Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Having a Servant Is Not a Right

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 235 posts

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#151

Post by iamjustin »

sliverstorm wrote: post #129
iamjustin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you saying? Just because they could be violent means they are violent? There's no profession where someone couldn't act violently.

You folks are trying real hard to put words in my mouth. My parent asked if I thought those were violent crimes; I said no. I also added that if they commit violence in the course of those crimes, then yes they are now violent criminals. Maybe it was unnecessary extra commentary, but do you disagree with either of these statements? I should try the words-in-mouth game, it seems fun. Are you trying to say just because…

Oh my god, dude. I honestly didn't understand what you were getting at. I read more into the extra commentary than you intended.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#152

Post by bradleyjg »

smegel wrote: post #132
bane wrote: post #7

> Last week, I watched with bewilderment as India’s most vociferous talk show host, Arnab Goswami, repeatedly asked his guests if they expected an Indian diplomat who is paid $4,180 a month to pay her domestic servant $4,500 a month. Meanwhile an American guest, Lisa Curtis, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, tried to make a point: “If somebody cannot afford to have domestic help, then they don’t have domest…

Your mechanic and most of the others will give you an itemized bill, and you can't order him to make you a cup of tea for free. In India and the Middle East this concept of "servitude" is really just slavery - lower class people are basically owned by wealthy families for their entire lives, are are given bare sustenance in return for total control over their labor and time, without conditions or restraint over when…

One of the most objectionable parts of this whole story is that an Indian court put out a warrant for this woman's arrest for quitting her job ("absconding") and then took her husband and child into custody!

Complaining about barbaric treatment when you have legally enforced indentured servitude and punish family members for alledged crimes, is real chutzpah.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#153

Post by allochthon »

credo wrote: post #127

I think it was wrong to strip-search and do cavity searches on the consular officer (in this case, a woman) "accused" of underpaying a maid. However,I'm not going to focus on that and I'm not going to quibble with some of the exaggerations in this column. Overall, I agree that Ms Khobragade must be prosecuted and the evidence clearly suggests that she is guilty. However, I find it astonishing that so many people (mos…

Arguments concerning hypocrisy are interesting, but they are tangential as well. They point up the need for a change in a different context. One can both appreciate the hypocrisy of a related issue and still be a little flummoxed at the case at hand.

The cavity search sounds to me like police overreach, and it's hard to imagine that it would have been needed. I wonder whether there would be case for pursuing charges of police misconduct, even if the practice turned out to be something that is routinely done in such situations.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#154

Post by mindcrime »

chasing wrote: post #2

> "If somebody cannot afford to have [X], then they don’t have [X]." To be fair, many Americans could take the same lesson. (And thanks for making me have to agree with the Heritage Foundation. Now I need to go take a shower and read some Paul Krugman columns...)

Now I need to go take a shower and read some Paul Krugman columns...

Wouldn't you just need to take another shower after reading Krugman?

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#155

Post by avenger123 »

skue wrote: post #93
suprgeek wrote: post #59

While this diplomat person as an individual is none too commendable (back home in India she is involved in some questionable property dealings [1]) - there is much more to the story than this shallow but seemingly introspective "article". The lady (servant - according to the article) was brought in on an authorized "Au pair" visa. Indian Diplomats in the US are paid little in-terms of monetary benefits. Most compensa…

Your response perfectly illustrates the flawed attitude the author was describing. Can you not hear yourself? You are calling another human being a "perk"!!! Enough with the semantic arguments: 1. Calling a servant an "au pair" or a "perk" doesn't make her less of a human being. 2. ALL human beings have rights, and in the US those rights include employment protections, such as a minimum wage. 3. It doesn't matter wha…

The elephant in the room with all this is that America has its own big problems in this area. The illegal immigrant workers from Mexico and other places seem to have issues with wages, employment rights and other things. Let's not even talk about the big daddy of them all on the corporate side, Walmart with its wage issues.

So, before Americans start feeling smug about how they set the standards for the rest of the world, please look in your own back yard. It's not that much prettier.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#156

Post by aninhumer »

gaius wrote: post #54
bjourne wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm curious though, where does the concept of "servant" actually end? Is my mechanic a servant? Or is he not because I go to his place for him to do the work instead of having him come to mine? A mechanic is a specialist. You likely can't repair your car so you have to purchase that service. Servants are just a plain time-to-money arbitrage. A maid isn't significantly better at vacuuming than you are, so you are ju…

I don't think this is a good model. F'rinstance you can have something delivered or drive to the store yourself. Are you "exploiting" the postman? Do you think he feels exploited?

The difference here is that you're not paying the postman to drive to the store for you alone, you're paying for one tiny fraction of his rounds. It's simply a matter of efficiency.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#157

Post by oh_sigh »

suprgeek wrote: post #59

While this diplomat person as an individual is none too commendable (back home in India she is involved in some questionable property dealings [1]) - there is much more to the story than this shallow but seemingly introspective "article". The lady (servant - according to the article) was brought in on an authorized "Au pair" visa. Indian Diplomats in the US are paid little in-terms of monetary benefits. Most compensa…

I don't quite follow your logic.

You focus on how having an au pair is a perk of her job. How is that connected with not paying an employee the legal minimum wage?

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#158

Post by sliverstorm »

bjourne wrote: post #44
bane wrote: post #7

> Last week, I watched with bewilderment as India’s most vociferous talk show host, Arnab Goswami, repeatedly asked his guests if they expected an Indian diplomat who is paid $4,180 a month to pay her domestic servant $4,500 a month. Meanwhile an American guest, Lisa Curtis, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, tried to make a point: “If somebody cannot afford to have domestic help, then they don’t have domest…

> I'm curious though, where does the concept of "servant" actually end? Is my mechanic a servant? Or is he not because I go to his place for him to do the work instead of having him come to mine? A mechanic is a specialist. You likely can't repair your car so you have to purchase that service. Servants are just a plain time-to-money arbitrage. A maid isn't significantly better at vacuuming than you are, so you are ju…

And yes it is exploitative in that it puts a much higher value on your time than on your servants.

That doesn't make sense. It's a simple fact that some people's time is more valuable than others. It doesn't seem exploitative to me.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#159

Post by bjourne »

bicx wrote: post #85
bjourne wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm curious though, where does the concept of "servant" actually end? Is my mechanic a servant? Or is he not because I go to his place for him to do the work instead of having him come to mine? A mechanic is a specialist. You likely can't repair your car so you have to purchase that service. Servants are just a plain time-to-money arbitrage. A maid isn't significantly better at vacuuming than you are, so you are ju…

Isn't exploitation based on the idea that you're manipulating some part of the system to pay someone less than they're worth? If maids are typically worth $Y and you pay the maid $Y, that seems fair to me.

If I purchase stocks for $X and then someone immediately comes and asks to buy those stocks for 50% more than $X I would absolutely accept (barring special circumstances). But if I pay someone $X to clean my house for an hour, and then someone asks me to clean their house for 50% more than $X I would absolutely refuse (barring special circumstances).

This suggests that either a) a maids time is worth much less than mine or b) the market price for cleaning services is severely depressed below its "true price".

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#160

Post by smegel »

bradleyjg wrote: post #152
smegel wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your mechanic and most of the others will give you an itemized bill, and you can't order him to make you a cup of tea for free. In India and the Middle East this concept of "servitude" is really just slavery - lower class people are basically owned by wealthy families for their entire lives, are are given bare sustenance in return for total control over their labor and time, without conditions or restraint over when…

One of the most objectionable parts of this whole story is that an Indian court put out a warrant for this woman's arrest for quitting her job ("absconding") and then took her husband and child into custody! Complaining about barbaric treatment when you have legally enforced indentured servitude and punish family members for alledged crimes, is real chutzpah.

> then took her husband and child into custody!

Holy crap! I have been following this fairly closely and had not read that. Do you have a link?

Post reply on HN