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

181–190 of 235 posts

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#181

Post by KMag »

FrankenPC wrote: post #8

Yeah. OK. I think any rational human would agree that the treatment of the servant was wrong. OTOH: NEVER violate diplomatic immunity rules! They are there to protect US...not THEM. You know, sort of like how it would be incredibly hypocritical to agree to international war crime laws then commit acts of torture and overthrow the sovereign ruler of a country. You can't do that! You...oops.

At the time of the alleged crime, the accused was a member of the consular staff, not a diplomat, and would therefore only be entitled to consular immunity, not full diplomatic immunity. Consular immunity extends only to actions taken as part of her consular duties. That's a very important distinction.

India has re-assigned her to a diplomatic post and tried to get retroactive full diplomatic immunity for her, but she was not a diplomat at the time she allegedly committed perjury by misreporting wages.

Edit: added the word "full" to reduce confusion.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#182

Post by sliverstorm »

vacri wrote: post #176
sliverstorm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, two reasons: - It seems to break the rule of punishment matching the crime. I wouldn't say violent criminals "deserve" to be locked in with other violent criminals & get stabbed, but at least the violent ones might be better able to fend for themselves. - Violent criminals require more security, so if we separate the violent & nonviolent criminals it will be cheaper for the US taxpayer

A jail cell is to hold arrestees, not to punish them. I'm also finding it weird that in your 'punishment matching the crime' scenario, a burglar who makes off with your TV is treated worse than a pension fund raider who causes a string of suicides. Or even a more run-of-the-mill embezzler who 'only' makes off with 100k.

If burglary is considered a violent crime, I may need to rework my comments.

As for jail v. prison, my apologies. I know the distinction, but so few people make the distinction in their use of the two words I usually ignore the difference.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#183

Post by KMag »

kamakazizuru wrote: post #106
nols wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raymond Davis didn't go scot free when the US claimed he had diplomatic immunity, he was imprisoned by Pakistan.

right - but released shortly after - and never strip searched.

It wasn't reported that he was strip searched, but I hope that's just because strip searches are pretty standard procedures when admitting detainees in most countries. Drugs and weapons can still be found in jails and prisons, of course, but I would hope most countries put in strict measures to at least minimize the number of weapons that detainees have.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#184

Post by tsotha »

genwin wrote: post #69
x0054 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> If the laws pass that require servants to be paid more, some servants will be lucky enough to make more money as a result, others will starve to death because they will go from making $64/month to nothing at all. Replace "servant" with any low-paying job. That's the old argument for ending the minimum wage. How many people starve to death in countries with a minimum wage? What actually happens is that wealth gets r…

>Replace "servant" with any low-paying job. That's the old argument for ending the minimum wage.

It's a pretty good argument, too.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#185

Post by sliverstorm »

phaer wrote: post #57
sliverstorm wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, then replace "blue collar" with violent and "white collar" with non-violent in my comment. I don't care which term we use, I just started with "white collar crime" because that's the most common term for financial crime, and "blue collar crime" (though an uncommon phrase) is the antonym.

It does not work like that because there is plenty of crime which is non-violent as well as not financial.

Yes, I know "white collar" was not the best term, it's just the most commonly used for the type of crime(s) like what she committed. Please, let us not get mired down in nitpicking over the precise term I used hours ago which I already freely admit was the wrong choice. I think it's clear now what I meant.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#186

Post by xname »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #79

I wonder if the same people who say "If you can't afford to pay a servant a living wage, you shouldn't have one" also like to claim the raising the minimum wage doesn't increase unemployment?

Yes. They do. It is sad to see the society being dominated by libtards.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#187

Post by wavefunction »

kamakazizuru wrote: post #92
x0054 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

actually people would still hire them - on the black market - with lower wages - just like most of the agricultural sector in the US with mexicans. You cant stop the free market.

You can, if you start punishing the employers, which the US government has always been loathe to pursue but is coming around to.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#188

Post by joonix »

wozniacki wrote: post #108
bitops wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh...as a Danish person, I think part of that distinction also is that Denmark has a really bad service culture compared to the US. It does seem to be changing. But I feel like Danes are a pretty proud (and/or headstrong) folk with very strong (and sometimes misguided, see Janteloven) notions around class and equality. I feel like many Danes who work in the service sector project this attitude that they're really ab…

Under Janteloven: The ten rules state: You're not to think you are anything special. You're not to think you are as good as us. You're not to think you are smarter than us. You're not to convince yourself that you are better than us. You're not to think you know more than us. You're not to think you are better than us. You're not to think you are good at anything. You're not to laugh at us. You're not to think anyone…

Very similar to tall poppy syndrome in Australia. As an American it's always bewildering to see these attitudes play out.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#189

Post by incision »

atlantic wrote: post #82
toufka wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having lived in the US, and then having encountered 'servants' in other countries, a striking difference is the respect for the person when they are not 'on duty'. In the US, when I go to a restaurant, I am being 'served', but after the waiter gets off work he's a full and equal neighbor of mine under both law and custom. A lifetime servant is conditioned to be deferential, in every part of their life, not just while…

I've never been to the US. But I recently watched a series of YouTube videos on Floyd Mayweather's personal life. He lives with a retinue of about a dozen very attractive female "personal assistants", ranging from the masseuse to the cook and the secretary. It was very clear from the videos that these people were on call 24/7, and their functions included sexual services. If this doesn't fit the definition of servant…

>"The US seems to have an aversion to the concept of servant, not to the reality."

I hope this is deadpan sarcasm.

You're drawing an analogy between sub-living wage housemaids to the for-television version of an exceptionally flamboyant professional athletes entourage.

Worse, you're extrapolating the latter - the promotional image of a singular talent, the elite prizefighter of a generation, who earns the U.S. median yearly income every 1.5 seconds in a 12 round fight - to be somehow representative of "the US".

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#190

Post by stevo111 »

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…

I'm a foreigner who worked in a summer camp in US. We've been told that this is a "culture exchange" program, as in we work some time and then we "exchange cultures".

In reality we've been working in the kitchen 6am-9pm 7 days a week (no days off). We didn't get paid anything - as legally we were "exchange students". All we got was "pocket money" ~600$ for entire summer. If something didn't get served right - cooks would blame us, and we wouldn't even be able to fight back as our English was not good enough (besides - we had this weird notion of "morality" almost unheard of in US). There were no cultural programs either and everyone treated as as if were slaves (which we were essentially). We couldn't get away either - as we were in a foreign country and to get anywhere would require 30 min. drive.

My point is -there is a lot of hypocrisy towards that Indian woman who only does what thousands of American businesses do every year.

Post reply on HN