3 ms·

Ok - that "you are kidding" was an unwarranted swipe. I won't do it again. Regarding "indentured servant" - that is the factually correct term to describe the

Ok - that "you are kidding" was an unwarranted swipe. I won't do it again. Regarding "indentured servant" - that is the factually correct term to describe the situation. Even H-1B visa holders themselves use this term. Here is a video of an H-1B visa holder using the exact term "indentured servant" with Congressman Darrell Issa at some policy event about the H-1B visa in Washington DC: https://youtu.be/2Tgc9m1IwNc?t=35m47s https://youtu.be/2Tgc9m1IwNc?t=35m47s The term "indentured servant" is exactly the right term to describe the employer-employee relationship between Guest Worker visa holders and their employer's. As demonstrated in the video, even the H-1B workers themselves are saying that they feel like indentured servants. I personally feel that politically correctness is somehow having the effect of normalizing this very abnormal employee-employer relationship (at-least here in America). As the guest worker in the video says, if he loses his job - he has to take his kids out of school, sell his car, sell his house and leave. This is not in any way a normal employee-employer relationship. I would like to think the points I am raising are thoughtful. well researched and articulate. Apart the "swipes" - which I will tone down on - I don't think I am guilty of any other transgressions.

dang 9y ago
The bigger problem is the one you didn't respond to. You're showing up in an HN thread with a single-purpose account armed with seasoned ideological talking points. That's very much not what this site is for, regardless of which battle it is and which side you're on.
- hildaman 9y ago
  If this is what you want me to respond to: > You could even, if you wanted to, make an argument that this has some things in common with what was historically called indentured labor. But to use a charged phrase as a rhetorical weapon in an ideological battle, which you clearly are doing, is the wrong kind of comment for HN. You are right, I could have absolutely talked about the history of indentured labor in America - but I don't think that was germane to the implications of the Regulation or the implications for the current (sorry) state of Guest Labor in America which what this discussion was about. Regarding: > The bigger problem is the one you didn't respond to. You're showing up in an HN thread with a single-purpose account armed with seasoned ideological talking points. That's very much not what this site is for, regardless of which battle it is and which side you're on. I am a geek, who has frequented HN for a long time, and before that digg and before that slashdot (I still go there BTW). I usually don't post very much. And "seasoned talking points" - cmon. Doing my research before shooting my mouth off - is a GOOD THING and I would like to think that I am elevating the level of discourse. Infact everyone else (except projectramo - who I did mishandle and doesn't disagree with my characterization of H-1B/L-1 workers) who has weighed in seems to think my comments are very apropos: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746592 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746592 Infact, in my view - you are the one who is flaming me and disrupting the discourse here.
  - dang 9y ago
    Probably I misunderstood you but this is because your posts don't differentiate themselves from someone using HN just for ideological purposes. If so, there's an easy fix.

dang 9y ago

The bigger problem is the one you didn't respond to. You're showing up in an HN thread with a single-purpose account armed with seasoned ideological talking points. That's very much not what this site is for, regardless of which battle it is and which side you're on.

hildaman 9y ago
If this is what you want me to respond to: > You could even, if you wanted to, make an argument that this has some things in common with what was historically called indentured labor. But to use a charged phrase as a rhetorical weapon in an ideological battle, which you clearly are doing, is the wrong kind of comment for HN. You are right, I could have absolutely talked about the history of indentured labor in America - but I don't think that was germane to the implications of the Regulation or the implications for the current (sorry) state of Guest Labor in America which what this discussion was about. Regarding: > The bigger problem is the one you didn't respond to. You're showing up in an HN thread with a single-purpose account armed with seasoned ideological talking points. That's very much not what this site is for, regardless of which battle it is and which side you're on. I am a geek, who has frequented HN for a long time, and before that digg and before that slashdot (I still go there BTW). I usually don't post very much. And "seasoned talking points" - cmon. Doing my research before shooting my mouth off - is a GOOD THING and I would like to think that I am elevating the level of discourse. Infact everyone else (except projectramo - who I did mishandle and doesn't disagree with my characterization of H-1B/L-1 workers) who has weighed in seems to think my comments are very apropos: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746592 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14746592 Infact, in my view - you are the one who is flaming me and disrupting the discourse here.
- dang 9y ago
  Probably I misunderstood you but this is because your posts don't differentiate themselves from someone using HN just for ideological purposes. If so, there's an easy fix.