21–30 of 54 posts
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21631039-interna...
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21631025-learn-ruses-i...
Today I learned there are 23 enslaved people in Iceland.
I'm sceptical of the score. How did they calculate that?
The TLDR is: they surveyed broadly representative demographics of nine countries on whether any family members had ever been forced to work, and kept in that position by coercion. They also used some secondary sources for ten other countries.
They extrapolated the figures for the rest of the 167 countries based on averages of countries considered to have similar characteristics, with some largely subjective country-specific adjustments.
As an example, the score for China, which they note has few confirmed reports of widespread slavery was (average proportion of slaves in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan).9 + (average proportion of Qatar, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia).1
Worthy as the objective behind the research may be, it's difficult to understate how speculative these estimates and the percentages reported to a ludicrous number of decimal places actually are.
The Economist had a pretty scathing tear-down of indicies in the issue week before last. One article specifically criticises the Global Slavery Index, another is more satirical, but still well worth a read: http://www.economist.com/news/international/21631039-interna... http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21631025-learn-ruses-i...
Specifically they found that the NGO behind the slavery index had taken some countries where there was no data and simply assumed that country had as much slavery as a similar country (nearby, similar population etc)
Then they ranked countries. And named and shamed.
It was not good statistics.
The abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass initially declared, "now I am my own master", upon taking a paying job. But later in life, he concluded to the contrary, "experience demonstrates that there may be a slavery of wages only a little less galling and crushing in its effects than chattel slavery, and that this slavery of wages must go down with the other". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
But taxes aren't right?
Wage slavery is a system in which a person can only subsist by exchanging their labor for money - essentially forcing them to work for others for a living in exchange for means of subsistence.
Taxes, in a democracy at least, are intended to be merely a yearly collection to pay for products/services used in common with a state managed agency typically overseeing the apportionment of those funds.
However, if taxes are extracted through coercive means (as they are in most present-day states), then they can be viewed as coercing individuals into a choice between either wage slavery or poverty. In that way taxes and wage-slavery are two ends a coercive system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But taxes aren't right?
Taxes are a bit different from wage slavery or even slavery, and shouldn't be confused with them. Taxes and wage slavery, however, do have a mutually re-enforcing relationship. Wage slavery is a system in which a person can only subsist by exchanging their labor for money - essentially forcing them to work for others for a living in exchange for means of subsistence. Taxes, in a democracy at least, are intended to be…
If we are discussing situations similar or equivalent to slavery, I would be remiss if I failed to mention conscription. I have never been able to find a principled difference between conscription and slavery; if you can, please explain it to me.
Today I learned there are 23 enslaved people in Iceland.
The definition of slavery according to them: Modern slavery involves one person possessing or controlling a person in such as a way as to significantly deprive that person of their individual liberty, with the intention of exploiting that person through their use, management, profit, transfer or disposal. I would like to know what significantly means. Were African slaves in America "significantly deprived" or just "d…
Significant to me would include: - inability to change employers - inability to travel off site - inability to make more money than the employer charges for fees/housing/... - inability to quit - fear of harm from employer Similar to the workers in Abu Dhabi http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/22/abu-dhabi-migra...
You could argue that America has this as a de facto result of real estate speculation. In any given region, real estate has a tendency to inflate until it sops up all excess earnings. Getting "above" real estate is only possible if you can save up a large down payment, etc., and get ahead of it... essentially like how old Roman slaves could purchase their freedom if they could save enough.
The announcement of feudalism's demise was premature.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-prison-industry-in-the-unit...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taxes are a bit different from wage slavery or even slavery, and shouldn't be confused with them. Taxes and wage slavery, however, do have a mutually re-enforcing relationship. Wage slavery is a system in which a person can only subsist by exchanging their labor for money - essentially forcing them to work for others for a living in exchange for means of subsistence. Taxes, in a democracy at least, are intended to be…
If one takes the trouble to define a modern tax system, you will see that there is no significant difference between it and the exactions imposed on a slave. One might distinguish between a democratically enacted tax and a slave's duties by the opportunity to vote, but Nozick made a strong case against that being a significant difference.[1] If we are discussing situations similar or equivalent to slavery, I would be…