Thanks Jeepers for vindicating my shoot from the hip memory on the 50% asset claim.
Since WW2, major population reducing war has been avoided because the degree of reduction has become unfathomable. It kept the cold war cold.
Back then, war was considered the solution more easily. It worked against the British, the Spanish in Texas and the Indians in the plains. So it was considered and implemented.
The post upthread that the south wanted slavery celebrated, not just accepted by the north is an excellent point. The north could have grandfathered in slavery in Alabama, but was adamant that Colorado-Kansas be non slavery. The south had the opportunity to accept new states are without slaves and continued on. There was a workable compromise here.
Sure, slavery is immoral; but so are 600,000 bodies.
Those who valuate such assets do so with various objectives in mind, thus, subjectively. That was part of the perfect storm formula forte mortgage meltdown, i.e., inflated appraisals based upon inflated price targets to accommodate down payment assistance programs with FHA loans for no-cash-to-close purchases by uncreditworthy minorities, a program implemented under Clinton.
Your author cited is a regular contributor to the Huffington Post, Samuel H. Williamson, Co-Founder and President, MeasuringWorth , and in this issue credits Democratic Presidents with the most economic growth:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samuel-h-williamson/presidents-economic-growth_b_1959778.html
So, I suppose in your citing Williamson that you are in favor of Democratic Presidents? Or will you concede these valuations are purely subjective?
He would ask us to believe that the vast acreage under plantations, homes, live stock, bank accounts, and other assets were equal to the value of the number of slaves??? According to US Census estimates, Blacks comprised 36% of the population in the South in 1860:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html
While that is a substantial portion, their relative market value would be governed by supply. Like the “sweat shop” labor force of the North, supplied by boat after boat of immigrants, that supply of slaves was relatively endless.
Williamson is clearly slanting his valuations toward the agenda of his market.