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

Global Slavery Index 2014

globalslaveryindex.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#31

Post by Abraln »

smutticus wrote: post #4
josu wrote: post #2

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…

I think your question is fair and don't understand why you were downvoted. I also question their definition of slavery. Are US prison inmates forced into labor also slaves? Slavery is not an easy thing to define.

Agreed, what about communities where marriage is extremely strict or are arranged? -they essentially cannot leave -they must work or can be beaten -they cannot go out alone -money is often exchanged in the marriage process This meets all the listed criteria for slavery. No black and white (pun not intended, but it works) definition that can be used, so any quantification is subjective. On the subject of prison labor, just after the civil war many southern states used trumped up charges to essentially enslave the newly "free."

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#32

Post by vacri »

josu wrote: post #2

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…

Were African slaves in America "significantly deprived" or just "deprived".

Taken away from their homelands by force to a different continent, using a technology that they couldn't replicate to get back? Forced to work in specific locations, and if they ran away, they were hunted down and brought back? Sold as objects for labour?

Is this a serious question? How much more 'significant' does it need to be before it reaches your theoretical bar? What's the gray area that you see that means they might not be defined as slaves?

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#33

Post by pdkl95 »

zenogais wrote: post #25
naturalethic wrote: post #20

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…

Nonsense. we don't[1] have a debtor's prison in the USA and I believe most laws that criminalize a simple inability to pay would be unconstitutional by the 13 Amendment.

Now, this is a very fine legal line to walk, because intent (mens rea) to withhold taxes is indeed a crime. Failing to file any required paperwork may also be a crime in some situations. IF by some chance you cannot pay, but still file on time and explain the situation to the IRS, they will only be able to impose financial remedies. So you can certainly get some sort of payment plan, or wage garnishes, or liens on any property you own - but not jail time or forced labor.

In practice, of course, this applies to only a very small set of people. It is cleasrly a attempt to work around the moral issues to allow tax laws to exist. If slavery is the concern, tax law is way to minor of an issue. I suggest looking into the current trend of trying (and succeeding, to some degree) to bring back slavery in the form of prison labor. For-profit prisons are a bad enough idea, but allowing way-below-minimum-wage labor and a lack of oversight and regulation is creating a huge moral hazard.

[1] I realize that there are currently trying to reverse the current situation a bring back various forms of criminal penalties and/or a type of debtor's prison. While concerning, they have had only limited, local success so far.

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#34

Post by nickff »

nyolfen wrote: post #30
nickff wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

except that you must make over a certain amount of money to qualify for income tax? if you're flat busted you're not paying any taxes besides incidental ones like sales. it's a really gross disingenuous argument to draw equivalences between the historical monstrosity of chattel slavery (the indignity of humans being reduced to property) and having an apportionment of your income siphoned for collective costs. at that…

You are describing one specific implementation of the income tax. I have three arguments against your attempt at distinction; the first being that what you are proposing is essentially Nozick's 'gracious master' who takes a portion of your earnings (income tax), while retaining the ability to recall you (conscription or jury duty). Another point would be to simply point out that you are specifying 'income tax'; a poll tax with no cutoff is also possible, whereas I never limited my argument to this single implementation, and you have constructed a straw man. My third argument would be that you never took the trouble to define 'tax', and that if you did, you would see the fundamental similarity.

What you call a 'social obligation' seems to be a construct for the rationalization of abhorrent behavior, especially because the moneys collected via taxation have frequently been used to finance the oppression of a great number of people.

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#35

Post by nickff »

pdkl95 wrote: post #33
zenogais wrote: post #25

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…

Nonsense. we don't[1] have a debtor's prison in the USA and I believe most laws that criminalize a simple inability to pay would be unconstitutional by the 13 Amendment. Now, this is a very fine legal line to walk, because intent (mens rea) to withhold taxes is indeed a crime. Failing to file any required paperwork may also be a crime in some situations. IF by some chance you cannot pay, but still file on time and ex…

The parent said:

>"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."

You never actually addressed the issue of coercion as a whole, you only addressed what happens when there is an 'inability to pay'; as you state:

>"So you can certainly get some sort of payment plan, or wage garnishes, or liens on any property you own - but not jail time or forced labor."

But you do not address what happens when one hides the money, in foreign accounts, or domestic locations. If one does either of these, they are subject to imprisonment, though it may not be called a 'debtor's prison', this is still coercion.

TLDR; If I demand money from you, under threat of confinement, it is coercion, whether or not you have the means to pay.

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#36

Post by nyolfen »

nickff wrote: post #34
nyolfen wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

except that you must make over a certain amount of money to qualify for income tax? if you're flat busted you're not paying any taxes besides incidental ones like sales. it's a really gross disingenuous argument to draw equivalences between the historical monstrosity of chattel slavery (the indignity of humans being reduced to property) and having an apportionment of your income siphoned for collective costs. at that…

You are describing one specific implementation of the income tax. I have three arguments against your attempt at distinction; the first being that what you are proposing is essentially Nozick's 'gracious master' who takes a portion of your earnings (income tax), while retaining the ability to recall you (conscription or jury duty). Another point would be to simply point out that you are specifying 'income tax'; a pol…

i form my views on material reality, not nebulous hypotheticals

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#37

Post by nickff »

nyolfen wrote: post #36
nickff wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are describing one specific implementation of the income tax. I have three arguments against your attempt at distinction; the first being that what you are proposing is essentially Nozick's 'gracious master' who takes a portion of your earnings (income tax), while retaining the ability to recall you (conscription or jury duty). Another point would be to simply point out that you are specifying 'income tax'; a pol…

i form my views on material reality, not nebulous hypotheticals

I have used no nebulous hypothetical, only cited a noted philosopher, given the example of a real system of taxation, and pointed out your failure to address my argument. And I should point out that I am part of material reality, unless my existence is a hypothetical construct (which may very well be true).

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#38

Post by backprojection »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #24
mseebach wrote: post #21

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...

Also worth listening to the More Or Less podcast on BBC r4 where they interview the Economist journalist involved. 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.

got a link?

Re: Global Slavery Index 2014

#40

Post by lifeisstillgood »

backprojection wrote: post #38
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also worth listening to the More Or Less podcast on BBC r4 where they interview the Economist journalist involved. 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.

got a link?

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/more-or-less-behind-the-...
Post reply on HN