World Slave Labor In America, Should It Be Allowed.

[Nithavela]

I agree, however the work is minimal, providing service in their facilities.

The article below ahows how they are branching out in firefighting, and other ventures.

Is it a form of slavery?

No, they do it voluntarily for $$$

Think prison labor is a form of slavery? Think again

Sadly you continue to fail to live up to your username. Labour in US prisons is neither voluntary nor well-payed nor for facility functions only.

 

[Truth7t7]

Sadly you continue to fail to live up to your username. Labour in US prisons is neither voluntary nor well-payed nor for facility functions only.

Sorry I let ya down, ill try harder next time.

I some what agree its slave labor, however the cost to keep someone jailed in California is like $60,000 a year. Food, Clothes, Medical,

Done here, next one.

Im out its all yours

 

[Nithavela]

Sorry I let ya down, ill try harder next time.

I some what agree its slave labor, however the cost to keep someone jailed in California is like $60,000 a year. Food, Clothes, Medical,

Done here, next one.

Im out its all yours

 

[Truth7t7]

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I was going to say shame on Hanes until I read the above post oh my golly give us a break!
M-Bob

A break on what? Factual historical salary ratio information?

Make no mistake about it, corporate greed is the largest contributor to the destruction of the middle class economy. Not immigrants, not outsourcing, not "too much government regulation". Those are just red herrings by the guys who are actually doing the damage so that people don't blame them, and furthermore, get tricked into voting for policies that allow even further exploitation.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average S&P 500 CEO makes over 300 times what their average employee makes, that's not counting the rest of the executive team where that number is still above 150. (Chief Officers, VP's, Directors, etc...).

People keep yearning for "how it used to be" where a middle class factory worker with no college degree could still go out and earn a living and have a house, 2 cars, and pay for a family vacation every year. Back when that was a reality, those same CEO's and executive teams were only pulling in around 50x what their employees were, not 300x.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Rob your one of the few that sees the picture realistically and your 100% correct!

The western world wealthy "Fat Cats" are not content with 50X the workers wage, they want it all!

This is a window of opportunity to save the American dream, being able to buy a home, car, tv set, and a toaster.

Americans retirement savings accounts and disposable income is out the door, as credit cards are maxed out, As the transfer of middle class American wealth goes to the "Fat Cats"!

Manufacturing jobs are middle class America, when they are removed, so is the middle class.

The masses of society are blind to this truth.

The "Fat Cats" would have citizens of the US just as Halima, they care about increased wealth, nothing more.

Whats the answer?

American Tariffs on Foreign goods, take the "Fat Cats" incentive away on abuse, protect our free American society, from the world slave trade!

I'd have to agree with some and disagree with some of what you stated here...

Some manufacturing jobs could be brought back, however, the ones that have been lost to automation are gone for good. For instance, if a computerized machine that can make 500 shirts per hour is already in use in an American plant, there's no way they're going to get that machine out of there and replace it with a person that can only make 20 per hour. That's just not going to happen.

The issue with trying to address this problem via Tariffs is that it's just going to replace mistreated foreign workers with mistreated American workers if other things aren't corrected.

For example, if the minimum wage stays where it's at, the only thing tariffs accomplish are making us pay a higher price for the goods, while American workers in a shirt factory toil away for less than $20,000/year. (far below the amount that would take them back to the "good old days" you describe above).

In order to have that, those workers need to be making at least $40-50k year (and even that still might be on the low end), and if we're talking about CEOs that are willing to outsource to 9 year old kids just to line their pockets, can you honestly trust them just to say "hey, I'm going to pay the American workers well out of the goodness of my heart".

What they'd actually do, is just find the state with the lowest minimum wage in a non-union/right-to-work state, and move their operation there and pay everyone $7.35 an hour, and only hire them for 34 hours a week instead of 40 so they could avoid having to provide benefits and paid leave.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average S&P 500 CEO makes over 300 times what their average employee makes, that's not counting the rest of the executive team where that number is still above 150.

In a free country is that any of our business how much those ones make?

Although many are leaning that way so far this is not socialism here.

Now I do see two sides to the coin. I retired from the city of San Diego with a decent little retirement. Some that retire there are receiving a quarter of a million dollars a year in retirement monies and benefits. I think there should be a $100,000 a year cap on these retired ones. Why? Because this is a government agency that should have more rigid controls.

As for the other high earners in the world who work for private companies I see nothing wrong with them getting what they can get.

M-Bob

 

[whatbogsends]

I can't speak for her specific case...but a lot of these cases are debt slavery. Under the pretext of getting a job and making money, a child is given materials she cannot afford to make a product (like sewing together soccer balls for example). The child is told if they see enough soccer balls together, they can make a profit which can then pay off the debt.

Unfortunately, the child doesn't realize that the little profit they make isn't enough to both feed them and pay off the debt....so the interest on the debt grows higher while the child spends the meager income on the food they desperately need (which is why they took this job in the first place). That child then grows up never able to do anything else...essentially owned by the company who gave them this "opportunity".

It's messed up...and I don't like it...but it's the fault of the nation these people inhabit. If they had child labor laws, minimum wages, unions, etc...these things wouldn't happen (not legally anyway).

I agree with your first two paragraphs. What makes it relevant to US politics is that many on the right advocate getting rid of child labor laws, minimum wage laws, union, etc. They see these things as impediments to a "free" market. It is dangerous thinking.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

We already have defacto slave labor here. it's called illegal immigrants. Funny thing, the same party that fought tooth and nail for literal slave labor is doing the same for the replacement.

Well, it's worth pointing out that the democrats (the segregationists & dixiecrats) that fought for slave labor, switched parties as part of the southern strategy...

...and present day democrats who are calling for open borders aren't doing so because of their desire to employ cheap labor. Part of their fight for it is their embracing of "PC culture" and other parts can be attributed to other things, but wanting to "keep them around for slave labor" certainly isn't on that list.

They're the ones fighting to get them a path to citizenship, and raise the minimum wage so that they could earn a halfway decent living.

 

[Willie T]

Meet Halima A Beautiful 11 Year Old Girl.

Halima works in a Bangaladeshi clothing factory, producing underwear for Hanes.
She earns 6.5 cents an hour, or $3.20 a week, she is slapped and screamed at for increased production.

Next time you buy Hanes clothing, think of Halima?

Wikipedia: Hanesbrands Inc. is an American clothing company based in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.[2] It employs 65,300 people internationally.

Gerald W. Evans Jr.
Executive Compensation
As Chief Executive Officer at HANESBRANDS INC., Gerald W. Evans Jr. made $9,056,825 in total compensation. Of this total $912,500 was received as a salary, $1,394,190 was received as a bonus, $0 was received in stock options, $6,543,769 was awarded as stock and $206,366 came from other types of compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for the 2016 fiscal year.

Other Executives at this Company
Richard A. Noll Joia M. Johnson Richard D. Moss W. Howard Upchurch

Truth7t7

You do realize, don't you, that you are free to purchase only those products you approve of. You may pay three times as much for them.... but it is strictly your choice.
But, there is then the situation that the little girl will have no job at all. Be sure to make enough $$$ to also send her food.

What I am saying is that just being a Bleeding Heart does nothing toward solving the problem. Come up with a workable answer.

 

[wing2000]

It's messed up...and I don't like it...but it's the fault of the nation these people inhabit. If they had child labor laws, minimum wages, unions, etc...these things wouldn't happen (not legally anyway).

The company boards who make decisions to outsource labor to countries that have no enforced labor standards bear some responsibility.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

In a free country is that any of our business how much those ones make?

Although many are leaning that way so far this is not socialism here.

Now I do see two sides to the coin. I retired from the city of San Diego with a decent little retirement. Some that retire there are receiving a quarter of a million dollars a year in retirement monies and benefits. I think there should be a $100,000 a year cap on these retired ones. Why? Because this is a government agency that should have more rigid controls.

As for the other high earners in the world who work for private companies I see nothing wrong with them getting what they can get.

M-Bob

If you're saying that you don't see a problem with it, and see no need for regulation, then do you staunchly oppose Trump's regulatory plan pertaining to protectionism?

People can't have it both ways here...they can't say "it's a great thing that these CEO's are pulling in 8-figure salaries, we should embrace that" while simultaneously saying "Donald should put protectionism laws in place so encourage purchasing American goods".

It was the former that caused the issues that the latter is attempting to address (in a flawed manner I might add).

It was their quest for a ridiculously high salaries & profits that drove them to seek alternatives outside of the US. When making 50x what their employees made just wasn't enough for them anymore, they sought to find new employees outside the country that would do it for much less.

If you pass protectionism laws that all but force them to use American operations instead of foreign ones, and "those pesky minimum wage laws" are what's standing between them and those high salaries they wanted, the first thing they're going to lobby for with their power is to remove that, dismantle unions, and pay American workers the same lousy wage they were paying the foreign workers.

If you're going to try to address greed with legislation (which is what the protectionism laws are attempting here) then it can't be flimsy legislation that just transfers the poor conditions from foreign workers onto domestic ones, it needs to be stern and it needs to codify and strengthen the rights of American workers. Otherwise, in 10 years, we'll just have American workers in a Hanes factory trying to scrape by on wages less than $15k/year.

Gotta pick one or the other...either you embrace 100% free markets and deal with the consequences (outsourcing, destroying environments, low wages, etc...), or you take a hard line and pass legislation that says "You WILL use American operations for this, You WILL pay them a decent wage, You WILL allow them to unionize, and You WILL provide benefits...if that means you and your executive team only make $5 million next year instead of $10 million...tough luck"

Trying to implement these half-baked solutions just transfer the problem from one place to another.

 

[Rion]

Well, it's worth pointing out that the democrats (the segregationists & dixiecrats) that fought for slave labor, switched parties as part of the southern strategy...

...and present day democrats who are calling for open borders aren't doing so because of their desire to employ cheap labor. Part of their fight for it is their embracing of "PC culture" and other parts can be attributed to other things, but wanting to "keep them around for slave labor" certainly isn't on that list.

They're the ones fighting to get them a path to citizenship, and raise the minimum wage so that they could earn a halfway decent living.

I am talking about the actual Democrats in Congress, not the rank and file voters. Congressional Democrats only care about getting a few citizenship for their voter plantation, and know that there will be more where they came from. Same as it was in the 80s.

 

[wing2000]

I am talking about the actual Democrats in Congress, not the rank and file voters. Congressional Democrats only care about getting a few citizenship for their voter plantation, and know that there will be more where they came from. Same as it was in the 80s.

....and I suppose companies and individual Americans who knowingly employ illegal laborers have no responsibility here?

Whether it's Hanes underwear or hiring a day laborer, it seems to me we as consumers and employers have choices to make everyday. We seem to care more about our wallet than how are goods and services are produced.

 

[Rion]

....and I suppose companies and individual Americans who knowingly employ illegal laborers have no responsibility here?

Whether it's Hanes underwear or hiring a day laborer, it seems to me we as consumers and employers have choices to make everyday. It seems to me that we care more about our wallet than how are goods and services are produced.

Never said that. There's more than enough blame to go around. Although I will note that I have seen certain Democrat die-hards here argue that the cheap cost of goods was a reason to keep illegal immigration.

 

[Kentonio]

Never said that. There's more than enough blame to go around. Although I will note that I have seen certain Democrat die-hards here argue that the cheap cost of goods was a reason to keep illegal immigration.

What happens if you drive up costs without simultaneously driving up people's purchasing power?

 

[Rion]

What happens if you drive up costs without simultaneously driving up people's purchasing power?

Why does this argument seem familiar? It reminds me of something...

Hmmm...

The Southern Argument for Slavery [ushistory.org]

 

[Kentonio]

Why does this argument seem familiar? It reminds me of something...

Hmmm...

The Southern Argument for Slavery [ushistory.org]

Really? We're back to baiting again?

 

[Rion]

Really? We're back to baiting again?

Pointing out that you're using the same arguments as slave owners is not baiting. Disagreeing with you is not baiting, either.

 

[Kentonio]

Pointing out that you're using the same arguments as slave owners is not baiting. Disagreeing with you is not baiting, either.

I enjoy people disagreeing with me. It’s interesting and gets me thinking in new ways. Throwing out a strawman about slavery however is not disagreement, it’s baiting. Just like if you were defending the right to bear arms, and I came back with ‘you know who else supports the right to bear arms? ISIS!’. That would also be baiting. Glad we could clear this up.