Talk:Slave Compensation Act 1837

Economics
This seems all true. But it fails to explore many relevant issues. For example there were many free-black slave owners who received compensation for freeing their slaves. And not all owners really owned slaves - they had bought them on credit, and to free their slaves without compensation would not only have ruined them but also the banks and their depositors who had lent the money. Nor was it all about already-rich people getting paid, many less well-off folk owned perhaps just one or two slaves, or even just a few shares in a company which owned or perhaps had a mortgage on a plantation. It's obviously a far more complicated picture than is so far presented here. 88.106.15.126 (talk) 14:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Usefulness of the comparison to current value
The article describes the compensation as "equivalent to around £16.5bn in today's terms". While this may be true, it hardly meaningful due to inflation during the latter part of the 20th century and the vast changes in life-style and culture. Inflation was zero or negative during the latter 19th century - if a person received bonds worth 500l in 1833 they would have been worth less than face value in 1900, and probably few people kept their bonds this long anyway. We just don't know when the last of them were redeemed. The notorious statement citing "2015" made it clear that this was the earliest date the we could be certain that the debt had been paid - i.e. the date when the consolidated bundle of debt that had absorbed the slave debt issue many many years ago (from which point we no longer had any further information on whether it was being paid off or not) was finally paid out and off the books.

Also it appears that may of the bonds were not "redeemable" until 1957. Doesn't this mean that the holder only benefited from the interest? I this case inflation would have made the bonds practically worthless in later years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwat00 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

The stuff about the percentage of the Treasury budget is also highly misleading as a comparison. Central govt. was tiny in those days compared to now - e.g. most of the "social services" were local or even just parish responsibilities. 159.196.12.219 (talk) 04:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)