Slashdot Mirror


Use of Forced Labor "Systemic" In Malaysian IT Manufacturing

itwbennett (1594911) writes "The use of forced labor is so prevalent in the Malaysian electronics manufacturing industry that there is hardly a major brand name that isn't touched by the illegal practice, according to a report funded by the U.S. Department of Labor and undertaken by Verité, a nonprofit organization focused on labor issues. The two-year study surveyed more than 500 migrant workers at around 200 companies in Malaysia's IT manufacturing sector and found one in three were working under conditions of forced labor."

137 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. "forced labor" by tekrat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Which is what, a euphemism for "slavery" ?
    Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, because slaves can't be fired - they can only be sold. You need to maintain your slaves so they continue to be fit for work and so they maintain their resale value.

      Capitalism requires that labor be a variable cost, not a fixed cost.

    2. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

      Only if you ask a Republican.

      Republicans freed the slaves.

    3. Re:"forced labor" by knightghost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here they called it "salary". Work 80 hours and get paid for 40.

    4. Re:"forced labor" by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's the new innovation of forced labor. In the bad old days, slaves were quite expensive so you had to provide food, clothing, shelter, and at least minimal healthcare.

      The new improved forced labor lets them pick up the slaves cheap, provide them minimal food and shelter and just let them die from overwork.

    5. Re:"forced labor" by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      no, it's the gaol of capitalism

      --
      Nullius in verba
    6. Re:"forced labor" by JMJimmy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "one in three were working under conditions of forced labor."

      Those stats are amazing! 3 in 5 graduates work in forced labour conditions in Canada/US. They just call them internships.

      One person I know, 2 degrees, 1 professional certificate, 2 years of internships. Coming up on a decade of paying for training, working for free, and finding no one will hire because they can just exploit the next slave.

    7. Re:"forced labor" by TWX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Slaves really weren't that expensive, that was why the South in the United States was literally the wealthiest society in the world right up before the civil war. A slave owner didn't provide food, shelter, or clothing. At most they provided raw materials for clothing and shelter and a small patch of land for the slaves to sleep on, and made the slaves grow their own food, make their own clothes, and build their own shelter. The only slaves that got the clothing/shelter/food treatment were the house slaves that directly interacted with the slaveowning family and their guests, and compared to the slaves that served as common labourers that number was incredibly small.

      Plus, as human beings, slaves were just as inclined to sex as anyone else, and since anyone born to a slave was also a slave, it meant a continuous supply of new slaves for those plantations large enough to have multiple generations of slaves on one property, and probably gave them a surplus to sell. That's how the United States could continue to have slavery for decades after the last slave was imported from Africa, they just bred them or encouraged them to breed themselves like livestock.

      This current phenomenon is indentured servitude, with the added indignity of paying for the privilege in advance.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do realize that Republicans of today aren't the same as the Republicans of the 1860s, right? When it comes to the oldest Republicans still alive and in power today, they're still 6 or 7 generations removed from the Republicans of those days. Political parties can undergo massive changes within just a single generation. When you're talking 6 to 10 generations difference, the policies sure as fuck aren't the same!

    9. Re:"forced labor" by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The pubs of then and now are completely different.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:"forced labor" by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, Republicans freed the slaves. And sometime between the two President Roosevelts, Bizarro-United States happened and the parties effectively switched platforms. One can even point to the election of Woodrow Wilson as the biggest turning point, when Wilson as a Democrat took on the same Populist Progressive platforms as his third-party opponent in Thodore Roosevelt, leaving Republican incumbent William Howard Taft as the most conservative of the candidates in that election. Over the next several elections Republicans became increasingly convervative and interested in promoting big business, while Democrats increasingly cited the plights of individuals and how big business was bad for them as laborers, and less and less in favor of states' rights. By the time FDR died the bulk of the transformation was complete, only leaving womens' issues and civil rights to settle through the next few decades.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    11. Re:"forced labor" by ComputersKai · · Score: 2

      You do realize that Republicans of today aren't the same as the Republicans of the 1860s, right? When it comes to the oldest Republicans still alive and in power today, they're still 6 or 7 generations removed from the Republicans of those days. Political parties can undergo massive changes within just a single generation. When you're talking 6 to 10 generations difference, the policies sure as fuck aren't the same!

      Exactly. The Republicans you speak of are from the Civil War era, and the policies of that time are quite different from those today; it's a similar case with the Democrats, who also happened to be have different policies from nowadays during that era.

      Even then (on a different note), the Thirteenth Amendment was the statute that actually freed the slaves.

    12. Re:"forced labor" by ComputersKai · · Score: 1

      Well, technically it gives valuable experience, unlike those laborers. Well, technically...

    13. Re:"forced labor" by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Slaves really weren't that expensive, that was why the South in the United States was literally the wealthiest society in the world right up before the civil war

      Well, that and the fact that slaves probably didn't count in the "per capita" part of "GDP per capita."

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    14. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

      No, maximizing profit is the goal of a capitalist. An immoral capitalist has no problem with it if it maximizes profit. Now before you get your panties in a bunch, remember that any other immoral idealogue will also tend to have no problem with it if it maximizes their objectives. Thus, while communism in theory doesn't espouse slavery; in practice those who profess communism will send you to a "re-education" camp or "assign you to a dangerous project that's vital for the advancement of the workers". These will be no better than any form of slavery resulting from the desire to maximize profit. Perhaps they will be worse.

      So. People are immoral jerks, and sometimes they need to be shot... by people who would rather not shoot but know they must, as opposed to people who will shoot you simply because they want a better cut of beef (capitalists), or can't stand the color of your drapes (ideologues of other types).

    15. Re:"forced labor" by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Hmm... I thought it happened more recently, with the Southern Strategy?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    16. Re:"forced labor" by agm · · Score: 1, Troll

      It's the goal of socialism. When you work for money and the state then confiscates a portion of that money for their own uses,that's effective slavery. You are working for them without choice. Socialism makes EVERYONE who works a slave to the state.

      Capitalism is about freedom of choice and freedom of trade. If anything, people are slaves to nature - we must feed and clothe ourselves. That's nothing to do with capitalism though.

    17. Re:"forced labor" by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The Republican party used to be referred to as "the party of the negro".

    18. Re:"forced labor" by geekoid · · Score: 2

      That is the most ridiculous view of those thing I have ever read.
      Capitalism, slave, socialism. You got them ALL wrong.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:"forced labor" by timeOday · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, slaves actually did have substantial market value. Piketty has an interesting section on this in "Capital". Quoting from it :

      What one finds is that the total market value of slaves represented nearly a year and a half of US national income in the late eighteenth century and the first half of the nineteenth century, which is roughly equal to the total value of farmland...

      In practice, in the antebellum United States, the market price of a slave was typically on the order of ten to twelve years of an equivalent free worker's wages... In 1860, the average price of a male slave of prime working age was roughly $2,000, whereas the average wage of a free farm laborer was on the order of $200.

      For reference, the US National Income in 2012 was $15.7 trillion, i.e. a few percent less than the GDP. 150% of that is about equal to the total value of all residential real estate in the US.

    20. Re:"forced labor" by eudas · · Score: 1
      --
      Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
    21. Re:"forced labor" by Mashiki · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      You do realize that Republicans of today aren't the same as the Republicans of the 1860s, right?

      You're right, they've grown just as much. Then again, I can look at the democrats of today and see: Race baiting, racism, calling republican blacks who don't toe the democrat lines "uncle tom's, house nigger, conservative slut" and if we jump back even a small bit we see democrats who voted against the various pro-black legislation(such as the civil rights act--including filibustering it), had various members who belonged to or were in the KKK as well. Some things change, others don't. Don't believe me? Take a look at the things that the left spew at Allen West or Stacy Dash.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    22. Re: "forced labor" by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And the unemployed are the property of the welfare state.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    23. Re:"forced labor" by mythosaz · · Score: 2

      You do realize that Republicans of today aren't the same as the Republicans of the 1860s, right?

      I suspect the last republican alive in 1860 died by the mid 1900's, yes.

    24. Re:"forced labor" by sjames · · Score: 1

      As timeOday said, they cost about 10 years wages for an equivalent free worker, so if the owner didn't keep them alive and well at least that long, it was a losing proposition.

      So as despicable as the practice was, the modern practice is in some ways worse.

    25. Re: "forced labor" by sjames · · Score: 1

      Actually, the war on poverty was working until the GOP insisted on surrendering.

      And yes, businesses that mooch on the taxpayer to supplement their inadequate payroll are evil. They know damned well they are mooching off of people with a lot less than they already have.

      We don't claim the car thief is blameless if you leave your keys in your car, do we?

    26. Re:"forced labor" by uncqual · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Even Democratic Congressmen use (and defend the use rather than apologize for it) the "Uncle Tom" racial slur to refer to Justice Thomas because he, apparently, doesn't "think Black enough".

      This same Congressman asserts that another Congressman stating he would not support Obama's polices was because of racism -- ignoring the fact that President Obama is the least experienced President and ran on the most progressive platform (albeit, he hasn't followed through on his stated principles) of any President in decades (to say nothing of probably being the most publicly arrogant) and that their viewpoints on political issues were radically different. (Both viewpoints, IMHO, wrong - but that's another issue.)

      If logic isn't on your side, scream racism and that will surely win the argument -- or so some liberals seem to believe.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    27. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Democratic dominance of the South originated in white Democrats' efforts to regain power during and after Reconstruction in order to re-assert white supremacy. Most white Southerners opposed granting suffrage to blacks during Reconstruction. The Ku Klux Klan, followed by insurgent paramilitary groups such as the White League and Red Shirts from 1874 on, acted as "the military arm of the Democratic party" to disrupt Republican organizing, and intimidate and suppress black voting. Elections from 1868 on were accompanied by increasingly high rates of violence, in which sometimes hundreds of blacks were killed.

      Solid South

    28. Re:"forced labor" by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

      Only if you ask a Republican.

      Republicans freed the slaves.

      And they've been going backwards ever since.

      You cant rest on your laurels and talk about what happened 150 years ago (my descendants started freeing slaves in the 11th century, when the US was having it's civil war, they had the largest single fleet in the world dedicated to stopping the slave trade out of Africa, just for a bit of context). Its like Berlusconi claiming he is Caesar because Julius Caesar was Roman or Putin calling himself Peter the Great because he was also a Russian leader.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    29. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Slaves were a lot more expensive than hiring freedmen. With a freedman, you didn't have to provide raw materials for their clothing and shelter, land for said shelter, land for the slaves to grow food on, etc. And if they got sick and died, you're not out the cost of a slave, you just hire a new one. Best of all, you don't even need to provide them enough money for them to be able to buy these things for themselves, you just need to pay more than the next plantation over.

    30. Re:"forced labor" by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I thought Obama was running more middle of the line than Hillary, wasn't she for single payer since the 90s?

      My memory is hazy, but Obama seemed to run moderate with a liberal fervor (sort of like how second Bush ran super conservative, but with a moderate fervor). What policies was Obama running on that were more progressive than Hillary (or really even McCain?).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    31. Re:"forced labor" by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      That's in 1860 though, after importation was banned if I am not mistaken.

      In the Caribbean life expectancy was far lower.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    32. Re:"forced labor" by sjames · · Score: 2

      By that time there were millions of slaves in the U.S. and as you pointed out, they reproduced and even resulted in a surplus for the larger plantations. There was a lively internal slave trade at that point.

    33. Re:"forced labor" by craigminah · · Score: 2

      No. "Capitalism is an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state." - Oxford Dictionary

    34. Re:"forced labor" by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

      Editorial Internship: Filling out passport documents, writing fictional reviews for a travel magazine of places she'd never been to (even though the owner was *paid* to come and stay to review them), and generally spending most of the day searching for stock photos that the magazine hadn't previously used.

    35. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Single payer? LOL no.

      Her health plan leaked and some people were actually able to read it before voting. It failed. Wasn't remotely single payer. Convoluted pig fuck, same as today. Every constituency got it's blowjob.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    36. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Complete bullshit. The south was poor and unindustrialized. If they had been a rich society they might have stood a chance of winning. They never did, even with Lee and _incompetent_ Union leadership they lost.

      The fact is slaves are shitty workers. They only work hard enough not to get whipped, and to get that you have to pay someone to hold the whip. Might as well pay them directly.

      Slaves built the US is just mythology.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    37. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The only reason anybody pays minimum wage is because they can't find anybody worth more than that.

      Seriously have you seen the kind of 'work' those mouth breathers do? Nobody hires them if they have any better options. Robotic burger flippers are here and the $15 minimum wage people are going to be sorry unless they get their shit together. Minimum wage=minimum productivity.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    38. Re:"forced labor" by Collective+0-0009 · · Score: 1

      Really, this guy got two up votes? Perhaps you should do some research on The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Dixiecrats and how there was an amazing shift (scroll to bottom) in which party southern states supported in the late 60's.

      Attempting to claim modern day Republicans were responsible for spearheading Women's and Civil Rights is laughable.

      --
      I finally updated my sig, but now it's lame.
    39. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Mostly cause you have to feed and shelter slaves. It's simply cheaper to pay people to work for you. If you need proof, try to feed&shelter your family on a slave-level job today.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    40. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You have NO idea how hard it is to refrain from pulling a Godwin right now...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    41. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So it's like today?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    42. Re: "forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Odd. A good deal of Europe won that war. Well, at least 'til we decided it would be a great idea to copy the idiocy of the US in that matter.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    43. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Valuable experience in how to bullshit customers, invent colorful descriptions of events and places she's never seen or experienced and finding visual proof of those aforementioned stories.

      Great resume for a political career, everything you need to convince your people to go to war with some country is right there.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    44. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's a great story. And where, say, do you get your customers? Where did you meet them? How did they learn that you're in the market? And that you're worth any dime they pay you?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    45. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So socialism doesn't give you a choice, you're a slave or if you refuse, you get paid by the state by wellfare.

      Capitalism gives you the choice to be a slave or to starve.

      I dunno. Most people would probably prefer socialism. But hey, what do I know about socialism, being in Europe. That's something I should leave to the experts across the big pond who have loads and loads of first hand experience with socialist systems...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    46. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Bull. The only reason anyone pays minimum is because they get away with it. Why the heck should I pay more than minimum wage if I can get what I want for that? Do you honestly think anyone would go "gee, that guy is good, I needn't pay him more 'cause there's nothing he can do, but 'cause I'm so impressed with his great work, here's five bucks more per hour!"?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    47. Re:"forced labor" by disposable60 · · Score: 1

      The South started the war owning exactly zero cannon foundries and had a disjoint rail system with multiple track gauges. The North had a unified rail system (one gauge) and enough industrial capacity to make arms.

      The strategic incompetence of an agrarian 'country' starting a war against an industrialized opponent outweighed the tactical advantage of field leadership ... eventually.

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
    48. Re:"forced labor" by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I thought Obama was running more middle of the line than Hillary, wasn't she for single payer since the 90s?

      Single payer is where we should have gone for basic services. It relieves a whole set of current issues, including using the ER as your regular doctor for the uninsured.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    49. Re:"forced labor" by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      The South started the war

      As an outsider, but a slightly knowledgable one, I though the North started it. Yes, the South declared secession, but the North started the war by marching into Virginia with the intent of occupying Richmond, although they only got as far as Bull Run. It would be like England invading Scotland tomorrow if the Scotish Nationalists win. Or like Germany and France invading the UK if the UK declared it had left the EU.

      Pity this discussion has gone off-topic (was about Malasian workers).

    50. Re:"forced labor" by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

      LOL - that's true, unfortunately the philosophy degree she has already gave her training in advanced bullshit, the english degree provided the creative lying, and a monkey could do the rest.

    51. Re:"forced labor" by genner · · Score: 1

      Which is what, a euphemism for "slavery" ? Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

      Doing anything for free is by definition not capitalism.

    52. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Nobody _want's_ the morons that get minimum. It's all they can hire so they live with them. Treat employees like middle school students. Demerits, detention etc. If they do good they get a ice cream party at the end of the month.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    53. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The union had incredibly incompetent generals. The south had Lee. That was the difference for the first year+.

      After that the north's greater wealth overwhelmed the south.

      Land rich? That's another way of saying 'dirt poor'. Africa is 'land rich' today.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    54. Re:"forced labor" by ultranova · · Score: 1

      The fact is slaves are shitty workers. They only work hard enough not to get whipped, and to get that you have to pay someone to hold the whip. Might as well pay them directly.

      And yet this lesson still remains unlearnt. Just look at how most companies treat their employees, who respond by putting in the absolute minimum effort they can get away with, and sometimes with outright sabotage.

      I think it's because we're still socialized to value domination over cooperation. "Putting someone in their place" feeds the ego of a manager, thus there's some amount of economic reward they're willing to give up to do so. And when every single one of them does the same thing, at every ladder of the hierarchy, you get a horribly ineffective organization.

      All in all, a modern corporation is a pretty good approximation of a totalitarian dictatorship: peons are merely squeezed dry as long as they keep their heads down, leaders declare grandious and frankly delusional "visions" that nobody takes seriously but can't call out as completely unrealistic either, everyone inbetween concentrates either on covering their back or stabbing daggers in those of others, and random purges threaten all. Stalin would be right at home in the modern boardroom, and probably a darling and role model of the business world.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    55. Re:"forced labor" by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I agree, I wasn't critisizing, I was stating my honest memory of the primary.

      Obama whooped people up, but Hilary was more liberal (note I voted Obama, we have a decent recent history with moderate dems).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    56. Re:"forced labor" by rezme · · Score: 1

      Research "The Southern Strategy" with regard to southern republicans.

    57. Re:"forced labor" by ultranova · · Score: 1

      No, maximizing profit is the goal of a capitalist. An immoral capitalist has no problem with it if it maximizes profit. Now before you get your panties in a bunch, remember that any other immoral idealogue will also tend to have no problem with it if it maximizes their objectives.

      The problem is, if you don't institutionalize morality, you get a situation which rewards the immoral psychopathic capitalist and punishes a moral and sane one, and if you do institutionalize it - for example in the form of welfare state - you get hordes of people howling that the state is interfering in the marketplace and creating inefficiencies, which of course is true but misses the point. Capitalism, like any social system, fails when it stops serving human needs and becomes an end to itself, since at that point is has betrayed its very purpose. And it's on the verge of just that.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    58. Re:"forced labor" by meta-monkey · · Score: 1
      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    59. Re:"forced labor" by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      my descendants started freeing slaves in the 11th century

      Time travelin', eh?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    60. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 1

      Revisionist BS. People whose skills begin and end with unskilled labor should not be trying to support a family.

    61. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 1

      Taking credit for something an ancestor did is more than a little disingenuous. You had nothing to do with it. And to assert that the blessings of freedom and prosperity are only for white people is more than a little racist.

    62. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So only rich people should be allowed to breed? Hey, now it all makes sense. After all, reproduction is the most capitalist of all kinds of things humans can do, the production means are fully in private hands!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    63. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Other way 'round it is, if you only pay minimum, you get morons. Don't expect anything other than monkeys if you offer just peanuts!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    64. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 1

      So now everyone above unskilled labor is rich? Who knew.

    65. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I use the phrase 'giving blowjobs to customers' when talking about marketers of any gender. Politicians are just marketers with an army to back them up.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    66. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 1

      Pretty much everyone alive in the 1860's is dead now.

    67. Re:"forced labor" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Modern Day Republicans" still work to protect individual liberties, such as the right to bear arms, the right to choose your school, the right to attend the church you want etc. The laughable concept are all the Democrats who pretend that the Republicans and Democrats "switched" positions on rights when in fact all that happened is in the 1960's a group of Democrats stopped being completely racist rights blockers, and started supporting the social welfare platform, and in the 1990's southern states went Republican after Reagan. But you like to fantasize about a "switch".

    68. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There are many morons who make more then minimum. They aren't worth it.

      That said. A moron that shows up on time and sober when scheduled will be making more than minimum in 6 months, tops.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    69. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      If you work someplace that bad, get a new fucking job.

      It's not like actual Stalinism, you don't go to the Gulag for trying to leave.

      That's one (of many) good thing about capitalism, corporations aren't alone you can vote with your feet.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    70. Re:"forced labor" by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If you work someplace that bad, get a new fucking job.

      Every place is the same. They're made of people socialized into the same values, after all.

      It's not like actual Stalinism, you don't go to the Gulag for trying to leave.

      Of course not. You simply lose your mortgage and get thrown to the street. That's entirely different.

      That's one (of many) good thing about capitalism, corporations aren't alone you can vote with your feet.

      You can vote with your feet, but the candidates are pre-selected by the system, thus they all support its values - just like under communism.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    71. Re:"forced labor" by agm · · Score: 1

      Ethically capitalism is way ahead. Nobody should be in enforced slavery. The state shouldn't actively harm us, they should be procting us from people who want to harm us. Socialism (of the kind in the US, Europe and almost everywhere else) sees the state actively harming people under the guise of "helping" them. That's ethically and morally wrong.

      There is no slavery in a proper capitalist system (that is, a system where people are free) - at least not slavery of the kind we're talking about. People will always be slaves to nature and the needs of their bodies - no system can change that.

    72. Re:"forced labor" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The Union wound up with some quite competent generals, such as Grant and Sherman, but it took some time to get the incompetents out. (McClellan was actually very good at many things, just not at winning battles.)

      Also, while the early battles in the East were capturing a lot of attention, the Union was dismantling the western part of the Confederacy. The "high water mark of the Confederacy" at Gettysburg was roughly contemporaneous with the Union taking complete control of the Mississippi.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    73. Re:"forced labor" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Ethically, socialism is way ahead. Nobody should live in grinding poverty, with the first industrial accident or serious illness wiping them out of even their meager lifestyle.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    74. Re:"forced labor" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Depends on the economy, really. When it's bad, there's plenty of competent people who will accept pretty much any job they can get. When it picks up, they all get better jobs and the only people who'll work at minimum wage are those who can't function in a responsible job. There are places and time where you could get quite competent people for minimum wage, which is positively frightening.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    75. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Usually such a thing happens when a butt-kiss artist meets a boss who is susceptible to being kissed up. Sadly our system does support such moochers. That has less to do with being sober or being on time, or even with competence. It's just that con artists will always prevail as long as people suffering from inflated levels of stupidity and people able to spend money are not two distinct groups.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    76. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Maybe answer the question? Should the "permission to breed" depend on your job?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    77. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The problem is that in a market where supply outmatches demand by a sizable margin, capitalism cannot provide an equilibrium. And workforce is such a market. Supply outmatches demand by at least tenfold. And the usual market instrument of capitalism will not produce a sufficient solution, i.e. the supply simply vanishing because there is no demand.

      People refuse to simply vanish because you don't "need" them. They'd probably rather kill you to get your money than die off peacefully.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    78. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      True, but why should we get monkeys as politicians forever? I dare say we deserve better!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    79. Re:"forced labor" by agm · · Score: 1

      On that we disagree. People should be protected from the initiation of force. The state shouldn't be in the business of actively harming people.

    80. Re:"forced labor" by agm · · Score: 1

      You're correct, but the problem you mention is nothing to do with capitalism. If you're suugesting that socialism is a solution to that then you're advocating that the state actively harms people to help those in need.

      The only ethical way to help people in need is via compassion and charity. Since government enforced wealth redistribution is compulsoy, it cannot be compassionate not charitable. Those traits are voluntary. It's not the political system via the government that should address the issue of people in need, it's the social system via communities and *voluntary* action that should.

    81. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'm advocating social peace.

      Sorry, I don't believe in compassion and charity. Never worked, never will. Aside of stripping needy people of their last remaining dignity, it's also something you simply cannot rely on once time get rougher, i.e. exactly when those in need feel it the most.

      That the supply side can fix problems is a myth. Sorry. It cannot. Mostly because there is no incentive. The economy is in the slumps because the demand is missing. And that in turn is something you can only fix if people HAVE TO spend when the economy would make it more appealing to refrain from doing so, i.e. exactly when the economy would need you to spend to keep it running.

      Now, whether people spend money depends mostly on two factors: First, whether they want to. And second, whether they have the means to. You might notice that the economy actually kept going for a while even after the steam was off. That's because people still had money to spend. The recession came when this was over, when people could no longer spend because they had nothing left.

      Our whole economy in the west is very heavily dependent on services. Services otoh are also the first thing people cut back on when money gets tight. What's higher on your priority list: Haircut or food?

      There is a very easy reason why countries with traditionally "socialist" systems were hit far less heavily by the recession. Mostly because even poor people still have money to spend.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    82. Re:"forced labor" by TwoEyedJack · · Score: 1

      Your question is built on a false premise.

    83. Re:"forced labor" by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Which is what, a euphemism for "slavery" ?
      Isn't that the GOAL of Capitalism??

      Forced labor with pay. The philosophy is that the goods have to be delivered with quality work and on time.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    84. Re:"forced labor" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Every place is not the same. Whoever told you they were is making money off your mental defeat. Don't listen to a word they say; ever again. Even if it's a voice in your head.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    85. Re:"forced labor" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Then are you offering the correct premise or should I keep guessing 'til we both lose interest?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. If you're paying for a job... by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...then it's not really a job.

    Doesn't matter if it's 'clean' multilevel marketing, paying a 'headhunter' to market you to local companies in your area, or paying someone to get you to a job somewhere else, if you're paying, then it's not a job.

    At least around here, headhunters are paid by the companies that need workers with particular skills. That's a negotiation between the company and the headhunter. Good headhunters actually take the time to talk to prospective workers to determine their skill sets, so that they can develop a reputation of being good matchmakers between companies and workers. Bad ones just send anyone through with keywords that might sort of apply.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:If you're paying for a job... by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      So true. If it's a real job, then you NEVER have to pay any amount of cash to get it. The employer should be paying the headhunter, not you.

      Why? Mainly because of the exact kind of crap that they are describing here. The employer has the money, which he demonstrates by paying the headhunter. If he can't afford to pay the headhunter, he can't afford to pay you.

      Also note they use the payment as a filter. That is, they don't want smart people working for these crap jobs.The smart people refuse to give up their passport and call the police after you bring them to your country. So they make sure to only 'hire' less smart people by giving you an intelligence test - if you are unwise enough to bribe the broker to get a job they promise is 'good', then you are unwise enough to give them your passport and not call the police.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    2. Re: If you're paying for a job... by Catbeller · · Score: 2

      Not stupidity. Desperation.

    3. Re:If you're paying for a job... by TWX · · Score: 1

      Also note they use the payment as a filter. That is, they don't want smart people working for these crap jobs.The smart people refuse to give up their passport and call the police after you bring them to your country. So they make sure to only 'hire' less smart people by giving you an intelligence test - if you are unwise enough to bribe the broker to get a job they promise is 'good', then you are unwise enough to give them your passport and not call the police.

      And the same thing applies to MLM here and even to those "businesses" that recruit naive young women to attempt to use sex appeal to sell things out of the backs of trucks to people in parking lots. I was once approached by a girl of probably 20 years of age, she was trying to get me to buy some kind of cologne, attempting to use both bully tactics ("You don't want to smell, do you?") and cute-bubbly sex appeal to get my money. Seeing the guys on the other side of the parking lot at a van I asked her how much they were paying her, and she said that she pays them and gets a portion of the profits from her sales. I told her they were using her and weren't much above pimps, leaving the implication for what that made her unstated. Based on the shocked look on her face I don't think she'd even considered how both dangerous and wrong her situation was. I got in my car and left; no idea if she was smart enough to leave or go into the convenience store and ask for help or not.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re: If you're paying for a job... by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      I have been desperate before. I would still never fall for this kind of stupidity.

      In America, they use a similar technique to get desperate people, it's a variation on the "Multi Level Marketing Scheme".

      Here they make you buy 'samples' to sell to your customers. No. If the company is real, they provide all samples and tools you need.

      People that buy the samples are desperate. But paying a head hunter to send you to another country, that is not desperate, that is stupid.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    5. Re:If you're paying for a job... by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      if you're paying, then it's not a job.

      The only exception I know of in the USA is certain companies (like insurance companies, trucking companies, or life guards) that require passing
      a certain test or having a particular certification. In almost all legitimate cases you can take the test from multiple 3rd parties and the test or
      certification transfers to other similiar type job and even in those cases most of the better companies will pay you to take the test or provide the
      training free of charge. I would be very reluctant to work at any job that required you to pay for your own background check, drug test, etc... as in
      most cases either these companies are scams or at best extremely cheap.

    6. Re:If you're paying for a job... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Interesting note: That's a new approach, spawned from the boom in the 90's.
      Prior to that it was common for the person looking for a job to pay the headhunter.

      Pre-internet making contacts to find out who was hiring was very difficult.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:If you're paying for a job... by TWX · · Score: 2

      I actually work in an industry where a subset of coworkers are required to pay for their own enhanced background checks on a regular if infrequent basis, but they pay the state, not the employer. The employer simply mandates that employees provide the results of these tests, as the state requires the employer to do so. If the state didn't require it, the employer probably wouldn't require it either.

      It's my experience that employer requirements for certifications are generally for third-party certifications, not internal ones. I've never seen internal ones that required the employee to pay the employer to receive. After all, either the certs are there to prove to the employer that the employee knows what they're doing, or to let the employer advertise that their employees have these industry-respected certifications for marketing purposes. Self-signed employee certifications wouldn't be worth much in most industries.

      Plus there may be federal laws that were originally intended to break "company stores" for migrant and low-wage workers that would still apply to internal-purchase things like such certifications. It might actually be illegal for the employer to charge the employee for something that only the employer provides and requires of the employee.

      At my work, if one is hourly and goes to internally-provided training, that time is paid at one's regular wage, and even some extra training for salaried staff is compensated for above and beyond one's base salary.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:If you're paying for a job... by TWX · · Score: 1

      Okay, I can see that. My work history started in the nineties, so I didn't have any experience with a different system.

      I don't think that my parents ever paid a headhunter to find them a job either. Dad's computer skills were all he needed, in concert with looking at the want-ads. Funny enough, the demand for COBOL and RPG programmers now is probably at least as strong as it was in the early seventies when he started working in the field.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    9. Re:If you're paying for a job... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Really this isn't so dissimilar to the racket now being perpetrated by colleges and universities in the US in conjunction with employers looking for cheap skilled labor.

      The end result is generation saddled with crushing debt and wages that are failing to keep up with inflation. Assuming they are employed.

    10. Re: If you're paying for a job... by Catbeller · · Score: 2

      You are not them. They've little or no choice. Overpopulation has consequences, one of which is reducing labor to negative cost.

    11. Re:If you're paying for a job... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There have always been both kinds of headhunters. Even some that play in both arenas.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    12. Re:If you're paying for a job... by jeek · · Score: 2

      "It might actually be illegal for the employer to charge the employee for something that only the employer provides and requires of the employee."

      When I used to work at Arby's forever ago, they charged me for the shirt I had to wear while working.

      --
      If you want to be seen, stand up. If you want to be heard, speak up. If you want to be respected, sit down and shut up.
    13. Re:If you're paying for a job... by TWX · · Score: 1

      How much did they charge you?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    14. Re:If you're paying for a job... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm a lot older than that, and never paid a headhunter. Way back when, I did see contracts where I'd be liable for some of the cost if I didn't work a whole year if I got hired through them.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  3. And politicians will expect the us to compete with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    this right? After all its a global economy.

  4. Shocked, I say! Simply shocked! by Narcocide · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lack of regulation and oversight breeds rampant victimization of the labor force?!

  5. Merger from Heck by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    These new batches of "Capitalist Commie" countries sometimes have the worst of both capitalism and communism, such as 1) wage slavery, and 2) no ability to do anything about it politically.

    One could argue the US was such a country during the late 1800's. The "big 3" mega-oligopolies bribed the system up the wazoo such that democracy was a zombie at the time. (Some argue we are headed back that way now.)

  6. Forced Symantec? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    The Horror! Isn't the use of that bloatware banned by some UN Charter? Have they no sympathy for the plight of computers under the burden of that cpu hogging virus allowing software!

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Forced Symantec? by ComputersKai · · Score: 1

      Now, if only Peter Norton did a "How to uninstall Norton" video...

  7. Re:But I want my iPhone 6 now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You won't need low level bosses to oversee a plant full of robots, and the CEO doesn't care about his employees, he just wants profits.

  8. Re:Modern slavery by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Ah, that's just because today's ultra-high-density platters require high-coercivity materials in order to adequately maintain the magnetization patterns that store the data. Low coercivity magnetic media just don't work at those densities.

  9. Some people *do* pay for jobs, and quite rightly by tgeller · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm disappointed by the many people (all Americans, as far as I can tell) who post here to say, "fuck no! I'd never be so stupid!!!". This, I think, shows an extremely narrow understanding of the world. Because:

    a) America is not the world. There are *many* places where you're expected to pay for your job, in one way or another. Sometimes it's above-board, sometimes not. I don't know about Malaysia, but wouldn't be surprised at all if that was the custom there.

    b) Oh, wait, we have this in America, too! I paid LOTS of money to my managing broker when I was a real-estate agent. These are standard fees: Everyone at every agency pays them. And let's not forget the *MINIMUM WAGE* workers forced to pay for their uniforms and so forth.

    So stop with the high-and-mighty. You're speaking from ignorance, not strength.

    --
    Tom Geller
  10. Global Economy by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

    Are these the people I'm told we must compete against in a world economy?

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  11. Re:But I want my iPhone 6 now by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    And this is news how? There's a reason our tech products are so cheap and it's not because the robots are making them (which is what will inevitably happen, just not yet)

    I thought it was because I signed a two-year contract!

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  12. Re:Modern slavery by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    Globalization has a fringe benefit: you can just make your products in countries where slavery is legal!

    (For the uninformed, Malaysia and its neighbor Thailand make the majority of the world's hard drives.)

    It's not a fringe benefit; it's a driving force.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  13. Goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're making a point about how screwed up things are, which is not far off from what we actually live with. To be fair to the concept, the intent behind the idea of Capitalism was division of labor to minimize the crap work we all have to do in order to take care of each other. Unfortunately a bunch of jerks figured out how to game the system and we've all failed to maintain rule #0 - Don't let jerks or cheaters take over the playground.

    I don't know how to make playground rules apply to the really real world, but that's the thing we've never figured out. Most of us know that the playground is for everyone who wants to play, that we have to get along even if we don't like each other, and that one way or another we all have to take care of each other. Most of us actually know how to do all that too. But we haven't figured out a good way to keep the jerks from taking over and forcing everyone to play by crap rules that aren't fun for anyone except them.

    (wish I could get this stupid g+ login to work. whatever)

  14. Re:Some people *do* pay for jobs, and quite rightl by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "...workers forced to pay for their uniforms and so forth."
    Where in the us is the legal?

    Also, where you self employed as an agent?
    OTOH, you were a real estate agent, so nothing you say is worth squat.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  15. Re:Modern slavery by Dadoo · · Score: 2

    You missed a word: "officially".

    --
    Sit, Ubuntu, sit. Good dog.
  16. Naw, it's just profits by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Motorola built a factory in the states and did just fine. They only moved it over seas because slave labor is still cheaper, but they were plenty profitable and selling the phones for competitive prices.

    I've been filling the head of a good friend of mine with liberalism and it prompted his Dad to ask "What do you have against Profit". This. This is what I have against profit. It's _never_ enough.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  17. A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by Kylon99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let's play devil's advocate here. Let's think about this assuming we don't care about the mass suffering, slavery and murder of humans, which is kinda bad enough already for us to try to end this practice any way we can. Say we are just bare naked capitalists, only interested in profit, past the point even Adam Smith would find horrific.

    This is still bad enough for us to care.

    We can't use slavery to produce our products because of laws and non-corruption in our countries, nor can we change our system to allow slavery. It would cost too much. So there is no way we can compete with Malaysia who is allow things, official or not. They are gaining an 'unfair' advantage by resorting to this practice that only they can use.

    Therefore, even if you are an inhuman psychopathic capitalist (or at least a long-term high functioning one), you should care about abolishing slavery, since it grants those who do an unfair advantage.

    1. Re:A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by skine · · Score: 2

      You say that we can't use forced labor, but we can if someone is being punished for a crime, as is stated in the 13th Amendment.

      Thus many prisons in the US run for-profit manufacturing businesses, using forced labor.

    2. Re:A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by Kylon99 · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't really know about the US, but the prisoners up here in Canada are paid for their work. Not very well and the system of having them buy daily necessities isn't great now, but apparently they've gone on strike to protest that last year. If the US is forcing their prisoners to work for no pay then that might be something they need to change.

      Although, I was thinking outright slavery since it reminded me of news reports in June talking about slaves being used in Thailand for the shrimp trade. In that case, the slavers there were also murdering their slaves, in addition to forcing them to work.

    3. Re:A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... since it grants those who do an unfair advantage ...

      When the kettle or toaster breaks do you pay someone to repair it? No. It's cheaper to buy another one. It's cheaper because the manufacturer charges less to make it than the tinker does to fix it. That is the price of an industrialized society: Severe wage caps so everyone can buy a kettle and a toaster. Another way is manufacturing goods in a society where the cost of living is lower. But increasing the level of industry in a society creates wage competition and then manufacturing isn't cheap. It results in manufacturers applying wage caps to a whole country; Haiti is a repeat victim of this.

      Summary:
      Industrialized society depends on comparative advantage. The easy way to reduce costs is to reduce wages. Wages reduced to zero is slavery.

    4. Re:A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      From a "inhuman psychopathic capitalist" perspective, you shouldn't even think about competing with Malaysian slaveowners. Rather, you should *become* a Malaysian slaveowner. Purchase a company in Malaysia whose workforce is slaves.

      Of course, it's not practical for everyone to do that. But if you're one of the inhuman psychopathic capitalists in the US, then why not? It's not in the interests of the US workforce or the US population as a whole. But it's in YOUR interest. So you'll do it.

    5. Re:A look from the view of ultra-capitalism. by skine · · Score: 1

      Looking into it more, prisoners in US prisons get paid between $0.23 and $1.05 per hour.

  18. Re:Some people *do* pay for jobs, and quite rightl by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2

    OK, let's put it this way - if you don't show up in uniform, you're sent home and don't get invited back to the party. The employer gives you a list of place(s) to buy your uniforms. How you pay for those is up to you. This happened at the first low wage job I had (as an orderly in a nursing home), as a construction worker (you couldn't show up in tennis shoes), and I'm pretty sure that's the case in almost any place in this country where low-wage employees are hired. And it's completely legal. So legal that you're allowed to write those off as a tax deduction. So, yeah, it's not "paying for a job" per se, but it does put a financial burden on people who are just starting one.

    --
    That is all.
  19. Re: Some people *do* pay for jobs, and quite right by Catbeller · · Score: 1

    Don't forget authors and actors, who have to pay agents to intermediate, or they don't get contracts.

  20. A Union by MrKaos · · Score: 2

    So does anyone here believe Malaysian IT needs a union to help them?

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  21. Um... huh? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Slaves were very expensive compared to immigrants. With immigrants you could treat them just as bad and when they got weak move on to the next batch. With slaves you had money sunk in. The south also had huge amounts of capital sunk into slaves. If you're selling someone's buying, and that costs money. It's one of the reasons they were so far behind the curve on the industrial revolution...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Um... huh? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Societies depending on slavery (or any kind of cheap labor) are by definition behind when it comes to invention, industrialization and progress. Simply because R&D is expensive. If it's cheaper to stick to employing humans, there is zero incentive to develop machines.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  22. Not if you're global... by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the real capitalists are global. They benefit from us competing with cheaper labor. Marx predicted this but all anyone can remember about him is that a few dictators used his books for rhetoric.

    As for Adam Smith, he actually as against this sort of naked capitalism. He wrote at a time of small merchant artisans. He didn't see the industrial revolution coming and if he had probably wouldn't have written the books he did. These days he's like Marx: all anybody remembers about him is what fits in with what they want.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Not if you're global... by Kylon99 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I realized that a bit as soon as I hit submit. I tried. 8)

      The article sparked my thoughts of what I heard about the shrimp slave trade from Thailand, for example, and not just necessarily factory workers in Malaysia. Possibly what is going on is this race to the bottom via slave labor, 'forced' labor as the article says, prison labor, dissident labor, etc. In order to compete countries are taking this tack. But I was thinking with the outrage of slavery, maybe it's enough justification going in there with guns and outright killing the slavers. i.e. one country trumping up some reason to invade, hiring mercenaries, etc., etc. Not that I would advocate it as I imagine the situation would only get messier, but this is very similar to how gangs work. I just suspect someone is thinking about 'solving' the problem that way.

      For anyone interested, the slave labor trade was reported in June.
      http://www.theguardian.com/glo...

    2. Re:Not if you're global... by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      Same thing with Orwell. I had a conservative friend try to tell me Orwell was a capitalist because he wrote Animal Farm. No, he was a socialist. He wrote Animal Farm as a criticism of Stalinism (totalitarianism with the drapings of communism). Also, as a comment on the self-censorship of English socialists who looked the other way with regards to Stalin's purges and other atrocities because they just really wanted this experiment in communism to work so badly.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  23. Re:Some people *do* pay for jobs, and quite rightl by righteousness · · Score: 1

    I don't know about Malaysia, but wouldn't be surprised at all if that was the custom there.

    No, it's not the custom here. With respect to the article, the payments are made by the migrant workers to the brokers in their home state, e.g. Bangladesh, before they step foot in Malaysia.

    --
    Don't fornicate. Seriously, just don't do it.
  24. Re:History of Imported Labor by righteousness · · Score: 1

    And this isn't about greedy companies. In all these countries the immigrant labor practices are _encouraged_ by the populist governments. It's insane.

    No, it is absolutely about greedy companies. The government has tried to restrict the practice of migrant labor, but they always face strong opposition from the greedy, capitalistics, mostly Chinese owned businesses who prefer to pay slave wages to migrant rather than pay reasonable wages to locals.

    --
    Don't fornicate. Seriously, just don't do it.
  25. Re:"forced labor" - bullox by Collective+0-0009 · · Score: 1

    So what your saying is that Democrats used to not give a shit about Civil Rights and Social Welfare before the 60's and they did afterwards? And that is used to argue against the Southern Strategy and Dixiecrats being responsible for a "swap" in political party agendas?

    Whether you say Dems started giving a shit about minorities in the 60's or Pubs stopped giving a shit about minorities in the 60's, the point is the parties switched how they felt about tolerance, equality, and civil rights in the 60's. So anything the the Pubs did in regards to that before the 60's can no longer be used to claim that you should support that party for those actions today.

    --
    I finally updated my sig, but now it's lame.
  26. Re:"forced labor" - bullox by TWX · · Score: 1

    Pretty much. There's an expression that's often used to demonize management in the workplace as it's attributed to them saying it, "...but what have you done for me today?"

    It works a lot better when applied to political parties. There's a sliding scale for how much worth one should put on the past actions of a political party, and actions a decade-old without either further followup or continued attempts to followup are meaningless.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  27. Re:Modern slavery by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

    slavery isn't legal anywhere on the planet.

    That's true, and I was being a little facetious. But a driving force behind the globalization movement is the ability to take advantage of much lower wages in poorer countries to avoid higher labor costs in wealthier countries. If you look at what is legal in those poorer countries, it's not too far from forced or sweatshop labor.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  28. Slavery by NewYork · · Score: 1

    In India 80% people are slaves.
    They're called Lower caste.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  29. Nelson Mandela by NewYork · · Score: 2

    "If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don't care." --Nelson Mandela