Adventures in the slave trade

Written By: - Date published: 9:50 am, October 22nd, 2012 - 74 comments
Categories: capitalism, class war, human rights, poverty, racism, sexism, wages - Tags: ,

Slavery was abolished in the 19th century, wasn’t it?

From wage-slavery to human-trafficking, modern day forms of slavery have many faces, all in the interests of some people making a profit out of the hardship of others.  These various faces of modern day slavery range in severity from harsh and unfair working conditions, to the most devastating forms of human degradation, abuse and oppression.

Today Al Jazeera reported on the impact on his family of the death of a striking South African miner. He was shot dead by police in August. He was working 1000 kilometres away from his meagre home because jobs are scarce.  He travelled that distance to support his wife and children. 34 miners were shot by police when they were striking for more pay. Some strikers became more desperate, and the conflict escalated.

Some modern day slavery is in the form of legal work for greedy corporates.  Other forms are the result of illegal practices spawned by the capitalist ethics of greed and profiteering.  In the UK right now, there is a concern about the increase in human tafficking.  In such cases, women are very often the victims of some of the nastiest forms of slavery in the guise of sex trafficking.  Evidence of this is shown in Deborah Padfield’s article, which is a response to

“The Criminalisation of Migrant Women” by Liz Hales and Loraine Gelsthorpe of Cambridge University’s Institute of Criminology, a report on the experience of trafficked women convicted of crimes including entry into fake marriage, drug importation, cannabis production, street robbery and selling fake goods. As victims of crime, they experienced domestic servitude, rape and aggravated assault, threats and theft of documents, sex and/or labour exploitation and forced participation in crime.

And one of the worst results is that the profiteers organising the trafficking go unrecognised. The trafficked people become victims of a legal system stacked against them, and they are treated as criminals. Padfield reports,

One legal representative refuses to tell the court that his client was forced into sex work lest it prejudice the court against her; through his refusal, he implicitly accepts that such victimhood is treated as culpable. The judiciary appears to have a similarly inadequate understanding of guilt and innocence: “one woman…, when asked in court whether she pleaded guilty or not guilty, stated:  ‘I want to explain to you why I did this.’ The response from the Bench was a sharp retort, ‘We are asking you whether you plead guilty or not guilty.’” Without an exploration of why?, that is an unanswerable question.

I haven’t seen any reports of New Zealand examples of the above devastatig levels of dealings in human misery.  But we do have our own milder versions of modern day slavery.  There was a recent report of the unfair treatment of immigrant nurses.  Some are being forced to work for worse conditions and pay than those experienced by most other nurses.

The Sunday Star-Times revealed earlier this year that trafficking of Filipino nurses has been taking place.

Qualified nurses were being promised nursing work by recruitment agents, but were instead forced to sign into two-year aged care contracts for low pay.

In another case this year, a group of Indian nurses found themselves unable to gain registration in New Zealand after arriving here to study.

And how else can you describe the NAct government’s plan to cut youth wages, other than as wage-slavery. CTU spokesperson, James Sleep says,

“Youth rates are fundamentally unfair, but also flawed. They won’t bring down overall youth unemployment numbers, but switch some low paid, insecure jobs from one group of young workers earning the adult minimum wage, to the cheaper group of youth eligible to earn youth rates. At any one point there will be workers displaced, failing to address the bigger job shortage problem,” …

The above are some very different forms of modern day slavery, with varying degrees of impacts on the victims.  They are all the result of the same underlying cause: human greed enshrined in contemporary capitalist ethics.  You can probably think of other examples, and of different ways this unfair system impacts on the lives of ordinary people.

74 comments on “Adventures in the slave trade ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Fran 1
    22 October 2012 at 10:12 am

    You are so right about the differing forms of slavery currently operating in our society. Unfortunately we seem to be living in a society where the powers that be think it is acceptable, even desirable to have a group of people who can be categorized as “less”, a group whose existence makes others feel superior. Such thinking filters down (trickles down!) until the divisions in society become enormous – this is how “class” is established and cemented in and class division is a very good way of controlling populations.

  2. bbfloyd 2
    22 October 2012 at 10:36 am

    So, once again, we see proof that, apart from small pockets of light, the human species is still too immature to be ready to take the next step towards true civilisation….

    From an historians perspective, these are interesting times we live in… To be able to map the descent from “glorious empire, and wealth”, back down to yet another “dark age”….Now THAT is a thesis worth getting out of bed to write….

    Too bad none of the writings that could have explained how the descent could have been avoided will survive to be read by whichever remnant of humanity survives the next ice age….We have been celebrating our “brilliant” impermanence for far too long for any real hope that our knowledge will survive in any meaningful form….

    Nothing new here… This was always going to happen whilst we, as a species, continued to try use the same methods that have failed repeatedly throughout human history…

    The real shame, to my mind, is the fact that, even though it is painfully obvious that the “merry pranksters” we have installed as our “leaders” have been bereft of any shred of progressive, forward looking cognisance….A fact underlined by the half witted, self serving methods employed in the promotion of the self destructive, intellectually vacant repeating of mistakes made ad infinitum throughout the entire lifetime of the capitalist system,… by the very agencies charged with the job of maintaining an “informed electorate”…..WE keep electing them, for whatever reason our tiny little minds can latch on to….

    Why are we surprised by this latest attempt to steal “candy from babies”?? The merry pranksters have been waving semaphore flags at us for years now regarding how much they resent the working population having a share of “their” wealth…..Did we honestly expect them to suddenly, diametrically change their central philosophies once confronted with the realities of government?

    Now THAT would be naive, to say the least…

  3. RedLogix 3
    22 October 2012 at 11:53 am

    And then of course there is middle class debt slavery.

    I mean think about it. The average home is about 30 years old and was worth about $350,000 when it was built. (In today’s terms.)

    Yet in those 30 years the banks have made at least $1m in interest fees from the various mortgages held on that property. And it never gets paid off.

    This is exactly the same as the old American Company Town model, only with an extra layer of obfuscation thrown in to fool teh rubes.

    • bbfloyd 3.1
      22 October 2012 at 12:10 pm

      That puts me in mind of a hamster, constantly running inside the wheel…. always looking to his/her own “pot of gold” promised by their “betters”… always in sight, but never close enough to touch…

    • Colonial Viper 3.2
      22 October 2012 at 12:35 pm

      Can’t wait for debtors’ prisons to start up again. Ah bugger, better not give the pricks ideas eh.

    • RedLogix 5.1
      22 October 2012 at 12:54 pm

      Interestingly joe rather like the very similar problem with FGM, it is the older women who actively perpetuate the cycle on the younger generation.

      And what happens when these people simply say that these practises are an integral part of the their culture and us middle-class whitey imperialists should butt out?

      At some point cultural relativism breaks down and you have to be able to point to some universal values.

      • Colonial Viper 5.1.1
        22 October 2012 at 1:05 pm

        A society and it’s culture has to evolve over time. One can encourage it to do so in many different ways. But it takes time, and leaders from within their own people need to show the way.

        Or, one can choose to disrupt those cultures and societies in order to perpetuate ones own values on to those people more directly. The usual age old justification is that the “primitives need civilising”.

        First of all, I think Europe and the US need to deal with the massive issues of human trafficking, indentured labour and forced prostitution within those territories.

        Where there are zero issues of cultural imperialism or cultural relativity. But plenty of criminal profiteering with both politicians and authorities alike turning a blind eye.

        • RedLogix 5.1.1.1
          22 October 2012 at 1:21 pm

          I’ve always been leery of the limits of cultural relativism. It’s far to easy to justify any behaviour you want as ‘our culture’ and elevate what is really nothing more than a set of social habits to some kind of ethical absolute.

          Here’s an interesting question CV. Part of me clings to the idea that in the long run a globalised humanity will eventually need to point to a universal code of values in order to sustain a global civilisation.

          But can this be achieved without homogenising all the cultures into a ‘coffee coloured’ soup? Rather how the Boeing 747 in making all destinations equally accessible has tended to make them all equally the same?

    • AsleepWhileWalking 5.2
      22 October 2012 at 3:26 pm

      *grrrrr*

  6. captain hook 6
    22 October 2012 at 12:53 pm

    as Adam Smith opined in his first major work, The Theory Of Moral Sentiments, what gives human beings the most psychological satisfaction is command over labour.
    so inmost respects economic dominance is just a smokescreen to bend others to your will and make them obey or face the consequences.
    i.e. personal annihilation
    so the belief that economics is to provide material satisfaction is more marxist false consciousness.
    and Karol, fyi, the use of interrogatives is dishonest, disrespectful and an invalid mode of argument.
    isn’t it.

    • RedLogix 6.1
      22 October 2012 at 12:59 pm

      Yes. Adam Smith would be appalled at how his work has been selectively misrepresented and used to justify an economic theory utterly anti-ethical to him.

      Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ idea was only a very small part of his ideas, and even he recognised that the idea was largely an hypothetical stalking horse … whose completely unrealistic assumptions more or less proved that ‘free markets’ do not exist in the real world.

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.1
        22 October 2012 at 1:13 pm

        Yep. In his theory of moral sentiments, Smith also said that it was the nature of humans to want to benefit others and see others happy, even if it was for no direct advantage to oneself.

        Keynes effectively shot down every major aspect of Classical Economics and the more recent Neoclassical version is only classical economics suped up with a complexity of highly elegant looking maths.

        Which the likes of Steve Keen has shown to be completely unsatisfactory and wrong-headed theoretically, and which the likes of NZ has shown to be completely unsatisfactory and wrong-headed in real life.

    • karol 6.2
      22 October 2012 at 1:07 pm

      Karol, fyi, the use of interrogatives is dishonest, disrespectful and an invalid mode of argument.


      Mmm… I tend not to use questions in written articles or essays that have more space for developing an argument.  In the relatively limited space of a blog post, where people have the opportnity to respond or provide an alternative view, I use them more to indicate contentious or debateable points, or ones where people can add their own views or develop the argument.
       
      In this post, it quickly introduces a common belief that slavery is a thing of the past. Then I go on to argue against it.
       
      You make a very good point about the psychological satisfaction from having command over labour.

  7. asd 7
    22 October 2012 at 7:48 pm

    The first thing that popped into my head when i read the byline was that WINZ asked me to paticipate in Taskforce Green this week just gone to spray weeds in the Rangitikei region to which I replied I would probably not as I have job interviews on the horizon.

    I don’t know the full details of Taskforce Green and its remuneration but it strikes me as a subplot to get dole figures down and get work done ‘on the cheap’ instead of paying a living wage to those actually doing the work. Another version of ‘modern day slavery’ I would argue as: dole=$200 a week plus another $100 for Taskforce Green=$300 which wouldn’t barely rent a house where I live.

    • karol 7.1
      22 October 2012 at 9:14 pm

      Sounds like work for the dole with a new name.
       WINZ blurb about it include these points: 

      Taskforce Green is a subsidy that allows people to participate in project-based work where they can develop work habits and general on the job skills. This experience will help people progress towards unsubsidised, sustainable employment….
       
      [to employers] your project must be a fixed term community or environmental project that would otherwise not be done, must not displace existing employees, and must provide full-time work for one or more people.

       
      But I don’t see that spraying weeds is a great job opportunity providing training that will lead permanent and unsubsidised work.  Also, there doesn’t seem to be any requirement that employeers provide work that will meet WINZ’s stated aim.
       
       

  8. fatty 8
    22 October 2012 at 8:48 pm

    The perpetuation of slavery relied on it being seen as normal. The same process of normalisation is used today to justify poverty and economic slavery.
    Zizek describes how any desire for economic equality is shot down with claims of equality as being utopian.
    Our current form of capitalism has become so normalised that change is considered impossible, despite the belief that almost anything else is possible.

    • karol 8.1
      22 October 2012 at 9:00 pm

      Ah, Zizek always has a colourful way of expressing himself, and has some good ideas.  Here I feel he is reinforcing what I just heard Bomber, Trotter and Sue Bradford talk about on the Union Report – that the neoliberal way has entrenched individualistic attitudes.  Zizek was giving examples of people pursuing their own desires in a world where “everything is possible” – just not good health care for all.
       
      And also on the Union Report tonight on Triangle, Bradford was talking about the largely hidden exploitation of  immigrants in NZ.  She said it was far more widespread than people realised.  She referred to a very recent example in NZ, in which an immigrant woman was being treated as a slave.  Has anyone seen reports of this?  I was looking around online this morning to see what the situation was in NZ, and the only example I found was that of the immigrant nurses I mentioned in my post.

      • fatty 8.1.1
        23 October 2012 at 12:28 am

        I see the union report is up on the Citizen A youtube channel…thanks I’ll have to have a look at it.

        Interesting that – Bomber, Trotter and Sue Bradford talk about on the Union Report – that the neoliberal way has entrenched individualistic attitudes…

        I was watching another clip of Zizek the other day, he was talking about how free market capitalism does create an individualistic attitude, but at the same time it suppresses individualism. Zizek talked about how our desire for individuality is a sham, and the result of our so called individualism is that we all live the same life, chasing the same dream, and facing the same issues, etc.
        So the individualistic attitude really results in nothing but conformity.
        I think of this whenever I see a tattoo these days…just another tattoo – how ‘individualistic’ – yawn.

  9. Gosman 9
    23 October 2012 at 8:25 am

    Why didn’t the South African miner move his family closer to where he was working? There is no legal reason why he wouldn’t be able to do so anymore.

    Perhaps jobs are scarce in South Aftrica because the ANC led Government is corrupt, not focusing on fixing the problem, and the country is not friendly to businesses. That is supported by the following article in this weeks Economist magazine.

    http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21564829-it-has-made-progress-becoming-full-democracy-1994-failure-leadership-means

    • karol 9.1
      23 October 2012 at 9:08 am

      Did you actually read the full article, Gos, or just some of the headline?
       
      Of course, the Economist is going to be looking at the situation from a perspective that supports big multinationals doing business in South Africa, and not at the damage that such an attitiude of “business at all costs” does.
       
      Did you read this bit? – my bold.
       

      The past two months’ industrial strife is about more than just pay or perks. The protests are a symptom of the deep malaise that has taken hold of South Africa. The ANC was dealt a bad hand in 1994, and it has played that hand badly. South Africa’s difficulties are now so entrenched that the ANC looks incapable of solving them.

       
      The problem, the Economist won’t admit, is that the ANC tried to compromise with, and join in, with the international neoliberal ways of operating.  That has maintained the gross inequalities that existed before apartheid ended.  This is indicated in the article:
       

      The starkest measure of South Africa’s failure is the yawning gap between rich and poor. Under apartheid, such inequality was by design. Since apartheid came to an end, a tiny black elite has accrued great fortunes. …
       
      Persistent inequality is in part down to the government’s failure to educate young South Africans, particularly black ones….

       
      And did you see the sparse home – not much more than a mud hut, that the dead miners family live in? (Al Jazeera video).  Hardly evidence of ability to afford to be able to uproot the whole family and move to be near a mine.  At least they have fairly clean rural setting.  Unlike the kind of more urban township they’d have to move to – like the one in Soweto mentioned in the Economist article:
       

      As the birthplace of the new, inclusive South Africa, it has become a stop on the tourist trail. But just across the railway track, rickety shacks huddle together. The roads are rutted and muddy. Communal latrines stand useless, their doors open and rubbish piled inside. Next to them on the uneven ground wobbles a portable toilet, its door padlocked against vandals. A sludgy stream trickles past, fouled by children unable to find the key in time.

       
      So many contradictions in your comments, gos.  Think again.
       

      • Gosman 9.1.1
        23 October 2012 at 10:27 am

        “The problem, the Economist won’t admit, is that the ANC tried to compromise with, and join in, with the international neoliberal ways of operating. ”

        You mean they have to live in the real world. They don’t really. They could take the approach of any number of African nations and put two fingers up against those dreaded multinational companies. A recent example of one doing this was Zimbabwe. Worked a treat there.

        The main thrust of that article was that the ANC is not doing what would enable the people at the bottom to get ahead. Of course with your leftist view of the world I am sure you think it is because they aren’t taking enough from the wealthy.

  10. Gosman 10
    23 October 2012 at 8:45 am

    The case of the South African miner is not really a case support the modern day slavery theme of this post. Noone is arguing that South African mineworkers are being forced to work for a pittance. They are highly unionised and have high wages in the South African context.

    • karol 10.1
      23 October 2012 at 8:55 am

      They are highly unionised and have high wages in the South African context.
       
      Well, that’s not shown in your above link, Gos.  That link provides evidence of a highly unequal society, where work for unskilled people is hard to come by.  And the big corporates that are siphoning off large profits at the expense of these workers?

      • Gosman 10.1.1
        23 October 2012 at 9:05 am

        That article, (and others on that site), made it clear that Labour disputes were discouraging investment and many Mining companies were shedding staff.

        “The recent wave of industrial action will only bring that moment nearer. After the miners at Marikana won a handsome pay rise, 75,000 miners, chiefly of gold and platinum, went on strike, mostly illegally. Anglo American Platinum, the world’s largest platinum miner, has fired 12,000 workers. Gold One has sacked over 1,400.”

  11. Gosman 11
    23 October 2012 at 8:57 am

    “And how else can you describe the NAct government’s plan to cut youth wages, other than as wage-slavery.”

    You can make a quite compelling case that it is a policy to enable young people to get a foot in the door of employment. There is strong evidence that abolishing the Youth minimum wage led to big increase in Youth unemployment.

    • One Tāne Huna 11.1
      23 October 2012 at 9:00 am

      More bullshit from Gossamer. “You can make a case” – then make one, weasel. Don’t forget to factor in the downward pressure on adult wage levels in your sophistry.

    • KJT 11.2
      23 October 2012 at 9:18 am

      “Strong evidence” only exists in right wing fantasists excuse for a brain.

      Both MSD and the Labour department have said evidence supporting a youth rate was inconclusive at best.

      Most overseas research shows youth rates do not increase youth employment.

      Which reflects what we saw locally when there were youth rates. The employers which paid youth rates simply sacked slightly older workers, transferring unemployment from those who got youth rates to slightly older workers.

      However there is, irrefutable evidence that reducing wages, and austerity, reduces overall employment. Which impacts most on the young and low-skilled.

      • Gosman 11.2.1
        23 October 2012 at 10:08 am

        ‘“Strong evidence” only exists in right wing fantasists excuse for a brain.’

        A recent study on the topic suggests otherwise.

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2535043/senior-lecturer-in-economics-at-canterbury-university.asx

        • McFlock 11.2.1.1
          23 October 2012 at 11:30 am

          or rather the point is demonstrated nicely.
               
           

          • Gosman 11.2.1.1.1
            23 October 2012 at 11:46 am

            Care to expand on this comment?

            What about what the Economist from Canterbury University was discussing do you disagree with exactly?

            • McFlock 11.2.1.1.1.1
              23 October 2012 at 11:57 am

              Given that it was an interview which basically just rehashed the same old shit that has been discussed here ever since the youth rates changed (including apparently by Crampton himself) only without any challenge from the interviewer, pretty much everything.
                     
              I love the way that you capitalise professions when you reckon one of them agrees with you, by the way (“Economist”, “Epidemiologist”).
              It really helps underline the fact that you’re and Idiot. 

              • One Tāne Huna …
                23 October 2012 at 12:00 pm

                Do not attempt to fill the void that is Gossamer: you will just waste your time and energy and the void will enjoy it.

                • McFlock …
                  23 October 2012 at 12:10 pm

                  lol – yeah, that and work’s a bit busy today.
                     
                  He is a fascinating little insect, though – I wonder if he got up this morning, bright and cheerful, and said “I think I’ll defend slavery today”. Probably not – though I think his conscience would allow it, his self awareness doesn’t reach that far…

              • Gosman …
                23 October 2012 at 12:05 pm

                Ahhh…. I see. Because you and many other lefties at this site disagree with this study, (mainly on ideological grounds as far as I can tell), it must mean he is spouting crap.

                Wow, the left has a world of intellectual talent given the strength of that argument. Of course it is a pretty dead and barren world but a world nevertheless.

                • McFlock …
                  23 October 2012 at 12:22 pm

                  What study? You didn’t link to a study. He added nothing in the interview that hasn’t been said here – and found wanting.
                       
                  Oh, and if by “ideological grounds” you mean “pointing out that his model only worked if his assumptions like that ratios didn’t change over time were true”, then yeah he was spouting crap.
                       
                   

                  • Gosman …
                    23 October 2012 at 12:30 pm

                    Are you trying to argue that the person being interviewed did not in fact carry out a study on the topic?

                    As for his assumptions, I think he was extremely careful in pointing out that the results do not necessarily mean a causal relationship between unemployment and the abolition of the Youth minimum wage. It is just a very strong suggestion the two are linked AND you can’t blame the recession for the massive increase in Youth unemployment.

                    Perhaps you have another explanation for the massive increase. Maybe it is because now that National is in charge of the Treasury benches Employers turn into youth hating raving lunatics.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2012 at 12:40 pm

                      I was merely pointing out that the content of the interview added nothing to the debate on minimum wage. Again, you’re rerunning arguments already discussed. Repeatedly. 
                             
                      Such a shame you have the memory of a goldfish. 
                        

                    • Gosman …
                      23 October 2012 at 12:58 pm

                      I am pointing out the problem in the statement made in the original post where it was stated.

                      “And how else can you describe the NAct government’s plan to cut youth wages, other than as wage-slavery.”

                      Whether or not these arguments have been raised before is irrelevant in this context.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2012 at 1:11 pm

                      Whether or not these arguments have been raised before is irrelevant in this context.

                      Unless of course the arguments you are resurrecting have been demonstrated to be complete bullshit. Which I’ve linked to several times, but I’m sure that you haven’t bothered looking at those arguments simply because you left your Dr Seuss Dictionary at home.
                             
                      Bring a plate, or don’t come to the fucking party. Don’t find some leftover bolognese in someone else’s fridge and pretend like you just won My Kitchen Rules. 

                    • Gosman …
                      23 October 2012 at 1:29 pm

                      I disagree they have been demonstrated to be complete BS. You might not agree with them but they follow orthodox economic theory on demand and supply, (i.e. increased costs of a good or service leads to lesser demand in most cases), and the argument also has supporting evidence, (e.g. the study by Canterbury Uni), suggesting that this in fact occured in NZ.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2012 at 1:43 pm

                      If you think the debate against the BS was not over, then continue from the point of departure – why are you starting it from scratch, all over again?
                           
                      Secondly, are you actually committing to agreeing with Crampton’s idea that abolishing youth rates led to increased unemployment?
                             
                      Thirdly,  if you want to use the paper as support, cite it or link to it. At the moment you’re just linking to a mediocre interview that rehashes ground already discussed.

                      You can’t really argue that your idea has supporting evidence until you actually present the evidence.

                    • Gosman …
                      23 October 2012 at 1:47 pm

                      Where was this point of departure? All you provided around this was a bunch of threads from this site that supposedly deal with the minimum wage discussion. How am I meant to work out what the defining last point was meant to be?

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2012 at 1:55 pm

                      It’s called “reading”.
                         
                      Hell, you took part in a few of those arguments, you should be familiar enough with them. Unless your ego has taken over the memory centers of your brain.

                    • fatty …
                      23 October 2012 at 2:03 pm

                      “Are you trying to argue that the person being interviewed did not in fact carry out a study on the topic?”

                      Do you have a link to the study?…his statements have so many holes in them. The recession is there, he apparently says that’s not an issue, but doesn’t expand on that. This recession has impacted massively on youth in all areas. I cannot understand his logic.
                      But I guess that’s the UC economics department for you!…they are not the tools in the toolbox. They forced out Paul Dalziel to Lincoln Uni years ago. Dalziel would own those UC economic simpletons in his sleep.
                      A quick search for Eric Crampton shows how much of a B-grade economist he really is. Kiwi blog use his analysis of National Standards for a post…it appears as if Crampton enjoys using flawed stats to push his ideology.

                      How does this noddy economist (who wastes his time crunching National Standards numbers) explain the youth unemployment during 2008 in the UK, throughout the world (read the first paragraph), and throughout the EU (look at the table on page 43, you will see that 2008 was an extraordinary year for youth unemployment growth in the developed countries and the EU).

                      I’ll need more than a UC economist talking for 5 mins to make me believe that the recession is not to blame, and that the end of the youth wage caused youth unemployment in 2008…5 mins on google suggests that Eric Crampton is an idiot…I’d be interested to read his study if there ever was one.

  12. captain hook 12
    23 October 2012 at 12:06 pm

    gosman never makes a case.
    he is just here to confabulate and confuse and send people off on wild gosman chases.
    so gosman why don tyou just fuck off till you have something to say.

    • Gosman 12.1
      23 October 2012 at 12:12 pm

      Because I haven’t breeched any major terms and conditions of this site and I enjoy seeing many of you turning yourself inside out trying to avoid any uncomfortable points I raise in relation to the downsides of your dodgy thinking.

      • McFlock 12.1.1
        23 October 2012 at 12:27 pm

        MUCH LOLZ

        • Gosman 12.1.1.1
          23 October 2012 at 12:32 pm

          I especially enjoy watching you switch your position 180 degrees simply because of your dislike of anything that could be remotely linked to the National party. Your views on devaluation have provided me much meriment recently.

          • McFlock 12.1.1.1.1
            23 October 2012 at 12:43 pm

            My views on relative currency values (like most things) have been consistent. The trouble is that you’re a moron. Sorry, “Moron”.

            • Gosman 12.1.1.1.1.1
              23 October 2012 at 1:34 pm

              The trouble is you don’t undertsand economics much at all as evidenced by you trying to have your cake and eat it over a ‘managed’ devaluation by 15% over an extended period which completely ignored the reality of what trying to do so would lead to.

              • McFlock …
                23 October 2012 at 1:49 pm

                The trouble is that you don’t think for yourself – you just spout out like a fresher econ student who has a crush on their neolib lecturer.
                     
                Shame the world is more complex than a slide rule. 
                   
                Oh, and I counter your argument about the exchange rate with the FACT that the Reserve Bank already influences macroeconomic variables via the OCR. Fairly competently, too.

                • Gosman …
                  23 October 2012 at 1:58 pm

                  I acknowledge it is complex. This is why there are unintended consequences for ALL policy decisions regardless of them being inspired by left or right wing politics. You on the other hand seem to live in a Pollyannaish world where Exchange rates can be ‘managed’ downward by 15% over an extended period of time with little to no problems. That to me suggests someone who has virtually NO understanding of how the real world works in terms of economics.

                  • McFlock …
                    23 October 2012 at 2:07 pm

                    been on the weed again, have you? Forgetting recent arguments?
                       
                    I note with that one that you also ran crying behind “but MY views are orthodox! waaah!”.
                         
                    You have the balls to argue that whether you’re emotionally attached to an argument does not affect its validity when you have a habit of appealing to authority. Dickhead.

      • vto 12.1.2
        23 October 2012 at 12:32 pm

        But you avoid uncomfortable points all of the time mr gosman. If you are unable to answer an issue you simply pose a question mildly indirectly related and pretend the main question doesn’t exist.

        As an example, I often pose the point that nobody on the right has explained how having foreign landlords is good for NZ, and you bounce around the edges of its but, like all other pro-foreign landlorders, you never actually answer the point.
        …
        ..
        .

        • Gosman 12.1.2.1
          23 October 2012 at 12:37 pm

          I have answered that question numerous times. You simply disagree with my view on the subject. But just for you I will paraphase the argument once more:

          ‘NZers can possibly get a better return from the capital invested here to purchase the land from other economic outlets and/or the productivity from the land owned by the foreigners can increase at a greater rate than if it remained NZ owned.’

          Now I am quite happy if you disagree with this argument. However you are quite wrong to continue this BS of stating noone has given you an argument. Noone has given you an argument you accept is quite different proposition.

          • vto 12.1.2.1.1
            23 October 2012 at 1:46 pm

            Your argument that somehow all arguments are equal is the BS.

            That is like saying John Key’s answers of “um, don’t know can’t recall, not my job, can’t remember” are actually answers. They are not.

      • One Tāne Huna 12.1.3
        23 October 2012 at 12:52 pm

        …uncomfortable points…?

        You flatter yourself. When was the last time you made a “point” – all I ever see is empty questions and long bows.

        • Gosman 12.1.3.1
          23 October 2012 at 12:55 pm

          I think I made a point about a case to be made in relation to the benefits of reintroducing a form of minimum wage for youth. If you disagree with this being a point casre to discuss why it isn’t?

          • One Tāne Huna 12.1.3.1.1
            23 October 2012 at 1:01 pm

            1. You didn’t make the case, so why would I bother?

            2. What McFlock said.

            • Gosman 12.1.3.1.1.1
              23 October 2012 at 1:08 pm

              I did make the case. Simply because you disagree with my arguments doen’t mean a case hasn’t been made.

          • McFlock 12.1.3.1.2
            23 October 2012 at 1:02 pm

            You rehashed a bullshit argument that has been eviscerated several times by commenters and authors on TS. You didn’t even have the balls to own your “point”, you merely suggested that a case could be made (not by you) and then hid behind the coattails of an msm interview with an economist (sorry, “Economist”). That’s not “making a point”, that’s attempting to steal other people’s intellectual credit while risking none yourself (i.e. you left yourself leeway to argue that you had merely put the point up for discussion, you had never believed it yourself).
                     
            Your ego’s writing cheques your IQ can’t cash. 

            • Gosman 12.1.3.1.2.1
              23 October 2012 at 1:10 pm

              Wether I personally agree with the argument is irrelevant. You might wish to have some emotional attachment to ideas or concepts but that doesn’t imbue them with any more or less validity.

              • McFlock …
                23 October 2012 at 1:28 pm

                It wasn’t the validity of the ideas I was criticising just then – the ideas have been defenestrated repeatedly. 
                   
                It was the lack of intellectual courage you show by refusing to commit to the ideas you put forward. As well as the dishonesty you exhibit when you try to pretend that you are interested in a discussion, when in fact you are merely recycling arguments that have been done to death in this very forum ad nauseum.
                           
                I guess all I’m really asking is that you go away, have a think, and bring something back to the table that YOU developed, believe in, and are prepared to defend yourself. Otherwise you’re just a shallow jellyfish of a waste of space.

                • Gosman …
                  23 October 2012 at 1:37 pm

                  No, you and many other leftists from this site quite obviously disagree with the arguments. That doesn’t mean the arguments cease to exist if you believe there is a sufficiently persuassive counter argument.

                  Funnily enough there is not one ‘right’ way of doing things McFop despite your wishes for it to be the case. ALL policies have pros and cons, even your precious leftists ones.

                  • McFlock …
                    23 October 2012 at 1:53 pm

                    It means the arguments cease to be valid, or at the very least reasonably plausible to anyone except the most stupid tory teabagger.
                           
                    The same reason you’d tell me to fuck off if I said that the exchange rate will increase because I read it in tea leaves. The argument would “still exist”, but only a moron would believe it. And then after the exchange rate actually falls, I’d just respond that if it weren’t for my tea leaves it would have fallen even farther.

                • Gosman …
                  23 October 2012 at 1:54 pm

                  Funnily enough a number of those threads you linked make little, or NO, reference to debates about the youth minimum wage. They hardly support your view that this debate has been dealt with here before in any meaningful way.

                  • McFlock …
                    23 October 2012 at 1:58 pm

                    “a number”
                    “little or ”
                    “youth minimum wage” (as opposed to minimum wage or cost of labour, which are relevant to YMW).
                         
                    Weasel fucking words. 
                         
                     

                    • Rogue Trooper …
                      23 October 2012 at 5:43 pm

                      I’ll just pop into this slavery thread ( I actually read most comments when I Standardize) hi flockie, hookie and contrary-one; back so soon from vertical-take-off?
                      well I suppose
                      time slavery
                      sugar slavery
                      cosmetic slavery
                      hygiene slavery
                      media slavery
                      caffeine slavery
                      nicotine slavery
                      oil slavery
                      automotive slavery
                      minimum-wage slavery
                      capitalist slavery
                      economic slavery
                      colonial slavery
                      property slavery
                      status slavery
                      curriculum slavery
                      credential slavery
                      ideological slavery
                      Propaganda slavery
                      religious slavery
                      pharmaceutical slavery
                      technology slavery
                      patriarchal slavery
                      matriarchal slavery
                      therapy slavery (psycho-analytic,behavioural, cognitive)ooh, I like that line

                      now,
                      to get to the nous of the matter, behind the discursive reason and the affective emotional state
                      cura animarum
                      -healing
                      -sustaining
                      -reconciling
                      -guiding

                      “Therapy” (yuck)- ‘normal making’
                      Spiritual Direction- Abnormal making
                      (gettin some theocentric healing goin on as opposed to anthropocentric)

                      the healing of meaning;
                      listening to life stories
                      not just self and self conflicts
                      also experience of, and relationships with
                      God Others World and Self

                      dum de doo..
                      🙂

  13. captain hook 13
    23 October 2012 at 1:45 pm

    gooseman you dont make any arguments at all.
    all you do is fly kites with no substance.
    just like the tories do in parliament.
    their programme is to loot the treasury and overlay their depredations with a whole lot of meaningless nonsense.
    just like you do here.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.