Message from @faultfiction

Discord ID: 686539241148514319


2020-03-09 11:38:21 UTC  

The worse off a slave is the more they are working

2020-03-09 11:38:28 UTC  

<:LIZ:588678565235523595> <:LIZ:588678565235523595> <:LIZ:588678565235523595> <:LIZ:588678565235523595>

2020-03-09 11:38:54 UTC  

Slaves inherently do less harmful work for less time if they are placed into better conditions

2020-03-09 11:39:03 UTC  

Or they are provided more food

2020-03-09 11:39:08 UTC  

Which also makes the work easier

2020-03-09 11:39:13 UTC  

Slaves are the properties of the owner so assumign they would have been kept to the house or confined to the property. Better treatment and conditions is a moral argument for it? Given that the other option for them to be to find work which they wont.

2020-03-09 11:39:25 UTC  

It is a moral arguement indeed

2020-03-09 11:39:28 UTC  

I dont disagre

2020-03-09 11:39:42 UTC  

But it is unrelated to the effect the slaves have on the economy

2020-03-09 11:39:57 UTC  

Whether or not they are fed and housed better or worse

2020-03-09 11:40:00 UTC  

They still work

2020-03-09 11:40:07 UTC  

The slaves have a positive effect on the economy because the loss of capital in prodiving employment is not there giving you more profit.

2020-03-09 11:40:15 UTC  

Isn't that the argument from economics perspective

2020-03-09 11:40:27 UTC  

I never mentioned employing slaves

2020-03-09 11:40:28 UTC  

Or

2020-03-09 11:40:36 UTC  

Turning slaves into employees

2020-03-09 11:40:47 UTC  

But where you are not offering a wage you are paying for their upkeep. Paying a wage waivers responsibility for food or housing.

2020-03-09 11:41:12 UTC  

Again you are trying to relate a moral arguement to an economic one

2020-03-09 11:41:22 UTC  

To summarise

2020-03-09 11:41:42 UTC  

Im not im telling you that the morality is not an argument at all here because of the principles of economics being involved.

2020-03-09 11:41:50 UTC  

Free Labour

2020-03-09 11:41:58 UTC  

No wages

2020-03-09 11:42:02 UTC  

It’s not free. That’s not point.

2020-03-09 11:42:05 UTC  

Let me loop this back to your original example

2020-03-09 11:42:37 UTC  

Owning a slave comes with the requirement of feeding them and housing them or just leaving them in the farms

2020-03-09 11:42:42 UTC  

You argued that if less poverty is an arguement for capitalism then better welfare for slaves is an argument for slavery

2020-03-09 11:42:43 UTC  

Doesn’t having slaves cause a negative effect on innovation as slave labour is cheap and there will be no drive on inventing labour saving technology.

2020-03-09 11:42:55 UTC  

In this case

2020-03-09 11:42:59 UTC  

There is no such thing as free labour. Unless you have a constantly supply of new slaves you do not pay for who you can expend without feeding or housing, it is not free.

2020-03-09 11:43:01 UTC  

The welfare of slaves

2020-03-09 11:43:04 UTC  

Is a moral concern

2020-03-09 11:43:19 UTC  

The economic standing of the impoverished

2020-03-09 11:43:28 UTC  

Is an economic concern

2020-03-09 11:43:33 UTC  

Its an economic concern. You want your slaves to be fit right?

2020-03-09 11:43:36 UTC  

to work hard

2020-03-09 11:43:41 UTC  

Not necessarily

2020-03-09 11:43:44 UTC  

Yes and no.

2020-03-09 11:43:48 UTC  

Slaves can be made to work hard with a whip

2020-03-09 11:43:49 UTC  

you don't want them to be fit from the goodness of your heart

2020-03-09 11:44:15 UTC  

A slave barely able to get through the day and just about survives is one who can’t rebel after work.

2020-03-09 11:44:55 UTC  

A really fit slave is capable of rebelling.