- Mar 11, 2015
- 77,525
- 35,639
- 2,330
- Thread starter
- #61
Blacks did build this country. In more ways than one. America became wealthy due to the textile industry. The textile indutry needed cotton for that to happen.You aren't owed a fucking thing. You didn't suffer, and blacks didn't build the country.
The Irish and the Chinese who built the railroads are responsible for the wealth of this country.
You people held back economic development which is why the South lost the war.
Then we have this:
“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”
Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry
Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016,
In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea: slave-backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:
In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves;and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.
First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”
As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.
The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.
Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves, Chicago Sun-Times.com March 7, 2014, derived from: American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
Since 2000, U.S. gross domestic product lost much as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including education and access to business loans, according to a study by Citigroup. Specifically, the study came up with $16 trillion in lost GDP by noting four key racial gaps between African Americans and whites:
$13 trillion lost in potential business revenue because of discriminatory lending to African American entrepreneurs, with an estimated 6.1 million jobs not generated as a result
$2.7 trillion in income lost because of disparities in wages suffered by African Americans
$218 billion lost over the past two decades because of discrimination in providing housing credit
And $90 billion to $113 billion in lifetime income lost from discrimination in accessing higher education
We can state our case for reparations on these numbers that started in the year 2000. If we only take lost income from racism starting in 2000, it equals 56,250 per black person in America. And this is money owed NOW, for things done in OUR LIFETIMES.
Son, the fact that you are white and have an opinion doesn't mean a motherfucking thing. I have studied this and much more. You come from a position of ignorance and given all the information avaliable on a clicks notice, your ignorance is willful. You don't know the first thing about which you speak.
What those like you need to do in these discussions is when one of us who are black present you with facts that rebut your ancient racist beliefs, take notes and read all of the information you get linked. In this case you can buy the Sublettes e-book cheap. But it's 800 pages and if you haven't read it, you can't tell me jack shit about what blacks did not do.
Last edited: