7 ms·

I've heard it said that the main difference between being employed and being enslaved is that you can choose your master when you're employed. It's a bit hyper

I've heard it said that the main difference between being employed and being enslaved is that you can choose your master when you're employed. It's a bit hyperbolic to be sure, but one does wonder how far we are from going full circle here..

lionkor 2y ago
In other first world countries it's certainly different. In Germany everyone gets paid time off, which is separate from paid sick time (there is usually no hard limit, but some fair use policy applies in some jobs). I can't be fired for random reasons on the spot - if I get fired for random reasons, they still have to pay me for a 1-3 month period that I work while I look for a new job. Firing on the spot is only legal in exceptional circumstances, e.g. when they can prove you simply didnt work your hours, or something (outside of paid and u paid leave, paid and unpaid sick leave). We also get maternal and paternal leave which is very nice. Overtime, health insurance, etc. are also dictated to some degree by law in a lot of countries. The fact that you (Americans) feel enslaved is because you choose to elect a government that doesn't care about any of that.
- linotype 2y ago
  No, six to ten states (mostly small, red states with shitty economies) that aren’t aligned with the majority of Americans elect the President and inflict their misery on the rest of us. Believe me, most people in states that matter want universal healthcare (which we already almost have, just in the most convoluted and corporate-fleece way possible), vacation and sick leave.
  - flanked-evergl 2y ago
    > Believe me, most people in states that matter want universal healthcare (which we already almost have, just in the most convoluted and corporate-fleece way possible), vacation and sick leave. In a federal system, as the US is, these are all things you can implement on the state level. You do not need to win at a national level to implement it.
- quartesixte 2y ago
  >The fact that you (Americans) feel enslaved is because you choose to elect a government that doesn't care about any of that. It really depends on the income-strata that you occupy, I feel. Hourly, physical laborers and service workers seem to suffer under a system that prima facie makes you wonder what century you're in. On the other end, salaried and technical knowledge workers enjoy quite a flexible arrange of time off policies, relaxed working times, and great health benefits. And then everything in between. I would like to think that only one of these camps feel enslaved. Americans do have this problem of not taking enough vacations though. But I think there is some cultural component to that...
- flanked-evergl 2y ago
  No American feels enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. Americans have it better than 99.999% of all humans who ever lived, and it's not particularly close.
  - defrost 2y ago
    That's simply untrue. You don't speak for "all Americans". A number of Americans (>1) see their imprisonment as a modern form of slavery, one that is explicitly allowed by the US Constitution: The U.S. Constitution bans slavery except as punishment for a crime ... In Texas, some prison farms are located on the same land as former slave plantations. It's "meaningful" in that they feel (with good justification) that they have been found guilty by a system designed to single them out and that they are railroaded into a lifetime of unpaid servitude. You may disagree with their feelings, but it remains that your blanket statement: > No American feels enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. is false
    - flanked-evergl 2y ago
      People loosing their liberties because of breaking the law — as determined by due process — is not slavery. They may feel enslaved, but again they cannot feel enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word because they are not enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-myth-mass-incarceration-remains-strong-despite-all-evidence-the https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-my...
      - waciki 2y ago
        what are you talking about? Getting enslaved because you "broke the law" is as old as slavery
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        flanked-evergl 2y ago
- amarant 2y ago
  Your points are valid, but I was talking about non-competes specifically, which companies try to apply outside of America too, even if they are not legally binding (I'm Swedish and I've signed a non compete in the past, knowing fully well I could choose to ignore it because that specific clause is illegal here, but still) My point was more that most people can't afford to not work in the industry they've spent years building competence in, and therefore a no-compete clause makes them very vulnerable to poor practices from the employer. The employer might (in theory) treat their employees poorly knowing that they cannot leave the company, and the employees will be forced to put up with it because leaving employment with a non-compete deal means they can't pay their mortgage. Calling it slavery is hyperbolic to be sure, but non-competes are undeniably a step in that direction.
kortilla 2y ago
And you get paid. People that say that kind of shit are privileged morons.
- ClumsyPilot 2y ago
  Roman slaves got paid. In imperial Russia the slaves were paid. American slavery institution is not representative of how this worked for thousands of years. In many societies you couldn’t just randomly kill a slave. So Are you sure who are the morons?
  - kortilla 2y ago
    Please try to intelligently elaborate how it’s slavery when all of the defining characteristics of slavery are removed (involuntary work, physical violence for disobeying, inability to change employers, etc). What do you think it meant to “buy a slave’s freedom”?
    - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
      What are you actually disputing? Are you claiming Roman slaves were not slaves and both the Romans that lived thousands of years ago and modern historians are wrong to call them slaves?
      - kortilla 2y ago
        Read the thread. I’m saying people who refer to working in the US today as slavery are diluting the word to something meaningless. All of the defining characteristics of slavery are not present. The Roman slaves had no autonomy to choose their employer or to just quit.
flanked-evergl 2y ago
That is not the main difference, for more information about the concept see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery

lionkor 2y ago

In other first world countries it's certainly different. In Germany everyone gets paid time off, which is separate from paid sick time (there is usually no hard limit, but some fair use policy applies in some jobs). I can't be fired for random reasons on the spot - if I get fired for random reasons, they still have to pay me for a 1-3 month period that I work while I look for a new job. Firing on the spot is only legal in exceptional circumstances, e.g. when they can prove you simply didnt work your hours, or something (outside of paid and u paid leave, paid and unpaid sick leave). We also get maternal and paternal leave which is very nice. Overtime, health insurance, etc. are also dictated to some degree by law in a lot of countries. The fact that you (Americans) feel enslaved is because you choose to elect a government that doesn't care about any of that.

linotype 2y ago
No, six to ten states (mostly small, red states with shitty economies) that aren’t aligned with the majority of Americans elect the President and inflict their misery on the rest of us. Believe me, most people in states that matter want universal healthcare (which we already almost have, just in the most convoluted and corporate-fleece way possible), vacation and sick leave.
- flanked-evergl 2y ago
  > Believe me, most people in states that matter want universal healthcare (which we already almost have, just in the most convoluted and corporate-fleece way possible), vacation and sick leave. In a federal system, as the US is, these are all things you can implement on the state level. You do not need to win at a national level to implement it.
quartesixte 2y ago
>The fact that you (Americans) feel enslaved is because you choose to elect a government that doesn't care about any of that. It really depends on the income-strata that you occupy, I feel. Hourly, physical laborers and service workers seem to suffer under a system that prima facie makes you wonder what century you're in. On the other end, salaried and technical knowledge workers enjoy quite a flexible arrange of time off policies, relaxed working times, and great health benefits. And then everything in between. I would like to think that only one of these camps feel enslaved. Americans do have this problem of not taking enough vacations though. But I think there is some cultural component to that...
flanked-evergl 2y ago
No American feels enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. Americans have it better than 99.999% of all humans who ever lived, and it's not particularly close.
- defrost 2y ago
  That's simply untrue. You don't speak for "all Americans". A number of Americans (>1) see their imprisonment as a modern form of slavery, one that is explicitly allowed by the US Constitution: The U.S. Constitution bans slavery except as punishment for a crime ... In Texas, some prison farms are located on the same land as former slave plantations. It's "meaningful" in that they feel (with good justification) that they have been found guilty by a system designed to single them out and that they are railroaded into a lifetime of unpaid servitude. You may disagree with their feelings, but it remains that your blanket statement: > No American feels enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. is false
  - flanked-evergl 2y ago
    People loosing their liberties because of breaking the law — as determined by due process — is not slavery. They may feel enslaved, but again they cannot feel enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word because they are not enslaved in any meaningful sense of the word. https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-myth-mass-incarceration-remains-strong-despite-all-evidence-the https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-my...
    - waciki 2y ago
      what are you talking about? Getting enslaved because you "broke the law" is as old as slavery
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - flanked-evergl 2y ago
amarant 2y ago
Your points are valid, but I was talking about non-competes specifically, which companies try to apply outside of America too, even if they are not legally binding (I'm Swedish and I've signed a non compete in the past, knowing fully well I could choose to ignore it because that specific clause is illegal here, but still) My point was more that most people can't afford to not work in the industry they've spent years building competence in, and therefore a no-compete clause makes them very vulnerable to poor practices from the employer. The employer might (in theory) treat their employees poorly knowing that they cannot leave the company, and the employees will be forced to put up with it because leaving employment with a non-compete deal means they can't pay their mortgage. Calling it slavery is hyperbolic to be sure, but non-competes are undeniably a step in that direction.

kortilla 2y ago

And you get paid. People that say that kind of shit are privileged morons.

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
Roman slaves got paid. In imperial Russia the slaves were paid. American slavery institution is not representative of how this worked for thousands of years. In many societies you couldn’t just randomly kill a slave. So Are you sure who are the morons?
- kortilla 2y ago
  Please try to intelligently elaborate how it’s slavery when all of the defining characteristics of slavery are removed (involuntary work, physical violence for disobeying, inability to change employers, etc). What do you think it meant to “buy a slave’s freedom”?
  - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
    What are you actually disputing? Are you claiming Roman slaves were not slaves and both the Romans that lived thousands of years ago and modern historians are wrong to call them slaves?
    - kortilla 2y ago
      Read the thread. I’m saying people who refer to working in the US today as slavery are diluting the word to something meaningless. All of the defining characteristics of slavery are not present. The Roman slaves had no autonomy to choose their employer or to just quit.

flanked-evergl 2y ago

That is not the main difference, for more information about the concept see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery