my grandfather came from scotland to canada as an indentured servent that is a slave. he worked all the time on a farm with just two hours off a week for very little pay. but this benefited him as scotland was going through a depression and he needed the work. he was able to send money to his wife and child. he had to stay eight years and he did. this type of work was suitable for him as he never had any get up and go.

Thanks to all who contributed their insights to my post!

Indeed the Plantation system in the South created an Aristocracy, a Landed Gentry. From this class leaders were chosen, taxes were levied, laws passed and policies devised. The Plantations had nearly no need for outside services and few goods beyond luxury items and tooling. The game was to remind the poor white trash that at least they were not N*$$#@s. In fact the most desire lands on the east coast were owned and dominated by Plantations. This pushed the White Trash out of the Tidewater, Piedmont and Larger mountain valleys into the ragged areas of Appalachia where many are found to this very day. Yet when the time to fight came the W.T. was the heart and back of the Confederate Army.

Loosing the war freed the W.T. to a great extent as well as the slaves. JIM CROW and the Klan became a social ladder up for many as the Dixiecrats sought to preserve the old order. Both made a pressure valve and control mechanism for the masses.

So to answer the question. NO! Slavery made some white people rich but placed millions more into a second class citizen status. It was no where near as dreadful on the W.T. as the slaves and freed black but it was a complete net sum loss!

I'm super white, but my family in no way benefited from slavery.

One side immigrated from Germany and lived a hard life working their own farm in North Dakota. The other side immigrated from England, joined the LDS religion, and fled to Utah to escape religious persecution (partially due to the fact that Mormons were abolitionist).

I also have lived my entire life in the North, and so has almost all my family, so you can't even get me there.

Now I'm being told I might have to pay slavery reparations...

What the what??

I agree with your assertion that not all Southerners were slave owners.

From Wikipedia entry for Nickajack Civil War Era:
Nickajack was made up of loosely defined regions of North Alabama and East Tennessee where popular sentiment remained loyal to the Union, and were decidedly anti-slavery.

In the period leading up to the American Civil War, there had been increasing talk of secession by the politicians representing wealthy plantation owners in the Black Belt. Hill country residents, however, were typically poor dirt-farmers and rarely slave owners. They believed such a war of secession would be "a war for the rich, fought by the poor," and they wanted to have nothing to do with it.

I've lived in what was loosely defined as Nickajack my whole life. The weird thing is... that I had never even heard of Nickajack until about a year ago.

I believe your thinking is quite sound on this subject.

Slavery on a global scale was ending Britain banned it 1834 and the importation of slaves in 1807, in fact:

Thomas Jefferson banned the importation of slaves in 1807 as well.

[abolition.nypl.org]

After January 1, 1808, it would "not be lawful to import or bring into the United States or the territories thereof from any foreign kingdom, place, or country, any negro, mulatto, or person of colour, with intent to hold, sell, or dispose of such [person] ... as a slave, to be held to service or labour."

Jefferson hoped it would end slavery in the US. There were hefty fines for shipping in slaves.

"Democracy in America" by de Touqueville, written int he 1830's describes the contrast while riding down, I think it was the Missouri River if memory serves, the sounds of hammering and commotion of building on the north side where there was no slavery and the dead silence on the south side where there was slavery. Development was simply too expensive with slaves, who would have required feeding clothing and lodging.

Slavery was a global fact of life before the 1800's. Income tax on a government issued fiat currency is our form of slavery today.

From knowledge hasn’t slavery been present for over 5500 years in some form in many civilisations & cultures. Therefore are we not all affected by this issue at some time & possibly at some point our ancestors were a part of this issue!!!

Ah, the debate over the cost benefit analysis of slavery. In the USSR under Stalin, several canals were dug by hand by political prisoners and criminals. Thousands of lives were extinguished by this endeavor and the end result was that those canals were unusable. What may we take away from the study of such an endeavor? The punishment and or execution by means of extreme cruelty comes at a cost to the state in terms of economic benefit. There is the cost of the substandard facilities and the labor and management to run them. Then there is the cost of keeping such prisoners alive to fill the purposes of the system. Finally, there is the opportunity costs, that is, where the investment of economic resources could have returned a greater benefit than the one obtained.

But the economic slavery, for that is what one could the enslavement of individuals for the purpose of labor of some kind, undergoes the same benefit analysis. First, productivity is always low in slave labor for the slave has little incentive to render more than the minimal productivity. Second, since the salve is property, a sort of capital investment much like machinery, one does not willing destroy ones source of capital. Third, such machinery requires maintenance to ensure that the machine makes it through its useful life. Fourth, agriculture was, in the past, labor intensive even as labor savings devices were added. In our modern age, the agricultural machinery is far more productive and has led to farming on an industrial scale. Even so, profit margins remain slim due the the risks from weather and other factors.

Finally, there many individuals and groups who felt that the slave population (mostly black and mixed heritage) should be bought by the Federal government and shipped back to Africa. Lincoln had considered this proposal and met with opposition due to the possible expense. One simple way was to invoke eminent domain over the chattel property and thus deport such property to Africa. However, many a banker in the northern states and in England held the mortgage on a great majority of such chattel property and would demand excessive compensation. Farm machinery had already started to come into farming that reduced labor and increased productivity before the war between the states broke out, thus the economics of owning slavery was starting to become very expensive.

So what is owed to the descendants of slaves and former slaves? I'd say, freedom from the Democrat plantation of the large urban inner cities. And who should pay an repatriations to those individuals who are the current indentured servants of of the Democrat urban political machines and plantations? Why liberal and progressive democrats who run those endeavors. Let those political elites and their followers who have benefited since LBJ's Great Society program pay the cost of renumeration.

read white corgo the untold history of slavery in America.

If we make it a black/white discussion then we play their game and feed the hatred. Liberty and justice for ALL.

Obviously the society that purchased slaves benefited. If it would have been cheaper to hire workers people would have done that rather than purchase slaves. Slavery was (and is) wrong, if you stand on liberty and equality for all you must be against slavery. That is to say that everyone should be responsible for themselves and have the same opportunity to work, educate, earn, etc.
Setting aside for a moment the reality that leftist politicians don't care about reparations (talking point not a real policy) - just a convenient topic to distract, trap conservatives, and prey on fear, greed, and dependency of minorities for the purpose of getting their votes. —- The idea that past slavery requires taking (stealing) from those who have not owned slaves to give to those who have never been slaves is also morally wrong. Under this precept a person could press for financial restitution from the grandchildren of the person who murdered their grandfather. It is effectively the misplacement of guilt without due process. It would go against the idea of liberty and justice for all.
Following their logic:
The government should stop trade with every country that allows child workforce and slavery in any form including communist/socialist societies where people don't get a choice in what they do or how they do it. Our society is benefiting from their slave labor force.