• Bye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think that’s wrong. Slavery existed because the government allowed it. If you were a farmer and you could afford slaves but didn’t have any, you wouldn’t be competitive with other farmers who had slaves. You were encentivized to do it. But then ol Abe did an amendment and a war, and then once it’s illegal you aren’t pressured to be terrible. You’re off the hook. It was the amendment and the war that ended slavery, not people voluntarily doing anything.

    It’s literally why we have laws. If people would just do the right thing otherwise, we wouldn’t need them.

    • threeduck@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It sounds like your morals are beholden to whatever reprehensible things are allowed by the government, if you are competitively incentivised. If slavery became legalised today, would you buy yourself some slaves to make sure you’re keeping up with the Jonese’s? Just because the government allows you to negatively gear and buy stacks of houses off of an initial investment, depriving others of their first home - solely because you legally can - doesn’t mean you have to, or should. This opulence of multiple home ownership, where you literally charge your tenants more than your mortgage costs, profiteering during a housing crisis, is really reprehensible. Look, I’m sure if we were at the pub together we’d have a great time, but buddy, you’re objectively an immoral person.