7 ms·

I’m glad to see this. The shutdown has been too “business as usual” for most Americans, while others are expected to work without pay, which is ridiculous.

thedaemon 8y ago
This is caused slavery, government mandated slavery. I don't see how so many people can be okay with this happening. Why are we not outraged?
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  No, it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit.
  - skh 8y ago
    Members of the Coast Guard are not allowed to quit. They are under UCMJ rules. EDIT: For those that don't know the Coast Guard is not part of the Department of Defense. They are under DHS and are not getting paid and are not allowed to quit.
    - pc86 8y ago
      The military is entirely separate from this discussion.
      - skh 8y ago
        The Coast Guard are under DHS and not the DOD. They are working without pay and are not allowed to quit.
    - ceejayoz 8y ago
      The USCG may not be part of DOD, but it's still part of the US Armed Forces. The US Supreme Court has historically deemed conscription to not constitute involuntary servitude as banned by the 13th Amendment. I suspect the same logic would apply here.
      - skh 8y ago
        The members of the Coast Guard were not conscripted. I don't know if that changes anything for you. But the salient facts are the Coast Guardsmen are not being paid and are not legally allowed to quit. So, according to your previous statement you agree that slavery is an appropriate word in this case. Also, one must contend with the fact that while conscription is not illegal they were paid for their services.
        ceejayoz 8y ago
        The same concept applies - "national security requires you, a member of the armed forces, to serve, whether you like it or not". I think it's a travesty that the Coast Guard isn't being paid right now, but it appears clear that the courts don't consider such a thing to be slavery in this particular case.
        skh 8y ago
        Are you retracting your original statement: ...it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit. Coast Guardsmen are not being paid and are not allowed to quit. Therefore, according to your statement you think it is slavery.
        ceejayoz 8y ago
        No, I'm saying the USCG is in a very specific situation that's more akin to conscription than slavery, especially as they're certain to receive back pay when the shutdown lifts.
        skh 8y ago
        You made the statement that it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit. I didn't make that claim. You did. I presented a subset of federal workers who can't quit and aren't being paid. According to your statement it follows that this subset of federal workers are in slavery. It's fine to misspeak or to not have thought about all of the implications of a statement. Just say you are retracting it or modifying it. You can't logically claim to maintain that it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit and then say of the workers who can't quit and are not being paid that they are not in slavery. This is a matter of logic and not opinion. Say you are modifying your original claim to be it's not slavery because of backpay. Or say that you need to change the original statement in some way. But don't double down and claim your original statement holds when you don't believe the subset of unpaid federal workers who can't quit aren't in slavery! It appears what you really believe is that workers who aren't being paid and aren't allowed to quit are in slavery unless they are in military type job. You should stop using conscription because no one in the Coast Guard was conscripted.
  - dkdbejwi383 8y ago
    What if they can't quit because of the wage-slave capitalist culture brought about by the US government?
    - ceejayoz 8y ago
      Then we've diluted the term "slavery" enough that it's no longer usable in a reasonable discussion.
      - thedaemon 8y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery Wage slavery is a very old term. Please do your research before making such bold statements.
        ceejayoz 8y ago
        It's a very old term because labor conditions used to be a lot closer to actual slavery. It's a very silly thing to compare "I have to work a shitty job at Walmart to make rent" to actual slaves being raped, whipped, having their kids sold, etc. while working in the cotton fields until they died.
    - tengbretson 8y ago
      Its a bizarre thing to see people feel the temptation to lump themselves in with the 30 million actual slaves in this world today just because they work retail.
- tengbretson 8y ago
  Can we just call it bad without lying about what it actually is?
  - morpheuskafka 8y ago
    It's not lying. People are being called to perform highly valuable full time work without any pay. This work is involuntary, because regular employees would be terminated and lose competitive status (adverse government action), and Coast Guard employees (who are paid by DHS not DoD) would face UCMJ charges for not working involuntarily without pay.
    - tengbretson 8y ago
      > This work is involuntary, because regular employees would be terminated Being fired for not doing your job is not evidence of slavery. It's just called "normal." Furthermore, I'm going to assume that you know the difference between "without pay" and deferred pay. If you know the difference and still choose to blur the lines intentionally I can only assume that you are lying as well.
  - thedaemon 8y ago
    Perhaps you are limiting your knowledge of slavery to one specific type of slavery. Please read up on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- danso 8y ago
  The shutdown is a disgrace, but calling it “slavery” trivializes the evil of America’s history of slavery.
jazzyk 8y ago
Strictly speaking, their pay is delayed - they will be paid for all the work, eventually. Still, regular employees should not be going through this, though.
- _djo_ 8y ago
  None of the contractors will be paid, as I understand it, only permanent federal employees.
  - jazzyk 8y ago
    Yes, that comes with the territory (contract cancellations or delayed/non payments are risks associated with running any business).
    - _djo_ 8y ago
      Though of course the underlying risk is that few contractors are going to want to work for the US government again, making it a lot more difficult to fill some positions where skills are scarce. The knock-on effects of this shutdown are going to be around for years.
      - zaroth 8y ago
        The contracting work is profitable enough to account for the various levels of risk, from federal audits to funding delays to government shutdowns. I predict the knock-on effects of this shutdown will be gone and forgotten within a fiscal quarter. The best evidence of this is looking at the stock market since the partial shutdown began.
    - bdcravens 8y ago
      The narrative around government contract work is that it is more stable and the checks will never bounce.
    - SamBam 8y ago
      In general a long-term contract with the government is an almost-guaranteed deal, except in very rare cases like these. It's completely reasonable for contractors to have arranged their finances expecting to be working. (Obviously no job is guaranteed, but most Americans still only have enough cushion for a couple months.)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
duxup 8y ago
Sadly I suspect the long term cost to get this far will be on the poorest folks...

thedaemon 8y ago

This is caused slavery, government mandated slavery. I don't see how so many people can be okay with this happening. Why are we not outraged?

ceejayoz 8y ago
No, it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit.
- skh 8y ago
  Members of the Coast Guard are not allowed to quit. They are under UCMJ rules. EDIT: For those that don't know the Coast Guard is not part of the Department of Defense. They are under DHS and are not getting paid and are not allowed to quit.
  - pc86 8y ago
    The military is entirely separate from this discussion.
    - skh 8y ago
      The Coast Guard are under DHS and not the DOD. They are working without pay and are not allowed to quit.
  - ceejayoz 8y ago
    The USCG may not be part of DOD, but it's still part of the US Armed Forces. The US Supreme Court has historically deemed conscription to not constitute involuntary servitude as banned by the 13th Amendment. I suspect the same logic would apply here.
    - skh 8y ago
      The members of the Coast Guard were not conscripted. I don't know if that changes anything for you. But the salient facts are the Coast Guardsmen are not being paid and are not legally allowed to quit. So, according to your previous statement you agree that slavery is an appropriate word in this case. Also, one must contend with the fact that while conscription is not illegal they were paid for their services.
      - ceejayoz 8y ago
        The same concept applies - "national security requires you, a member of the armed forces, to serve, whether you like it or not". I think it's a travesty that the Coast Guard isn't being paid right now, but it appears clear that the courts don't consider such a thing to be slavery in this particular case.
        skh 8y ago
        Are you retracting your original statement: ...it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit. Coast Guardsmen are not being paid and are not allowed to quit. Therefore, according to your statement you think it is slavery.
        ceejayoz 8y ago
        No, I'm saying the USCG is in a very specific situation that's more akin to conscription than slavery, especially as they're certain to receive back pay when the shutdown lifts.
        skh 8y ago
        You made the statement that it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit. I didn't make that claim. You did. I presented a subset of federal workers who can't quit and aren't being paid. According to your statement it follows that this subset of federal workers are in slavery. It's fine to misspeak or to not have thought about all of the implications of a statement. Just say you are retracting it or modifying it. You can't logically claim to maintain that it'd be slavery if they couldn't quit and then say of the workers who can't quit and are not being paid that they are not in slavery. This is a matter of logic and not opinion. Say you are modifying your original claim to be it's not slavery because of backpay. Or say that you need to change the original statement in some way. But don't double down and claim your original statement holds when you don't believe the subset of unpaid federal workers who can't quit aren't in slavery! It appears what you really believe is that workers who aren't being paid and aren't allowed to quit are in slavery unless they are in military type job. You should stop using conscription because no one in the Coast Guard was conscripted.
- dkdbejwi383 8y ago
  What if they can't quit because of the wage-slave capitalist culture brought about by the US government?
  - ceejayoz 8y ago
    Then we've diluted the term "slavery" enough that it's no longer usable in a reasonable discussion.
    - thedaemon 8y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery Wage slavery is a very old term. Please do your research before making such bold statements.
      - ceejayoz 8y ago
        It's a very old term because labor conditions used to be a lot closer to actual slavery. It's a very silly thing to compare "I have to work a shitty job at Walmart to make rent" to actual slaves being raped, whipped, having their kids sold, etc. while working in the cotton fields until they died.
  - tengbretson 8y ago
    Its a bizarre thing to see people feel the temptation to lump themselves in with the 30 million actual slaves in this world today just because they work retail.
tengbretson 8y ago
Can we just call it bad without lying about what it actually is?
- morpheuskafka 8y ago
  It's not lying. People are being called to perform highly valuable full time work without any pay. This work is involuntary, because regular employees would be terminated and lose competitive status (adverse government action), and Coast Guard employees (who are paid by DHS not DoD) would face UCMJ charges for not working involuntarily without pay.
  - tengbretson 8y ago
    > This work is involuntary, because regular employees would be terminated Being fired for not doing your job is not evidence of slavery. It's just called "normal." Furthermore, I'm going to assume that you know the difference between "without pay" and deferred pay. If you know the difference and still choose to blur the lines intentionally I can only assume that you are lying as well.
- thedaemon 8y ago
  Perhaps you are limiting your knowledge of slavery to one specific type of slavery. Please read up on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
danso 8y ago
The shutdown is a disgrace, but calling it “slavery” trivializes the evil of America’s history of slavery.

jazzyk 8y ago

Strictly speaking, their pay is delayed - they will be paid for all the work, eventually. Still, regular employees should not be going through this, though.

_djo_ 8y ago
None of the contractors will be paid, as I understand it, only permanent federal employees.
- jazzyk 8y ago
  Yes, that comes with the territory (contract cancellations or delayed/non payments are risks associated with running any business).
  - _djo_ 8y ago
    Though of course the underlying risk is that few contractors are going to want to work for the US government again, making it a lot more difficult to fill some positions where skills are scarce. The knock-on effects of this shutdown are going to be around for years.
    - zaroth 8y ago
      The contracting work is profitable enough to account for the various levels of risk, from federal audits to funding delays to government shutdowns. I predict the knock-on effects of this shutdown will be gone and forgotten within a fiscal quarter. The best evidence of this is looking at the stock market since the partial shutdown began.
  - bdcravens 8y ago
    The narrative around government contract work is that it is more stable and the checks will never bounce.
  - SamBam 8y ago
    In general a long-term contract with the government is an almost-guaranteed deal, except in very rare cases like these. It's completely reasonable for contractors to have arranged their finances expecting to be working. (Obviously no job is guaranteed, but most Americans still only have enough cushion for a couple months.)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

duxup 8y ago

Sadly I suspect the long term cost to get this far will be on the poorest folks...