Sites Holmquist trys, and often fails, to go no more than a couple of days without visiting (some of which Holmquist regularly swipes links from without attribution)
Well, look, it's not like slavery hasn't been studied for 100 years. Just to take the unpaid labor, a segment -- slavery was a monstrous, immoral institution, and that's why it should be condemned. But if you are looking at it economically, two economotricians won the Nobel Prize for studying slavery and they came up with the figure of 10 percent of a slave's wages were unpaid labor because the slave, after all, got food, clothing and housing.
And of course the freedom to purchase those items as they wanted in accordance with their full citizenship in the United States. The man in charge of frontpagemag.com continues:
Now, you and I, Tucker [Carlson], and James [Carville] and Ron Walters pay -- 30 percent or 40 percent of our labor is unpaid because it goes to the federal government. So this is -- there's -- this isn't the issue.
In a related matter, On August 6 I noted that David Horowitz of frontpagemag.com does not know, or chose to ignore, that other countries outlawed, including Great Britain, abolished slavery before the United States did.
In light of this, I'd like to make a challenge to all people, such as Dan Savage, who believe the United States should be taking over countries that violate the human rights of the people within their borders in order in order to establish freedom for those people. Would any country that had abolished slavery before the United States did have been justified in attacking, invading and conquering the United States in order to abolish slavery? Please explain your answer. posted by micah holmquist at 8/23/2002 03:06:00 PM
