a dilemma

Nicholas D. Kristof, a New York Times columnist, once purchased the freedom of a couple of modern day slaves. In his article on the experience, he acknowledges the complexity of the transaction. Yet, he seems not to realize the wider complications arising from the practice of buying the freedom of slaves. Read here for some notes on a conceivable quagmire. Since it's hard to find on that page I'll just paste the section I'm talking about here:

Should you buy freedom for slaves? Readers of The New York Times Op-Ed page will know that Nicholas Kristof has recently purchased the freedom of two young girls in a brothel. It appears that the young girls were held there against their will and tricked or coerced into joining in the first place.

As an economist of course I wondered whether buying slaves will lower net enslavement. I can think of at least two general mechanisms suggesting that Kristof's purchase will increase the number of slaves in the longer run, or at least not lower the number of slaves:

1. Slaveholders and brothel owners presumably hold profit-maximizing inventories. Depletion of inventory will lead to replacement under a variety of assumptions.

2. I suspect that Kristof, a Westerner, overpaid for the two slaves. Slave owners expect such higher prices in the future, which may lead to more slaveholding. Furthermore the cash flow may stimulate investment in more slaves. Even for firms in advanced economies, current cash flow predicts investment better than does real interest rates.

Overall we can think of the slaveholder as more able and more eager to get more slaves. That being said, the marginal slaves will be harder to trick or capture than the previous slaves. So we cannot be sure whether net slavery will go up or down. Kristof's efforts also have a publicity effect, which may either help or hurt the slave trade. On one hand the Cambodian government may be embarrassed and crack down. On the other hand, the slaveowner has received amazing free publicity. On net, Kristof's actions may be less heroic than they would appear at first glance.

This is an interesting example of the social world's complexity. Unlike, say, physics, we cannot keep other variables constant while we tinker and experiment. One practice, although good and prudent prima facie, will doubtless cause unexpected effects. It makes the world infinitely interesting and wonderful, but also uncontrollable.