NationStates

Ralkovia wrote:

Laerod wrote:You need to reread what was posted. "Not cost effective" and "inefficient" aren't the same thing, so presenting an argument as to why something was cost effective enough to survive doesn't mean that it's the best economic choice.

Cost effective still means it worked and if it means that it "Got the job done" than slavery has just been economically justified.

Ceannairceach wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Of course. Free labor is more cost effective than slavery in certain jobs other than the primitive and mindless work that was entitled in picking and harvesting crops. There is a reason why slavery is still used in undeveloped parts of the World for farming.

Slavery exists and has existed because slavery is profitable and cost effective.

If minimum wage was not employed, free labor would STILL be more cost effective than slavery in menial work.

The Emerald Dawn wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Cost effective still means it worked and if it means that it "Got the job done" than slavery has just been economically justified.

Firing seventy-eight high-density clusters of naked virgins held together with tape and saliva, weighing approximately nine billion tons each, directly at Moscow would also stop Moscow from being a thing. Not economically justified, simply because it got the job done.

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Cost effective still means it worked and if it means that it "Got the job done" than slavery has just been economically justified.

So you admit that you made a non-sequitur?

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Of course. Free labor is more cost effective than slavery in certain jobs other than the primitive and mindless work that was entitled in picking and harvesting crops. There is a reason why slavery is still used in undeveloped parts of the World for farming.

Slavery exists and has existed because slavery is profitable and cost effective.

Not really what people are objecting to. People are objecting to your disgusting claim that it's "necessary".

Ralkovia wrote:

Laerod wrote:So you admit that you made a non-sequitur?

Where?

Ralkovia wrote:

Laerod wrote:Not really what people are objecting to. People are objecting to your disgusting claim that it's "necessary".

For places where machines are not readily available. Yes. It was necessary. Later it became cost-effective method.

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Where?

Ici. Your argument is almost entirely unrelated to the statement you quoted.

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
For places where machines are not readily available. Yes. It was necessary. Later it became cost-effective method.

And this is why people consider you a bad person.

Chinese Regions wrote:I lol'd algebra can have political bias

Ralkovia wrote:

Laerod wrote:And this is why people consider you a bad person.

I'd like to pretend that people think of me as the Bad Boy Jew with a heart of gold.
Also pockets full of gold too

Gauthier wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
I'd like to pretend that people think of me as the Bad Boy Jew with a heart of gold.
Also pockets full of gold too

Ah, the irony of a Jew arguing that slavery is justified.

Chinese Regions wrote:I lol'd algebra can have political bias

Ralkovia wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
Ah, the irony of a Jew arguing that slavery is justified.

The Pyramids don't lie. They lasted this long.

Gauthier wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
The Pyramids don't lie. They lasted this long.

And Oskar Schindler had it so good Spielburg made a movie about him. *nod*

Ralkovia wrote:

Laerod wrote:Ici. Your argument is almost entirely unrelated to the statement you quoted.

Sorry. I'm having a problem following it. Can you actually state it.

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Those that do not flow with the market, end up getting washed away. Once it stopped being cost effective, slavery would have ended. The same way we went from record players to MPGs.

You need to reread what was posted. "Not cost effective" and "inefficient" aren't the same thing, so presenting an argument as to why something was cost effective enough to survive doesn't mean that it's the best economic choice.

Death Metal wrote:Fox News Agenda: Uneducate the masses, because dumb people are easier to control.

Ralkovia wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
And Oskar Schindler had it so good Spielburg made a movie about him. *nod*

Nazis should have learned that using people angry at you for making complex weapons is stupid. They can sabotage that shit.

Laerod wrote:

Ralkovia wrote:
Sorry. I'm having a problem following it. Can you actually state it.

Laerod wrote:You need to reread what was posted. "Not cost effective" and "inefficient" aren't the same thing, so presenting an argument as to why something was cost effective enough to survive doesn't mean that it's the best economic choice.

Gauthier wrote:

Allemonde wrote:Wow what a bunch of idiots. Maybe they don't know that Algebra originates from the Babylonians and the Muslims.


Oh crap never mind.

That would mean every single school, public and private is in reality a madrassa. No wonder they push for home schooling.

Who needs some fancy-shmancy cash-draining school system, anyway?" Mitt Limbaugh declares from the front steps of his double-wide mobile home, shotgun in hand. "My Pa raised me and my eight brothers and three sisters without no waste of time schoolin'! My Pa taught me everythin' I need t'know, let all these whippersnappers' Mas and Pas teach 'em what they need t'know!

The Emerald Dawn wrote:Sticking your penis onto an iron turned to "nuclear fire"

Wikkiwallana wrote:

The Emerald Dawn wrote:Sticking your penis onto an iron turned to "nuclear fire"

Where do you think discount hot dogs come from?

Forster Keys wrote:You have to laugh. For your own health.