Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom argues that the ability to make choices is fundamental to economic development, and that the evaluation of outcomes can provide misleading answers. He uses the example of the high material consumption of United States slaves relative to some free whites to illustrate this contrast. This paper discusses some of the implications of such comparisons and the problem of evaluating what might be regarded as favorable outcomes which come from unfavorable institutions (e.g., slavery). It appears that all good things do not necessarily go together. The past relation of enslavement to the need for subsistence is discussed. Differences in gender roles under slavery and after emancipation are also examined.
