Well see this is the solution to world hunger. take the starving and homeless people of all races and make them work but for food instead of us currency. They should be treated humanely and in well health but the work that is needed can be done by them for good care, shelter, and food. It is a whole different aspect of slavery instead of the old version.
And what if they want out of this agreement? Can they just freely leave as they please? if that is what you suggest then they are not truly slaves but simply workers working for food and shelter rather than the money too buy these things with. And therefore your not providing proof that slavery should be legal. Slaves don't have the option to leave or stop working. They are owned. And if that is the case with those individuals in your suggested world hunger fixing program it is still immoral for every human has the right to live their own life free of being owned by another.
thats not what im saying. if they choose to be a slave they file to become a slave. after that they are not free. they are put on a slave market and bought. it is not their choice to leave when they please but their choice between being a slave or starving. Once they are bought they are paid with food and shelter and care but no money which is considered slavery. If they run away at all they can be caught and punished but not killed.
Owning another human being, having that type of power over another person, will almost always corrupt the owners. These slaves will be treated poorly regardless of any laws or regulations placed on this plan of yours. Your plan would also be incredibly detrimental to the world economy. Construction crews, planters, carpenters, basically all manual labor positions will be replaced with these new slaves. Making the unemployment rate skyrocket. Forcing even more people to "sign themselves up" to become slaves just so they don't end up starving to death. Your solution would be a catastrophic disaster and in no way justifies slavery becoming legal.
which is why that slaves will only be used for agricultural purposes. which would reduce the use of mechinary so it would be more "green" for the atmosphere. it would only be agricultural because any other use of slaves would not be considered slaves, they would be "indentured servants" and would be against the laws that would be associated with slavery and its regulations. yes i know that the industry business would decrease but thats why slavery should only be allowed in 1/15's of the state.
either way if the homeless and hungry do sign up, which most of them wont so there is no problem, the ones that do will either be old, in bad health, and wont last much longer. so either way my argument in correct and you loose this argument.
"either way if the homeless and hungry do sign up, which most of them wont so there is no problem, the ones that do will either be old, in bad health, and wont last much longer."
Then what would be the point of your grand plan? If so few signed up it wouldn't make much of a difference either way. And your whole reason for allowing slavery is the fact that fixing world hunger would cancel out the immorality associated with literally owning another humans life , but if your plan doesn't really make a difference then you literally have no reason to even allow slavery to be legal.
"so either way my argument in correct and you loose this argument."
Because you have given no good reason that slavery should have been legal you have not won this argument. The burden of proof was on you and you provided absolutely no real proof that slavery should be legalized. There for you sir lose this argument.