I think that it was a fair trade. I think it is a fair trade because when they killed a living animal you would not be able to eat it with out getting sick. The reason why they traded gold for salt is because when they would kill a living animal they would be able to put salt on it to have it stay moist and have it not go bad. If I was the one that was trading I would do it for my health because salt would be a thing that I need to survive but on the other hand with gold that is a need. When 1oz of gold is about 1000 dollars. The salt is probably worth like 25 cents at the store. This is why I think that trading salt for gold was a good trade.
I agree with Tony. I also think the salt for gold trade in the West African Kingdoms was a fair trade. I agree with Tony when he says that the reason for why they traded gold for salt was because they would kill a living animal and they would be able to put salt on it so it would not go bad. With the salt, they were able to eat there food without getting sick. The salt was a need and not a want. Also, I agree with Tony when he says that he would rather have the salt then the gold. I would rather have the salt then the gold because without the salt, I would not be able to live.
I believe that it was a fair trade. I believe this because, both salt and gold had an importance. Both things were valuable in Africa (only salt) and all of the other civilizations (gold) that the Africans traded with. When the Africans traded gold for salt with the other civilizations, they were each for a pound, so this made it fair since both things had a value, and they were equally traded. This is why I believe that trading gold for salt was a fair trade.
I agree with Myles. This was a fair trade. They were both valuable items for different empires. Mali empire wanted salt, and had plentiful gold, and Egypt wanted gold and had salt.
I think that this was a fair trade. I think this is a fair trade because without the salt, they would not be able to eat without getting sick. The gold was a want. The salt was a need. They would not survive without having the salt. They would be able to survive without gold. If they did not have the salt, there meat would go bad. It would be rotten in a few days. With the salt, the food would go rotten in a few weeks instead of a few days. This is why I think that the trading of salt for gold was a fair trade for the West African Kingdoms.
I agree with you Regis. Salt is a need and Gold is a want. Africans did have a lot of gold, so it was easy to trade the gold for salt, so Africans could preserve their food.
I agree with you Regis because most of the food would spoil and since most of the animals have a lot of meat they need it.The people want gold as a want because it symbolizes being rich and wealthy so this creates a good and fair trade.
I agree with Regis. Salt is needed for the kingdoms of western Africa and gold is a want for the rest of the world. that is why I think it is fair.
the gold and silt trade was good for the African because they need silt for the meet so the meet can last
I think it was fair. I think it the Salt and Gold trade was fair because salt was something Africans needed to survive. The salt would help preserve food so it would last longer. It was also fair because they had plenty of gold and people outside Africa did not.
I agree with you Izzy S. I agree with you because, this was a fair trade. Salt was a need for the Africans, and gold was a need for the Arad Muslims. They also sold each thing for the same ounce which made it fair. This is why I agree with you Izzy S.
I agree with Izzy because the Africans did need it to survive and they got it by trading something they didn't really that others wanted for an equal amount.
I do believe that the trade of gold for salt was fair. I believe this because the Mali empire had plentiful gold. Salt was also something they really needed. They needed the salt to keep the meat good and for it to not spoil. This is why I believe that this was a fair trade.
I agree.Salt was very useful for meat.But gold was not.It only looks nice.I think it is unfair but the person with gold does not know.
I think that this was a fair trade because in Africa all they had was animals that had a lot of meat example like an elephant. The elephant if you had about a ton of meat then it would spoil in a day or two and the meat would be useless and only make you sick.This would be a waste of meat.And in Africa there was an abundance of gold and they needed salt to preserve the meat. They would trade the gold because they saw that most countries wanted it because it was valuable to them. They traded a pound of gold for a pound of salt.I think that if they changed the trade to like an ounce of gold for a pound of salt then I think it would be very fair for both of them.
I agree with Jesus since salt preserves meat. And that without salt the food would spoil in two or three days. It would be better to be able to eat everything over time than eating everything all at once.
I think (back then) the salt and gold trade was fair.Actually it was sort of unfair.Someone got a flimsy metal that looks nice end another person got something to help keep food fresh.Nowadays, gold costs $1300 per ounce. While salt only costs $3.So I say its pretty unfair.
I think it was because insted of the food getting roten they can use the salt to make it good to eat. it will be safe to eat if you put salt on the food anyways :)
I think that it is unfair that they traded gold for salt. I think this because if the africans knew how much gold was worth to the outside world they would be rich. Also because the person who got the gold was rich for giving someone salt which in my opinion is really unfair.
I disagree, This was a fair trade.
I highly disagree.My reasoning is because yes today it was unfair because gold is like $25,000 an ounce and salt is like $2.00.Back then it was all about supply and demand and needs and wants
Yes I think that the salt for gold trade is fair. Gold my be way more expensive, but it's useless. People want it because it's expensive. Salt has a big use for the west africans, so thats why I think the salt for gold trade is fair.
I do not agree with you Aidan. I think that if they could have sold something else for the salt.
I agree you like because ones if they didn't have anything to trade for the salt
I think it was a good deal since the Africans needed salt to preserve the food they caught. The gold didn't really matter since it didn't really help them survive. So the Africans traded based on their needs. This si understandable since they would die with gold. So they would rather live than die rich.
I think this was a good trade. I think this was a good trade because the West Africans had so much gold. With all this gold they could trade for salt.
i agreed that gold has such much as salt does.
Yes I do believe trading gold for salt is fair.My reasoning for this is because the Africans really really needed salt to live,it was a necessity.So basically the only way they could live is by giving the traders what they want which is gold.So one group had a big supply of what the other group needed and another group had a big supply of what the other group wanted so why not trade it.
i think it was fair because salt and gold were both shard
I think it was fair because they were both traded equally and were also at the same level of need and want. The people in west Africa who needed salt got it and the Arab muslims got what they wanted. It was fair because the west Africans didn't really need gold and the Arab muslims didn't really need salt because they both had enough of it.
yea i think it was a free trade . beacuse it helped it gave the people food for nutrition
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.