Michael wrote,
> ... claims that the large slave operations were efficient ...
>
> Field, Elizabeth B. 1988. "The Relative Efficiency of Slavery
> Revisited: A Translog Production Function Approach."...
> Hoffer, R.A. and S.T. Folland. 1991. "The Relative Efficiency of
> Slave Agriculture: .....
I look at this stuff many years ago. These claims are wrong. I recollect that
the basic problem is measuring the amount of "labor input" in a slave system.
It can't be properly measured and, so, very poor proxy measures have to be
used. Any econometric study of efficiency in slavery is an example of garbage
in, garbage out.
The basic ideological issue behind this efficiency is the neoclassical
assumption that what exists is efficient. Slavery existed and, so, it must have
been efficient (so say the neoclassicals). The concern of neoclassicals is, if
slavery existed and was not efficient, when then what does this say about
production within capitalism--it is not necessarily efficient?
Eric
