There's no "Company Store" where you get deeper in debt to your employeer. No indentured servitude. No one forcing you to work there (quit anytime for a better job). Etc.

I don't like what I hear about working conditions and agree it should be improved, and I also agree this is not slavery.

I don’t disagree but only on the concept of chattel slavery, there are other forms of slavery. The idea that there are better jobs for every single employee there isn’t true. Amazon knows that, you know that, the parent knows that. And since people have to work to survive, it is a bit of a trap or a form of wage slavery.

But then if you sit around on welfare, you’re demonized less than a worker that undoubtably contributes to society. If you ask for a pay raise and a union, the propaganda goes in full affect.

Resistance to improving working conditions seems to be almost as strong as resistance to ending slavery in the south as well.

Regardless of the use of the word slavery, I’m all for supporting the people who actually work on the bottom rung. Wage competition between union and salary jobs are the main reason things are as good as they even are in the US today.

Just as the means of production have evolved so too have the means of oppression and control. Not that I'm putting words in OP's mouth, but I'm sure they are not making a direct comparison of "this is just like that," more a "This is the modern version of that."

It’s not the modern version of slavery though. The modern version of slavery is indentured workers in Dubai, prisoners is the U.S., sex trafficking victims.

Given that the US still prosecutes people for slavery, it's easy to argue that modern day slavery exists, and this is not it.

It's such a gross misuse of the word.

Amazon employees are voluntary and by definition would rather have the job than not. It's nothing like slavery. Saying it is waters the concept down and is incredibly disrespectful to those who were actual slaves.

That doesn't mean the job shouldn't be improved, but anyone equating it to slavery loses all credibility and can't be taken seriously.

>I see “modern day slavery” and I stop reading. There are no whips. No rape. No families torn apart. No slave ships. Grow up people.

You stopped reading because there were no practices of old school slavery in the so called modern day slavery?

Modern days slavery is still slavery... Blood diamond harvesting, US prisoners used as unpaid work force, sex workers, sweat shops in foreign countries.

Amazon work conditions suck, but not modern day slavery bad.

Chattel slavery is only one form of slavery.

What would 'modern day slavery' look like? And what would be the most appropriate phrase for the scenario described in the link?

There is still actual old school slavery around. Mostly in the third world: https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/modern-slavery/

What to call it when US Ivy League graduates are shocked to discover that they share a country with blue collar workers, I don't know...

One obvious example of modern day slavery in the United States is prison labor. It's not rare, and it's still disproportionately black people because of our racist "justice" system.

Is your argument that all demographics commit crime at the same rate? For example the vast majority of those incarcerated are in for violent crime, and a significant number of those involve killing.

I think the argument is that the treatment is inhumane because of the demographics involved.

Modern-day slavery looks like someone kidnapping you and forcing you to work in a brick kiln because they showed you the equivalent of $200 USD before taking it away from you and so now you "owe them money".

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27486450

Computer vision driven whips obviously

The thing is, their is a reason they say "modern day slavery" and not "slavery." The implication here is that just because there are no actual whips, no literal rape, and no families torn apart forever doesn't mean we should think this is acceptable. It's the modern equivalent of slavery. No, it's not slavery with whips and rape. It's a different type of slavery. Hence the qualifier.

Anyways, I did you the service of explaining why you would get voted down. If you aren't going to read something, and you have nothing useful to add, don't bother commenting. Comments like yours don't contribute anything useful and only harm HN.

I appreciate you taking the time to reply with why you believe the other poster is wrong. Too many people just downvote and move on without giving the opportunity to let others learn.

However, I think you're wrong. There is slavery today with rape, murder, physical control, etc. When I see "Modern day slavery" or the "modern equivalent" is still just "slavery".

There is indeed slavery today with rape, murder and physical control - so I don't think the term "modern day slavery" is accurate save for some explanation as to what the "modern day" part means. Language doesn't necessarily work in a linear way - it's entirely possible for "slavery", "modern slavery" and "modern day slavery" to all refer to different concepts. Someone else in this same comment thread even uses the term "old-school slavery". Nevertheless, the term "wage slavery" has gained increasing usage, and comparisons of the wage system to slavery go back a long time, even when the plight of slaves was evident at the time. Keep in mind that the author of this quote was an ardent abolitionist too:

>The only difference as compared with the old, outspoken slavery is this, that the worker of today seems to be free because he is not sold once for all, but piecemeal by the day, the week, the year, and because no one owner sells him to another, but he is forced to sell himself in this way instead, being the slave of no particular person, but of the whole property-holding class.

> There is slavery today

Yes, there is. That's slavery.

> When I see "Modern day slavery" or the "modern equivalent" is still just "slavery".

I don't understand. It seems like you missed a word, and however I try, I cannot figure out what you mean.

Slaves couldn't quit their jobs if they were unhappy about it. That is one of the defining aspects of slavery.

If your choice is unemployment and not being able to afford the basic necessities, what choice do you have?

I mean, sure, you could quit and give up those those things. But then by that line of thinking, slaves could technically stop being slaves if they wanted to.

In both cases, the individuals are worse off. But I don't think that's the bar we should be shooting for.

I guess the real question is: are you okay with conditions Amazon has for it's Fulfillment center employees? Or are you just wasting people's time whining about the word "slavery?"

The choice would be looking for another job. A choice that slaves didn't have. By your definition, everybody is a slave, who is not so rich that they can afford to stop working.

As for Amazon's Fulfillment centers, I'd like to read a statement by their operators before making a judgement. I suspect it is not as easy to make unskilled workers do useful work as many people think.