Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Overpopulation and the price of slaves[change source]

I simply can't find a citation for the claim that overpopulation has driven the cost of slaves down. This also doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense because many of the countries with the most people aren't the countries where slavery is a problem. I'm going to go ahead and remove the claim for now. Kansan (talk) 06:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's probably basic economics: In a normal market economy, the price of a good will decrease, if its supply increases, and demand stays the same? - Places to look are probably archives of special punlications (focusing on econmics, or history). If you add "citation needed" to the relevant parts, the search for such publications can begin. --Eptalon (talk) 10:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to clarify: by "normal market economy" I meant "perfect competition". There are many sellers, and many buyers, and neither the seller nor the buyer can directly influence the market price. --Eptalon (talk) 10:25, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One of the main characteristics of perfect competition is easy entry and exit into a market, and due to the legal issues involved with modern day slavery, I just don't think it's applicable here. There are too many other factors here (i.e. the legal status of slavery has changed over the years, technology has changed, etc.) to solely consider this in terms of supply. Kansan (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This may partly be true; however consider that there problably is no clear agreement of what consitutes "slavery"; are those girls who became prostitutes to pay of their (monetary or idelological) debt "slaves", or do we find a different name for their situation? - To speak in economical terms, market entry may not be easy and there may be certain factors that make exiting the market "difficult" or "unattractive" (being prosecuted for human trafficking, for example). Given all these "shades of grey", I still think it is possible to model this "scenario" using market ecocomics; I am not an economist, but I think that if you use a specialized search engine, finding papers about this exact scenario will not be difficult. - Other idea: if market entry/exit is difficult, the number of market players will stay approximately the same; if the demand stays the same, the supply directly influences the price (more supply - less price). --Eptalon (talk) 15:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thralldom[change source]

Is slavery really called "Thralldom?" I'm a native English speaker, and I've never heard that word before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Hello! It looks like this is some kind of an English word. I just checked the English Wikipedia and they use the word in their article as well. Also does Thralldom redirect to the slavery article over there. -Barras (talk) 14:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From what I can tell, the term "thrall" refers to a specific type of slave in Scandinavia around the 14th century. Kansan (talk) 03:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think "thralldom" is a pretty rare word for most people. I have only heard it used in a different sense, that of a person being so greatly influenced by another person that we come to say "she has him in thrall" or some such. It suggests some kind of magical invisible influence, rather than slavery. Anyway, on grounds of rarity it is not a natural synonym for Simple English readers. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wish I could recall where I got this, decades ago, but the word became rare in medieval English and was revived in the 19th century for mainly metaphorical use. Which is to say, for those who wanted to show highly educated they were. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Focus of this article?[change source]

Hello, we should seriously look at what the focus of this article should be. It is very nice o get a historical overview, and yes, it was officially abolished, in the first half of the 20th century. Since then, it has continued ot exist, and it would probably be good if the article could mention that. Today, it probably takes more of a form of forcing people into prositution, or other forms of forced labor. And of course, the result may no longer be the 'feel-good-we-solved-the-problem' story adapted to schools. --Eptalon (talk) 12:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I think it's a good page, and it seems a shame that it bears no recognition as "good " or "very good." I would only improve it by more sources, and by some work on how widespread slavery was in Africa before the colonial era. It's quite wrong to think the idea was modern or invented by white men. En wiki does have a page "slavery in Africa".

Needs, of course more sources, but pretty good for our wiki. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Six out of ten??[change source]

The "six out of every ten boys bled to death" is simply preposterous. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That doesn't sound like a very good source. The website cited says "About six of every 10 boys bled to death during the procedure, according to some sources". Without citing the original sources it seems unreliable. But I suppose it could be true? Maybe they could capture so many people that they didn't care if most of them died. 2607:F140:400:A000:1815:1FA8:7862:B9C7 (talk) 18:37, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Niger. (...) Nigerian[change source]

"In Niger, there is also much slavery. A Nigerian study has found that more than 800,000 people are slaves, almost 8% of the population".--Please make sure this is correct (while i try to fix other articles). 2001:2020:319:772E:B12D:76D0:570:69A7 (talk) 15:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not okay, maybe[change source]

"This was long after the 1636 edict by Tokguawa Japan had expelled Portuguese people."--Needs an extra word, or so? 2001:2020:309:7C75:79DB:7F1D:B3F6:BFED (talk) 22:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]