That is not true. A slave was a substantial investment. You had to keep them in good health
There are books that talk about how some slaves cried at being fred, and wanted to stay and did stay on the plantations. And when they needed to be paid, then the fact that they were only able to live so good BECAUSE They all worked for free as slaves became apparent.
The owner lost their investment and now had to pay them, but with no money back from the freed property.
Slavery was bad and all that, and I am not for it by any means.
It was just THE WAY THINGS WERE back then. That was the system that had been in place for years.
People went to Africa to get slaves because that is where the slave market was.
The are true horror stories, but not all of them are horros stories.
That is not true. A slave was a substantial investment. You had to keep them in good health.
How is my statement not true? Read the whole thing. The houses that the slaves lived in were minimal. But often they weren't much worse than the poorest free men. And the clothing they got was equal to that of a very, very poor person. Well, they mostly had as much food as they could grow and raise. As for health, any good slave owner would raise hell if an overseer allowed a slave to die from an untended injury or illness or abuse.
Like I said, the difference between a socialism and old slavery is the old slave owners actually cared about their slaves.