Thread 17939303

If slavery made America rich why were the northern states richer than the southern states? Why is Canada which never had slaves more successful than Brazil which had slaves until 1890? Why is Mauritania which practices slavery today not an economic powerhouse? If Europe is rich thanks to colonialism as the leftists say, why is Portugal, the longest-lasting Western empire (1415-1999) poorer than countries that didn't have colonies like Poland, Slovenia, or Finland?

the value of slavery was the slaves, freeing the slaves deleted the value of the slave economy

>>17939303 (OP)
The North was more industrialized and had a much larger population (22 million vs. the South's 9 million). While plantations made certain families of slave holders very wealthy they also disenfranchised poor whites by gatekeeping them from laboring thereon.

>>17939303 (OP)
northern states had a large industrial base with factories and so on

southern states had tobacco and cotton crops

>>17939303 (OP)
>If slavery made America rich why were the northern states richer than the southern states

Southern states provided raw materials, north processed it. north sells it for more, gets richer

>Why is Canada which never had slaves more successful than Brazil which had slaves until 1890

Canada is economically attached to U.S., and had industrial base sooner, while brazil has neither.

> Why is Mauritania which practices slavery today not an economic powerhouse?

Pariah state, and in desert

>If Europe is rich thanks to colonialism as the leftists say, why is Portugal, the longest-lasting Western empire (1415-1999) poorer than countries that didn't have colonies like Poland, Slovenia, or Finland?

Portugal centered itself and reinvested in its colonies, so when they left, value was lost. Poland, Slovenia, and finland didn't and are apart of the eu, allowing rapid growth.

>BAD THREAD

>>17940110
>Portugal centered itself and reinvested in its colonies, so when they left, value was lost.
Portugal was pretty poor even when they still had colonies

>>17940075
So, in essence, Dixies were a colony of the North?

>>17939303 (OP)
Institutions.

>>17940463
They were clinging onto the colonies in the first place because Salazar was convinced they would start printing money any day now as a sunk cost cope.

>>17940110

So what you're saying is slavery doesn't benefit an economy in any way whatsoever and none of us "owe" anything to any slave. Got it.

>>17939317
No, the value was in the crops they sold. They could've replaced the slaves with white wagies and their profit margins would probably be even bigger since they wouldn't spend revenue on caring for slaves.