Conquer Club

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote: The only slave I know of today are the slaves of ideological bs and the poor women who are sex slaves.

You forget some agricultural workers, even here today in the US.. and some factory workers as well. I don't want to divert this topic yet further, but slavery very much exists today, and is always worse when immigration crackdowns are intensified.

The immigrants that come from South of our border to work in our fields aren't slaves. They knowingly come to do the work here and get paid. They live fine and are actually able to save to send back to home. In fact, when Alabama passed its laws they left leaving no workers to do the jobs. Farmers had to cut back the size of their farm. So I wouldn't call them slaves. There are probably still children doing labor but I don't always see that as a bad thing if their working conditions are good(in reality they probably aren't).

No, but am starting a new thread with the answer, data.

Here are a few links.
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/rele ... 6691.shtml

http://www.npr.org/2012/02/28/147580896 ... ay-slavery

Its not just illegal immigrants who are impacted. Some legal workers have their papers held by unscrupulous employers. Even when its not outright slavery, workers may be paid much less than promised wages or not allowed to leave when they wish, etc.


Also, the US state department definitions of slavery:

http://www.state.gov/j/tip/what/index.htm

Plus of course there's the problem of the US government paying a US private military outfit, DynCorp, while they kidnapped and sold children into sexual slavery.

Wiki wrote:In the late 1990s, two employees, Ben Johnston, a former DynCorp aircraft mechanic, and Kathryn Bolkovac, a U.N. International Police Force monitor, independently alleged that DynCorp employees in Bosnia engaged in sex with minors, and sold them to each other as slaves.[68][69] Both employees were fired, and Johnston was later placed into protective custody before leaving several days later.[70]

On June 2, 2000, an investigation was launched in the DynCorp hangar at Comanche Base Camp, one of two U.S. bases in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and all DynCorp personnel were detained for questioning.[70] CID spent several weeks investigating and the results appear to support Johnston's allegations.[70] DynCorp had fired five employees for similar illegal activities prior to the charges.[71] Many of the employees accused of sex trafficking were forced to resign under suspicion of illegal activity.

In 2002, Bolkovac filed a lawsuit in Great Britain against DynCorp for unfair dismissal due to a protected disclosure (whistleblowing), and won.[72] Bolkovac co-authored a book with Cari Lynn titled The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors And One Woman's Fight For Justice. In 2010, a film titled The Whistleblower, starring Rachel Weisz and Vanessa Redgrave, was released.[73] Samuel Goldwyn Films, the film’s distributor, stated that the film was not based on the book and is a fictionalized, dramatic presentation.[74][75]

And if that's not enough, they were caught paying for child prostitutes again in Afghansitan:

In 2009, DynCorp contractors paid a 17 year-old Afghan performer to entertain them in Kunduz.[89] A Wikileaks cable released after the incident stated that the Afghan interior minister at the time, Hanif Atmar, asked the assistant US ambassador to try to "quash" both the story and release of video from the incident.[90][91][92][93] In response to the leaked video, DynCorp fired four senior managers and established a chief compliance officer position, which focused on ethics, business conduct, related investigations, and regulatory compliance.[89]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DynCorp#Controversies

Well, player, are illegal immigrants slaves?

BigBallinStalin wrote:Well, player, are illegal immigrants slaves?

She makes a fair case that they can be in the modern sense. If compared to the kind of industrialised slave trade of previous centuries, then they can't be seen as slaves in that traditional model. Slavery in the modern day is much more about the criminal underworld, and has different parameters.

using the word "slavery" in that sense seems like it's just an attempt to sensationalize.


They're probably treating workers unfairly, but to call it slavery is a bit of an overstatement, no?

That's like saying because execution by Brazen Bull no longer exists, we call execution by lethal injection "sticking someone into a bronze statue of a bull and setting the ground below it on fire"

Army of GOD wrote:using the word "slavery" in that sense seems like it's just an attempt to sensationalize.


They're probably treating workers unfairly, but to call it slavery is a bit of an overstatement, no?

That's like saying because execution by Brazen Bull no longer exists, we call execution by lethal injection "sticking someone into a bronze statue of a bull and setting the ground below it on fire"

seems reasonable. Because I used text I have responded to aog by writing a sonnet.

Army of GOD wrote:using the word "slavery" in that sense seems like it's just an attempt to sensationalize.


They're probably treating workers unfairly, but to call it slavery is a bit of an overstatement, no?

That's like saying because execution by Brazen Bull no longer exists, we call execution by lethal injection "sticking someone into a bronze statue of a bull and setting the ground below it on fire"

Your argument turns back on itself. It's more like you're calling execution by lethal injection not an "execution", because worse methods of execution were performed in the past. Executions are executions, and slavery is slavery.

I'm just looking for a clear definition of slavery to apply to illegal immigrants.

So far, I have yet to receive that definition from PLAYER. She cites the US State department, which keeps it pretty vague, and then muddles "modern slavery" with various forms of slavery, so at least Player could pick one of those categories and explain how it applies to illegal immigrants.

...

Great. They use "exploitative" to describe "slavery." How vague can that be? 12-hour work shift under a voluntary agreement? EXPLOITATIVE! Working for $5.00 an hour under a voluntary agreement? EXPLOITATIVE! Devaluing our US dollars with every monetary policy? EXPLOITATIVE!? "Stop it, BBS! The government does not exploit people because it's the government!"

I view problems which illegal immigrants face to be a form of government failure. It's primarily due to the unintended consequences of the US-mandated regulations on immigration.

"
The illegal immigrants are incapable of seeking legal redress because of the prohibition on nearly all immigrants enforced by the US federal government. It's like damning drug producers for poor quality and for shooting each other while overlooking the state-mandated prohibition which prevents individuals within the markets from using the legal system to resolve these problems.

To be polemical: the market provides while the government stomps on them."

BigBallinStalin wrote:I view problems which illegal immigrants face to be a form of government failure. It's primarily due to the unintended consequences of the US-mandated regulations on immigration.

Au contraire, if the government's goal is to get people (immigrants) dependent on it, then the government is unquestionably successful to a very high degree-

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... mmigrants/

EDIT: Oh, and this-
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ove ... 49589.html

patches70 wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:I view problems which illegal immigrants face to be a form of government failure. It's primarily due to the unintended consequences of the US-mandated regulations on immigration.

Au contraire, if the government's goal is to get people (immigrants) dependent on it, then the government is unquestionably successful to a very high degree-

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... mmigrants/

Oh, well there's two different arguments we're making here.

Mine is directed at the complaints about illegal immigrants being unable to seek legal redress for wrongdoings committed by their employers. I explain why this happens. It's a "hate the game, not the players" approach, as in it's an institutional/systemic problem created by the government.


Your link seems to confirm a different argument of mine:

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=175894&p=3851668&hilit=welfare#p3851684

show

Context:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=175894&p=3851668&hilit=welfare#p3851668

show

Basically, it appears that the enforcement costs are already too high. My Public Choice senses are telling me that the government does this on purpose in order to secure more votes via the welfare goodies. This also explains the occasional Illegal Immigrant Amnesties we have had under Bush and Obama--I think through executive order too, which is damning. My Austrian Economics sense are telling me that the government has implemented well-intended policies which have yield unintended negative consequences.

I was just being snarky and am not willing to really enter into the "are immigrants slave" argument. I mean, slaves don't have a choice at all right? At least that's what I always thought slaves and slavery were.

People taking low wage jobs voluntarily, I'm not seeing the slavery thing there. Now, unless Player wants to pay $10 for a tomato or other outrageously expensive prices for goods made from cheap labor, well, for my part I must say I don't have a printing press in my basement to afford such things. Maybe Player does, IDK.

I wasn't making an argument at all, I was just being a pain in the arse is all. Continue at your leisure trying to show how the economics of unskilled labor is almost always lower wages, because, well, the work is unskilled. Anyone who has working fingers and toes can do the job.

If an illegal immigrant is willingly going to make the choice to risk their life and leave their family to get whatever job they can find....then it isn't slavery. I think the biggest problem is the failure to truly understand where these people come from and the conditions. That is also to say that sometimes we don't appreciate what we have, don't recognize why we have it, and might not understand how to keep it.

patches70 wrote:I was just being snarky and am not willing to really enter into the "are immigrants slave" argument. I mean, slaves don't have a choice at all right? At least that's what I always thought slaves and slavery were.

People taking low wage jobs voluntarily, I'm not seeing the slavery thing there. Now, unless Player wants to pay $10 for a tomato or other outrageously expensive prices for goods made from cheap labor, well, for my part I must say I don't have a printing press in my basement to afford such things. Maybe Player does, IDK.

I wasn't making an argument at all, I was just being a pain in the arse is all. Continue at your leisure trying to show how the economics of unskilled labor is almost always lower wages, because, well, the work is unskilled. Anyone who has working fingers and toes can do the job.

If your link is true, then your snarky comment is also true--although it's a little off-topic. Anywho, I enjoyed our discussion.

I'd agree with you that the exchange of wage for labor does not constitute as slavery if the contract is voluntary. Of course, if the illegal immigrant can't seek legal redress concerning a problem with the contract, then his situation may devolve into slavery; however, that form of slavery is an unintended consequence of the US government's policy on immigration.

If only the government had no monopoly on the legal system, we could see solutions become discovered through a competitive legal system which would have courts that represent illegal immigrants and courts that represent employers. In some scenarios, a third party court/judge--independent of the other two courts/judges--could act as arbitrator.

Phatscotty wrote:If an illegal immigrant is willingly going to make the choice to risk their life and leave their family to get whatever job they can find....then it isn't slavery. I think the biggest problem is the failure to truly understand where these people come from and the conditions. That is also to say that sometimes we don't appreciate what we have, don't recognize why we have it, and might not understand how to keep it.

So if a Mexican woman travels to the United States, is kidnapped and forced into the sex slave trade, that's not slavery to you because she made the choice to travel to the United States? Seriously?

BigBallinStalin wrote:Well, player, are illegal immigrants slaves?

Not all, definitely not. I never said that was the case. I said that some are, that sex slaves were not the only US slaves, that some were in agriculture and other industries. Some legal immigrants are slaves as well.. and I would venture even some citizens are.

The problem with illegal workers is not that they are all slaves, but that they are more prone to all kinds of abuses, including the ultimate abuse... slavery.

patches70 wrote: People taking low wage jobs voluntarily, I'm not seeing the slavery thing there. Now, unless Player wants to pay $10 for a tomato or other outrageously expensive prices for goods made from cheap labor, well, for my part I must say I don't have a printing press in my basement to afford such things. Maybe Player does, IDK.

The irony is that we ARE paying more, and a big reason is because those at the bottom are not getting reasonable wages. This means they have to be supported by artificial programs like welfare, food stamps and, most particularly medical assistance.

patches70 wrote:I wasn't making an argument at all, I was just being a pain in the arse is all. Continue at your leisure trying to show how the economics of unskilled labor is almost always lower wages, because, well, the work is unskilled. Anyone who has working fingers and toes can do the job.

A. no, its definitely not "unskilled".. whatever that is even. (amazing how many "low skill" or "no skill" jobs cannot be done well by executives in their own companies!!). IN many cases, the jobs being shipped out or just plain underpaid are very skilled jobs. Meatcutting and Construction are 2 very well-known examples. Even the agricultural picking to which you blithely referred earlier is not as low skilled as you seem to believe.

B. When people are paid less than it takes to survive, then they need to be subsidized. The only reason many low wage people can afford to take the jobs they have is that they get all kinds of assistance -- free or low cost childcare, food assistance, medical assistance, etc etc etc. Because the person could not really take the job without those types of assistance, the truth is the assistance is really all that is keeping the companies in business. AND, worse, this artificial system of pretended low prices is keeping more honest businesses from paying more.
When you add in that a lot of these low wage jobs are held in big industries, (Dollar General McDonalds, etc, etc....), then it means that all these subsidies are the primary reason these corporations are able to stay in business.

BUT... the worst part is that these low wages mean people can buy less and less and less... which drives the economy down, exactly as we are seeing.

Part of the problem seems to be that slavery in the US has a very specific meaning and history. The Atlantic slave trade, and the history of African Americans.

Anything less than that industrial scale slave trade will get scrutiny when different forms of slavery are presented. But Player is right that it ain't the only form of slavery.

Symmetry wrote:Part of the problem seems to be that slavery in the US has a very specific meaning and history. The Atlantic slave trade, and the history of African Americans.

Anything less than that industrial scale slave trade will get scrutiny when different forms of slavery are presented. But Player is right that it ain't the only form of slavery.

Yeah, well, historically, we also have American Indian and Chinese train workers... but neither are particularly modern.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Part of the problem seems to be that slavery in the US has a very specific meaning and history. The Atlantic slave trade, and the history of African Americans.

Anything less than that industrial scale slave trade will get scrutiny when different forms of slavery are presented. But Player is right that it ain't the only form of slavery.

Yeah, well, historically, we also have American Indian and Chinese train workers... but neither are particularly modern.

Aye, but it seems like people so far want slavery to only mean slavery along a certain model, as if other forms of slavery don't exist, or can be excused because they might be less bad, or less systematic.

So peeps get a free pass for enslaving people, cause, just as in the past, they weren't legitimate people.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:Well, player, are illegal immigrants slaves?

Not all, definitely not. I never said that was the case. I said that some are, that sex slaves were not the only US slaves, that some were in agriculture and other industries. Some legal immigrants are slaves as well.. and I would venture even some citizens are.

The problem with illegal workers is not that they are all slaves, but that they are more prone to all kinds of abuses, including the ultimate abuse... slavery.

(1) What criteria must be met for an anyone working in agriculture to be considered a slave? (if you include "exploitative," then please clarify that vague term).

(2) I would agree that illegal immigrants tend to be more prone to abuses. Is this failure to seek legal redress due to their inability to partake in the US legal system?

Symmetry wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Part of the problem seems to be that slavery in the US has a very specific meaning and history. The Atlantic slave trade, and the history of African Americans.

Anything less than that industrial scale slave trade will get scrutiny when different forms of slavery are presented. But Player is right that it ain't the only form of slavery.

Yeah, well, historically, we also have American Indian and Chinese train workers... but neither are particularly modern.

Aye, but it seems like people so far want slavery to only mean slavery along a certain model, as if other forms of slavery don't exist, or can be excused because they might be less bad, or less systematic.

So peeps get a free pass for enslaving people, cause, just as in the past, they weren't legitimate people.

(A) So, what you're saying is that people were enslaved because they were viewed as not legitimate people... do you think that's the primary cause?

(B) Or, would the inability for the enslaved to seek legal redress be the primary cause? (And/or would the primary cause be ineffective legal institutions?)

(C) Or, is the primary cause a profit motive?

BigBallinStalin wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:Well, player, are illegal immigrants slaves?

Not all, definitely not. I never said that was the case. I said that some are, that sex slaves were not the only US slaves, that some were in agriculture and other industries. Some legal immigrants are slaves as well.. and I would venture even some citizens are.

The problem with illegal workers is not that they are all slaves, but that they are more prone to all kinds of abuses, including the ultimate abuse... slavery.

(1) What criteria must be met for an anyone working in agriculture to be considered a slave? (if you include "exploitative," then please clarify that vague term).

I would say the key is are they able to leave. Beyond that, we can look at things like are they paid a real wage? (script usable in the "company store" might still be a real wage, though when the wage is very little and the goods available are high priced and of poor quality in the extreme that can be borderline -- little different from the slave master supplying slaves with some food and clothing)

When I said agriculture slavery exists, I was referring to some specific cases. One is pretty "classic", where someone will recruit and bring folks across the border to work., then when they get here, they find that the conditions are much worse than they were told, the pay either nothing at all or so little any hope of repaying the recruiter are pretty well gone. We hear of that most in regards to drugs and sex trades, but it does happen in other industries.

Another scenario is workers already here working for someone and not being paid, being threatened with either deportation or actual physical violance (sometimes threats against the family/kids). Some employers will say things like "either do x or I will have immigration round you up and take you away from your kids [who may or may not be citizens]"

Or, it might be just that workers are kept, given minimal food (which they are told is deducted from their pay), and then in the end they are given nothing for long hours of hard work.

Anyway.. I think you can imagine such if you have not heard of it already.

BigBallinStalin wrote:
(2) I would agree that illegal immigrants tend to be more prone to abuses. Is this failure to seek legal redress due to their inability to partake in the US legal system?

Yes, very much so. Also, the threat that some immigrants face in returning home may be worse than even the harsh conditions they face here. That not so often true in true slavery cases, but is very much true in lesser abuse cases.

So, let's establish a difficult scenario and think like public policymakers.


(1) Effectiveness of enforcement on illegal immigration
---> Is is effective or ineffective?
---> Can it be made more effective?
---> If so, is it worth the benefits and costs? (the negative consequences of violating citizens' rights and human rights come to mind).

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

If (1) is ineffective and can't be made more effective (without incurring more costs than benefits), then we face a serious dilemma:


Since some portion of illegal immigrants are being treated as slaves, and since all illegal immigrants can't seek legal redress due to the unintended consequences of current immigrant policies, then....

(A) Should immigration policies be relaxed, thus allowing the current illegal immigrants to be freed of slavery and/or be allowed to partake in the legal system?

(B) Should the State's monopoly on the legal system be abolished or broken up, so that private courts would become available to the illegal immigrants in order to mitigate the negative consequences (slavery, contract/immigrants' property rights violations, etc.) of public policy?

(C) ???

BigBallinStalin wrote:So, let's establish a difficult scenario and think like public policymakers.


(1) Effectiveness of enforcement on illegal immigration
---> Is is effective or ineffective?
---> Can it be made more effective?
---> If so, is it worth the benefits and costs? (the negative consequences of violating citizens' rights and human rights come to mind).

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

If (1) is ineffective and can't be made more effective (without incurring more costs than benefits), then we face a serious dilemma:


Since some portion of illegal immigrants are being treated as slaves, and since all illegal immigrants can't seek legal redress due to the unintended consequences of current immigrant policies, then....

(A) Should immigration policies be relaxed, thus allowing the current illegal immigrants to be freed of slavery and/or be allowed to partake in the legal system?

(B) Should the State's monopoly on the legal system be abolished or broken up, so that private courts would become available to the illegal immigrants in order to mitigate the negative consequences (slavery, contract/immigrants' property rights violations, etc.) of public policy?

(C) ???

You start with the wrong assumptions, entirely in the above.

Enforcement of illegal workers was intentionally ineffective, becuase people in real power benefitted from the mass of low wage workers who made few demands.

However, per A. We need to change the focus from illegal immigration to working without paying taxes. I have stated elsewhere that I think its reasonable to assess all non-citizens specific additional tax. HOWEVER, the onus of enforcement and penalty should be on the employer, not the employee.

B) utterly irrelevant. this is not a private versus state court issue. The public court system is actually very effective, its just that a lot of private entities don't want it used... and tend to subvert it.