It didn't. But what changed? What was the variable here? Hmmm, what happened in the '60's? Civil rights movement? In a perverse way, yes. And yes, to an extent you are correct in blaming rich southern land owners, but not those of the 18th century.
Who fought civil rights most when the issue first was debated? RICH SOUTHERN WHITE DEMOCRATS, like Algore's daddy! Yet, when it was passed; who suddenly was the champion of black civil rights? These same rich southern democrats. How did they "prove" their loyalty to their new "friends"? By making sure as many of them as possible were on the welfare roles. Then by making benefits lopsided so that Uncle Sam was a better provider than daddy; but to get the goodies the mother had to dump daddy.
Just imagine how this destroyed the morale of the black father! Especially a young black father who hadn't fully achieved marketable job skills yet! Then they relived the father from responsibilities of fatherhood and gave him some crumbs from the dole; not quite enough to live on, but more than a minimum wage job at first. Then increased the minimum wage so that entry level jobs were harder to come by (jobs that would teach marketable skills); so much easier to just go on the dole and maybe do some shoplifting to suplement it.
To fully complete the destruction of the black community, they made sure courts went easy on criminals so that there wasn't either a carrot or a stick to tempt many black males into the legitimate work force.
Both logic and history require open eyes. I believe it is time you opened yours.
MARK A SITY
http://www.logic101.net/
That's not only logical, but explains the "over-crowded jails" hoax.