If steam powered tractors and equipment had taken over the clearing, planting, picking, and railroad building at the same time as the other steam innovations, what might have happened to slave laborers?

Steam powered the Industrial Revolution, including cotton industries. Once picked, cotton could be de-seeded by steam cotton gins. Steam-powered boats and railroads moved cotton bales to processing centers. And steam looms wove the cloth. All of these innovations vastly increased the productivity of cotton processing–except for planting and picking. Those activities still relied on labor, so the slave system remained. Expansion (post-Battle of New Orleans) required slave labor to clear the land for planting, and to build the railroads. This is pure speculation but, from a managerial economic perspective, what consequences followed from not mechanizing (using capital) land clearing, railroad building, planting , picking operations?This is a classic labor v. capital issue, common to all businesses. For instance, a friend of mine owns a trucking business including a fleet of semis. We were talking recently about autonomous trucks and he noted that the benefits so far outweigh the drawbacks, he and his competitors will adopt this innovation very quickly. Human drivers are not consistent and waste fuel. Computers won’t have federally regulated sleep times and can run 24/7. They are less likely to have accidents from human failings, although new sources of accidents will likely arise. Altogether, these will add up to significant savings.Like the slave-labor v. capital question here, these truck drivers will be put out of work. There will be social upheaval from that. Many of these truckers have high school educations, are white, male, and really like the second half of the 2nd Amendment. If steam powered tractors and equipment had taken over the clearing, planting, picking, and railroad building at the same time as the other steam innovations, what might have happened to slave laborers?Also, “right hand” is used by Baptist to denote a “field hand,” someone who is reduced to the essence of his or her work role. They are disembodied hands used to plant and pick. The rest of the human is neither important nor recognized. In what ways do modern corporations continue this idea, i.e., not acknowledge the whole human but maintain a management focus the human as defined by the job role?Use the two sources attached to answer the question(s) above and how the two readings work together. Use chapter 4 in Wilkinson- Managerial Economics and Chapter 3 in the Baptist text.