was about collecting federal EXPORT taxes (for which there was never any official provision within the US Constitution) from the prosperous cotten and tobacco growers in the south - Lincoln's congress had just up'ed it from 28% to 43% and that drove the planters, who saw that they were being fleeced, to spread the talk of secession to the huge population of non-slave holding southerners.

It is always about money - and, if you care to look under a rock for a sludge covered varmit money-craving jew, you'll find at least one who was pressing hard to get things started (see "Uncle Tom's Cabin", written by a jewess, naturally).

[crimethink]

Technology would have made slavery obsolete in the CSA by the end of the 19th Century. The war was, as we know, for "other" reasons - same reasons Anglo-America kicked Germany in the teeth.

cheka, you are correct...mechanization, first, more intricate machines, then widespread steam, then petroleum...the end of slavery without mass murder.