5 ms·

It's broken for sure, though it's not really anything new. The US is still structurally a slave society, even if we now have the freedom to bounce between plant

by courtf 5y ago

It's broken for sure, though it's not really anything new. The US is still structurally a slave society, even if we now have the freedom to bounce between plantations (unless your visa is only sponsored by a specific one).

Seattle3503 5y ago
> The US is still structurally a slave society, even if we now have the freedom to bounce between plantations What makes you say that?
- courtf 5y ago
  The country has never functioned without hordes of cheap, disposable labor that must work into their geriatric years or starve. There is no long-term stability, nor any expectation of it, unless you can become part of the owner class.
  - kwere 5y ago
    its called reality: where people exchange their assets (time,labour) for other assets (food, cars, houses) to benefit from comparative advantages in an almost free market.
    - wiredearp 5y ago
      If the combined cost of housing, education, retirement, childcare and healthcare amounts to more than any average person can earn during a lifetime, these advantages are in other words never comparative to your investment of time and labor, you could argue that the free market has instituted a form of slavery even if we call it reality. You are after all working under the threat of physical harm if your healthcare depends on employment and we call that violence. Except of course in America where we call it freedom.
      - bluGill 5y ago
        None of those expenses are fixed. When people earn more money they spend it on more expensive houses, better education, high quality childcare (read education), and better healthcare. The amount of money you make at minimum wage would fund a nice lifestyle in 1700 - inflation adjusted. The "bathroom" would be an outhouse and a bucked of water you heat on a fire. You wouldn't have even a beat up old car to drive. There is no visible end in sight to this trend.
        dredmorbius 5y ago
        Law of Rent and Iron Law of Wages say otherwise. Read Smith. Book I, Chapter 8, beginning "There are certain circumstances, however, which sometimes give the labourers an advantage" and through to "The scanty maintenance of the labouring poor, on the other hand, is the natural symptom that things are at a stand, and their starving condition that they are going fast backwards." https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/Chapter_8 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/...
        bluGill 5y ago
        The subject does have a lot of complexity that doesn't fit in a comment box. My point stands in general, but it gets complex.
        dredmorbius 5y ago
        Among the reasons I threw the book at you.
        bluGill 5y ago
        I know, I've read the book, my comment is right out of it.
      - theandrewbailey 5y ago
        Calling what the modern day American poor have as 'a form of slavery' is disingenuous. Not being able to afford all of those things is a result of being poor, not of them being subject to 'a form of slavery'.
    - courtf 5y ago
      This is neither how the world has always been, nor how it must always be, so it's a bit myopic to call the situation "reality."
Supermancho 5y ago
The imbalance of power between employee and employer is clearer today than at any point in history. The free market concept of equilibrium is always going to favor the (financially) wealthy, which is not an equilibrium in the sense of equitable balance. Somehow, this is controversial to say here?
- Clubber 5y ago
  I know it may feel like a slave to have to work to live, but it certainly isn't anything like slavery in the antebellum period. It's more akin to the old soviet adage, "So long as the bosses pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work." The hyperbole bug doesn't do an argument any favors. It's overused today.
  - courtf 5y ago
    The only reason it comes across as hyperbole is because of the US history of antebellum slavery. Sure, we aren't all being held against our will, subject to extreme violence at any time, but the prison system does something pretty close. Many slaves throughout history lived relatively comfortably, and even Frederick Douglass described wage slavery in the US. It's a scary, controversial word, I guess, but the article depicts a pretty scary world for grandma to end up in too, if you ask me.
    - Clubber 5y ago
      Something also very common but less discussed is the practice of selling a slave's family members on a whim. Wives, husbands, children, parents sold, never to be seen again. A slave could also be raped, have their spouses and children raped on a whim as well. This was also common. There was also forced breeding. Having to work at a shitty, thankless job just isn't in the same ballpark.
      - courtf 5y ago
        Yes I've read Frederick Douglass. He lived that version of slavery, but still described wage slavery in writing about working shitty, thankless jobs. There is more than one way to use the word.

by courtf 5y ago

Seattle3503 5y ago

> The US is still structurally a slave society, even if we now have the freedom to bounce between plantations What makes you say that?

courtf 5y ago
The country has never functioned without hordes of cheap, disposable labor that must work into their geriatric years or starve. There is no long-term stability, nor any expectation of it, unless you can become part of the owner class.
- kwere 5y ago
  its called reality: where people exchange their assets (time,labour) for other assets (food, cars, houses) to benefit from comparative advantages in an almost free market.
  - wiredearp 5y ago
    If the combined cost of housing, education, retirement, childcare and healthcare amounts to more than any average person can earn during a lifetime, these advantages are in other words never comparative to your investment of time and labor, you could argue that the free market has instituted a form of slavery even if we call it reality. You are after all working under the threat of physical harm if your healthcare depends on employment and we call that violence. Except of course in America where we call it freedom.
    - bluGill 5y ago
      None of those expenses are fixed. When people earn more money they spend it on more expensive houses, better education, high quality childcare (read education), and better healthcare. The amount of money you make at minimum wage would fund a nice lifestyle in 1700 - inflation adjusted. The "bathroom" would be an outhouse and a bucked of water you heat on a fire. You wouldn't have even a beat up old car to drive. There is no visible end in sight to this trend.
      - dredmorbius 5y ago
        Law of Rent and Iron Law of Wages say otherwise. Read Smith. Book I, Chapter 8, beginning "There are certain circumstances, however, which sometimes give the labourers an advantage" and through to "The scanty maintenance of the labouring poor, on the other hand, is the natural symptom that things are at a stand, and their starving condition that they are going fast backwards." https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/Chapter_8 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations/Book_I/...
        bluGill 5y ago
        The subject does have a lot of complexity that doesn't fit in a comment box. My point stands in general, but it gets complex.
        dredmorbius 5y ago
        Among the reasons I threw the book at you.
        bluGill 5y ago
        I know, I've read the book, my comment is right out of it.
    - theandrewbailey 5y ago
      Calling what the modern day American poor have as 'a form of slavery' is disingenuous. Not being able to afford all of those things is a result of being poor, not of them being subject to 'a form of slavery'.
  - courtf 5y ago
    This is neither how the world has always been, nor how it must always be, so it's a bit myopic to call the situation "reality."

Supermancho 5y ago

The imbalance of power between employee and employer is clearer today than at any point in history. The free market concept of equilibrium is always going to favor the (financially) wealthy, which is not an equilibrium in the sense of equitable balance. Somehow, this is controversial to say here?

Clubber 5y ago
I know it may feel like a slave to have to work to live, but it certainly isn't anything like slavery in the antebellum period. It's more akin to the old soviet adage, "So long as the bosses pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work." The hyperbole bug doesn't do an argument any favors. It's overused today.
- courtf 5y ago
  The only reason it comes across as hyperbole is because of the US history of antebellum slavery. Sure, we aren't all being held against our will, subject to extreme violence at any time, but the prison system does something pretty close. Many slaves throughout history lived relatively comfortably, and even Frederick Douglass described wage slavery in the US. It's a scary, controversial word, I guess, but the article depicts a pretty scary world for grandma to end up in too, if you ask me.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    Something also very common but less discussed is the practice of selling a slave's family members on a whim. Wives, husbands, children, parents sold, never to be seen again. A slave could also be raped, have their spouses and children raped on a whim as well. This was also common. There was also forced breeding. Having to work at a shitty, thankless job just isn't in the same ballpark.
    - courtf 5y ago
      Yes I've read Frederick Douglass. He lived that version of slavery, but still described wage slavery in writing about working shitty, thankless jobs. There is more than one way to use the word.