How the fuck you own 600 human beings you don't have to pay wages and STILL die in debt?

He freed them though.

>>17919482
yeah, all 9
he didn't even free his cumdumpster

>>17919479 (OP)
He owned valuable assets rather than a steady supply of physical money

>>17919516
He built a really cool house called Monticello

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monticello

>>17919811
Shame they are still propagating the myth that Jefferson had children with Sally Hemings

>>17919479 (OP)
He lived and extremely lavish lifestyle comparable to European nobility

At one point he was the biggest importer of French and Italian wine into the US for his private wine cellar. He also imported a shitload of luxury clothing, art, books (more than 6,000 volumes), food, liquor, furniture, etc.

Monticello – Jefferson’s primary home in Virginia was an architectural marvel

He traveled like crazy. Jefferson lived in Paris in considerable style, socializing with European elites, attending balls, concerts, and intellectual salons, and collecting art and furniture.

>>17919479 (OP)
It actually costs more money since you have to feed, clothe, and house them. Further proof that slave owners were retarded kikes who did it for a feeling of being faux-aristocracy rather than any real economic gain.

>>17920127
>It actually costs more money since you have to feed, clothe, and house them
I don't know what shitty job you have where your salary doesn't cover those things. Paying employees would have cost all that and then some.

>>17919479 (OP)
how did the USA end up with $37 trillion in debt?
or $150 trillion if you count the stuff not on the books yet

>>17919857
so he's the Goring of the Founding Fathers?

Because he had to clothe, feed, and house 600 human beings.

>>17919479 (OP)
That's how you know he was smart, why save if you're going to die? You don't take money to the grave, burn every penny and borrow as much as you can so you die and leave the mess for everyone else to deal with.

>>17920214
>how did the USA end up with $37 trillion in debt?
Because the US' economy is roughly $30 trillion annually and the US has roughly $45 trillion dollars worth of natural resources which gives it high liquidity and high non-liquid assets?

>>17920179
Retard. The point is that these are YOUR responsibility, not your employer's. It's up to you to make ends meet. Slaves are a net negative on revenue. When an employee gets sick, an employer must legally pay a set amount of wages for that sick day. When a slave gets sick, you basically either have to dip into your pocket for extra care or risk working them to death.

>How the fuck you own 600 human beings you don't have to pay wages and STILL die in debt?
He was bad with money
Also its a common misconception among normal retards that slaves in the American South were this 10000x investment
They werent, they got sick a lot and werent actually that great as laborers
Also the idea that slaves = free labor is fucking stupid
Housing them wasnt free
Feeding them wasnt free
When they had children you had another mouth to feed and the mother had to take time off work
The idea that a shitty farmer on bad land could make money as long as he had slaves is nonsense
Jefferson was famously bad with money and lived beyond his means pretty much his whole life

>>17919485
He didn't even free his own children.

>>17919479 (OP)
if you own 600 slaves people will be more willing to lend you money, because it means you have plenty of collateral should you fail to repay your debts

>>17920746

>>17919479 (OP)
niggers aint cheap. just like farm equipment today.

>>17920127
If this was true nobody would be a slave owner

>>17921080
What makes you say that? They still use enslaved pajeets and niggers to build things in Dubai. They don't even need to cut labor costs since they're literal billionaires and Saudi oil barons. They just keep slaves because it makes them feel slightly more affluent and old money than other richfags.

>>17920790
>When a slave gets sick
Ultimately irrelevant, how often do you take sick days off work? The revenue gained from 99% of days easily makes up for anything lost on 1%. And anyway, see below
>risk working them to death.
Oh no the poor slave owner (most of them did this, slaves were cheap to buy and usually made their money back from a short while working. Remember these were the days before the end of the triangle slave trade)

>>17919479 (OP)
He was one of the planter elite OP. He liked foreign things and imported goods, going deep into debt to afford a lavish lifestyle and keep up appearances was normal. This is also why broke English aristocrats in the later half of the century would marry American newly-rich “dollar princesses” to gain access to their families money

>>17921124
>slaves were cheap to buy
Stopped reading.

>>17921125
Imagine betraying your old money ancestors who had kept your bloodline clean since 1066 to marry American new money, just to find out her dad had been keeping up appearances and was broke

>>17921144
This eventually happened to the main-line of Vanderbilt’s and the Astor family as their descendants spent their way out of the top 0.01%

just parasite colonizer things

>>17921127
>https://www.statista.com/statistics/1069716/british-american-west-african-slave-prices/
>https://accessgenealogy.com/virginia/tobacco-production-trend-of-prices-and-exports.htm
around 1750 Tabaccy prices were 20 shillings (£1) for every 100lb. Today you can harvest about 1,500 kg of tobacco from a single hectare, but that's with modern equipment and fertiliser, so we'll only assume a third of that. 500 kg is about 1100lb. Jefferson owned 5000 acres of land (about 2000 hectares). Let's assume only half is used to growth tobacco. 1000x1100 gives us 11000lb, which in turn gives us £1100, taking the above price of £27 per slave means he could replace 40 slaves a year and still turn a profit.
Admittedly much less that I had assumed, since I was thinking in Carribbean terms, but still speaks to the replaceability of slaves, a man like Jefferson could easily have lost 2 or 3 slaves a month and still made a good profit.
(By comparison the yearly wage for a average English working man was about £40-60. Food prices were low, a loaf of bread cost 5d (0.02% of a £) in London, and doubtless would have been cheaper in rural areas)