i think it is a good trade because some people couldn't get salt or gold.
salt gave you nutrience and you need salt to trade. gold allows you to become wealthy if you are poor you also might need gold to buy or trade.
I agree with you but now in 2017 I would much rather have gold then salt. It would have been nice though to get something you need back then.
I half agree. I think salt is a important thing as I said in my comment. I disagree with gold being important. Back then, you could trade tons and tons and tons and TONS of wheat for that stuff, so it'd be a useful trade. One would get crops to eat and reproduce, while the other gets a needed thing and preserver. Also, gold was a want, not a need so the people who gave the salt got ripped off.
I agree with you Garrett. I agree with you because you are right salt gives you nutrience and you need nutrience in your body.
I agree with you Garrett. Salt has a lot more positves thsn gold does. Sure its pretty but what use does it have, can't make weapons, can't eat it or preserve food with it what is the point of gold.
I agree for a part f it. Back then it didn't matter. Gold was a kind of currency that the West African kingdoms had an overload, with a large amount to spare. Now, the trade is completely unfair. Gold is now extremely valuable, so they can now get pounds of salt for a chip of gold. ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ
Yes. I believe it was smart and right to trade gold for salt. Sodium you need to survive and salt preserves food. You don't need gold at all.
i agree with you about the salt part but gold you kind of need. If you want to trade of purchase anything and you dont have money but gold you can trade or purchase gold for that item.
Sure you need the sodium but buy more things with the gold. Also they could of bought Iron.
I agree with you Miles because you do need salt to survive. Also, gold is kinda useless but only for fashion.
I agree with Miles because if you don't have salt then you die. Salt is also good for preserving food.
I agree with you Miles. You don't need gold to live. They needed salt to preserve their meat.
I think that it was not a fair trade because gold is very expensive. But if I needed something I would trade something I want for it. It it could be a fair trade it just depends on the way you look at it.
I believe that it was a fair trade to trade salt for gold. Gold was not helping keep anyone there alive, it was only something that made a Kingdom richer. Salt was able to preserve food, which made food last longer, and more people could eat.
I agree with you Angie salt has way more uses and gold is just something to brag about. To people in west Africa salt was more valuable because they had such an abundant amount of gold and a scarce amount of salt.
I think it is a good trade. It's a good trade because you need salt because salt has nutrients you need. Salt also preserves food so when you kill an animal you can save it for a little longer. Gold is not a need so it's a fair trade.
I think that is was fair to trade salt for gold. I think this because salt is something that we need in our body even though it dehydrates us.
I agree with you Julia, even though it dehydrates us the minerals inside of the salt is good for us. Plus it can help kill some type of bacteria.
Yes I do believe salt for gold was a fair trade because. Its like a store you get some food you have to pay, it is just the new advancements in technology these past years. Every year some new type of technology happens. When you go to the grocery store you have to pay that's a law just like back then.
I think it was a unfair trade of salt for gold. Sure you need salt but gold is expensive and cool looking. If I were them I would trade for salt and other goodies so the price evens out.
I disagree with you Kevin. Sure having gold would make you look "cool" but back then there was so much gold that it was not really as special as it is now. What if in Africa having a pound of salt was equivalent to having 1 pound of salt, what if salt made you look "cool" back then.Plus salt can be used in various ways unlike gold which is almost completely useless in a situation of survival or just in general.
*A pound of salt= One pound of gold
I think the trade of gold and salt was fair because gold is very pretty and valuable. But salt is something you need. So is kinda equal. I think the Africans should of traded a half of a pound of gold for a pound of salt.
I agree with you Zack. I think it was fair because you need salt. Gold is a valuable resource so it's a fair trade. It's a equal trade in my opinion.
I agree with you, Zack because they needed salt, but gold was valuable. Trading half a pound of gold for a pound of salt does seem like a good amount to make it more fair.
I agree with you. The africans should have gotten more salt for the amount of gold they were trading.
When you first think about it you say of course not but if you look at the situation they are in, then you might end up saying yes. Gold is a want and salt is a need. Everyone else wants gold so it is easy to trade those resources with other civilizations.
I agree with you, Abby. The Africans needed salt, and they had plenty of gold to trade with. At first, looking at the numbers, it does look very unfair, but add in the scenario, and it seems more fair.
I think it goes back to needs and wants. Africans didn't need gold and they had so much of it. They needed salt so they traded gold for salt.
I think that it is some what fair. If you have a lot of gold no salt you trade your gold for their salt. The africans should have goten more salt from the amount of gold they are trading
I think that the gold for salt trade was a good trade. The West Africans had more wants than needs. If they had an abundant amount of gold and a scarce amount of salt they can just get what they want and give what they don't need.
I think It was a good trade, and also not so good of one. This is because, gold... wan't very valuable in Africa, mostly because there was a lot of gold. Not just a small amount, A LOT. Enough to travel to neighboring civilizations, and hand it out FOR FREE. So gold wasn't to valuable to them, and salt was. So overall it was a good trade... but, gold is very valuable now, therefore also a bad trade.
But I personally think it was a good trade, ONLY in their situation.
oops wrong classroom... that explains a lot. time for copying and pasting!
and the question is different... :(
I think it was a good trade because they needed slat but did not need gold. Gold did nothing for them, coudn't make tools or wepons eat of preserve food with it. Also salt is good for peserving food, adding nutrients, and adding flavor.
I think it was completely unfair for them to be so generous, when they never knew that they were being scammed! They could've gotten so many POUNDS of salt for a small amount of gold, imagine how much they could have gotten for the large amount of gold! ಠ_ಠ
Between gold and imagine, it was meant to be a period *.
I agree with you because they did trade pounds of salt for a small portion of gold. So they were getting scammed. And that's not fair.
Yes i do think it was a good trade because gold is not a need. It is a want. They need salt to preserve food. Food is a need not a want
I agree, food is want you need to survive. Gold is what you want, it won't help you survive.
I agree with you Princeza because gold is just a want and salt is a need. Without salt you die, without gold you sad, but that is how it works.
I think this was a fair trade.The Africans were very smart when they traded gold for salt. Salt was very valuable for saving their food sources. It would keep their food from rotting, preventing them from eating rotten meat which would make them sick.:D
I agree with u Connor W. It was fair for them to get the salt to keep the food fresh.
#glad to have you back
I think that it was a fair trade for the west. Back then they had a lot of gold and they did not know what to do with it. I also thought it was fair because they needed the salt to keep food fresh
I think the gold and salt trade was fair because of needs and wants. The West African Empires needed salt for there food. Also the West African Empires had no use for gold.
I think it was fair because they would trade a pound of salt for a pound of gold. Plus the got rid of what they wanted for what they needed,salt. And the had no use for gold because they could not use it for weapons or armor.
I think the salt to gold trade was a good idea because gold was a soft material, which meant they couldn't use it for armor or weapons. What they did need was salt. I think it was a useful trade.
I totally agree with you the trade was the best the can't use gold for armor or as a weapon. So it useless to them the only thing they could used it for is trade and jewelry.
I feel that the trade was fair, because the Africans needed salt, and had lots and lots of gold. They needed the salt, and they didn't need the gold, so they traded what they had for what they needed, therefore, I feel that the trade was fair. If it happened in modern days, I would have changed the numbers, because salt in this time period is much less valuable than gold, but because of the situation and the time period, I do feel that the trade was fair.
I don't think that trading salt for gold was fair because in the west they needed salt to keep all of there food fresh, and that was big back then. And they did salt for flavor. So in the west gold did not mean much back then. So that's why I think trading salt for gold was not a fair trade.
I think the gold for salt trade was fair because in the west they did not have any salt and without salt they would die. They used to have salt pops to get the nutrients from the salt. Also the salt can preserve food so they could have it longer.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.