Modern Day Slavery in America

Welp I'm not going to touch that slavery issue with a ten foot pole, but that college debt is definitely a huge problem not just for Americans but for almost everyone in the world. Hard to tell someone don't go down that path of not getting a degree, when every bloody company in the world asked for a minimum of a Degree for those jobs, and to migrate you need a bloody Degree as well. Two choice, get a degree and be inundated with debt but have a fighting chance of getting a job, or no degree, and will probably have very little chance to get a job that pays well, and stuck unable to migrate elsewhere. Its quite a vicious cycle IMO, as company want people with skills and experience, and to get those you need to join a company. Without that paper printed in those expensive af universities, chances are not many will even consider you. There are a few sectors that company don't mind self learn skills but those are quite few and far in between. Even worst when you are a dropout but still have to carry the same burden of that debt. Sucks to be me. But at least I've finished paying off that debt a few years back. Working part time does help you to avoid those nasty debt, which what I've done when studying in Japan (it cost 10k USD per year for just the school fees ffs) you will lose out on all the good times of being a student, but you gotta do what you gotta do when you didn't win the lottery of being born in a 1st world country or into a wealthy family.

First things first, the title is pure click bait. If you wanted to talk about debt without people complaining you should've put debt somewhere in the title. Even if you said "debt slavery." I find the comparison rather distasteful, but I have no qualms when used in the correct context. A blanket statement about "modern day slavery" in the title doesn't define the context. If you want modern day slavery go read about that man in Bucks County, PA and those girls he kept captive. Second, while I have no qualm with the term debt slavery I do find that this thread does exhibit a lack of respect for historical context of the word slavery and the phrase debt slavery. It seems that the way you use the phrase "debt slavery" is to make use of bleak nature of the word "slave." But what does the phrase really mean? I can be in debt to my neighbor, but that doesn't make me the neighbor's "slave", just the same as a student can be in debt to the government without being a "slave." However, debt slavery is state where the debtor not only owes money but has their autonomy restricted, and this second part is essential because that's where the "slave" part comes in. Sure people who owe a lot of money may have difficulties - that's a natural part of debt in general. What you're referring to here doesn't really qualify as true debt slavery, but it is a reasonable extrapolation because students do have to work to pay off their debt. However, they are expected to ultimately gain benefit in the form of education and higher wages (whether they actually get the benefit is a different story), whereas a true debt slave gains no benefit from going into debt and is thereafter forced into working (not simply paying) off that debt in ways defined by the debtee. The key to your argument are those who end up graduating from college and then end up in a poorly paying job (or no job). These people are very close to meeting the definition of debt slaves except that they weren't forced into that position and they aren't bound to stay in that position. This brings forth the alternate names for debt slavery - debt bondage and bonded labor. Third, finally onto your topic of concern. Student debt is a major problem. I'm well aware as I'm almost certainly in more debt than anyone here. Of course, I chose my path knowing that this would be the result and that I'll probably be paying off my debt for most of my life. And right now, I'm literally working at the hospital and paying to do it, which brings up an important part of the whole situation, expectations. I expect to gain a quality medical education by doing this and ultimately a degree that allows me to practice medicine. When people go to college they expect (or at least should expect) to gain an education and the 'opportunity' for a quality job. That's a little different than the situation that I'm in. I will have a job when I get my degree (it's a bit more complicated than that, but let's make this simple), and someone graduating from college will have to apply for jobs. Therefore, the value of their degree is more strongly dictated by the job market than mine (again there are a number of ways the job market would affect me too). A bad job market devalues the degree, and sometimes to the point that the person paid more than the degree is worth. Of course there are other factors like how well the person did and what they got their degree in. If you're going to go in debt for your education you probably shouldn't end up with a degree in art history. This does narrow down the paths that people should choose to take (if they are thinking about the money), but that's how life is unless you're just really lucky. Now, I also have some thoughts as to how all of this came about. The reality of inequality is that people are left to fight with each other over not enough resources (money or jobs), which drives demand and makes those resources even harder to get. There are a few things which I feel support this concept. First, we have twice the population in the U.S. than in the 1950s and even more than 100million more people than in the 1970s. All those people are going to be fighting over the same resources because the upper class won't relinquish anything that they have. Now, you also have to consider that prior to the civil rights movement there was also a significant segment of the population that was almost essentially forced into being low class. This segment is also now able to more freely fight for those resources. So what you have is a small percentage of upper class persons with protected finances and an increasingly larger number of people fighting over resources that haven't really increased at the same rate as the population, and this leads to a bigger gap. This doesn't even mention how our economy has continually shifted from manufacturing which doesn't require an education to service which requires more education. It's just a theory that I haven't really thought out, but income inequality started shooting up in the 1970s after the baby boomers started becoming adults and after the civil rights movement. This also corresponds with rise in college tuition that seems to have started right around 1980. Even the percentage of the population in college (in addition to absolute number of students) has been increasingly since the 1970s. Denmark, regularly considered a prime example of wealth equality has 5.6 million people. That's less than the population of a few cities in the U.S. Not to mention they have a very homogeneous population. It's obvious we have a problem, so the question is now what? We can't just make college cost less, because then taxes go up a lot and the people who are already in debt will carry an unfair burden. And any solution must also take into consideration how so many American students are ill prepared for college. Higher education may put people in debt, but our primary and secondary education system in the U.S. is rather pathetic. In conclusion, the system is very flawed and it has to change but how to change it is another problem.

Holy hell. Stop whining. "Debt Slavery," is a coined term whether you think it's distasteful or not. It doesn't matter if you don't like the sound of it. Get the hell over the use of the word slavery. No one alive today has gone through or partaken in systemic (racial) slavery, so just shut the hell up about it. No he SHOULDN'T have to be careful not to offend others with a thread title. ESPECIALLY when using TERMS RECOGNIZED BY THE DAMN UNITED NATIONS of all fucking things. Get over yourselves. This is not a discussion about the term slavery. It's a discussion of actual, real debt slavery that runs rabid in the first world countries of today. So please, just stop with the offended comments and comparisons to past systemic slavery.

^agree with Gudmoore completely, but kudos to you drmario to think of a well thought out counter argument. What was lacking in your argument is that you used your own experience as a focal point to what is really going on. You are in debt for a degree that is actually worth something. But what about the colleges that falsify job placment rates, or the art colleges that spend massive amounts of cash (mostly taxpayer's money from defaulted loans) to promote their college and get even more victems? What about the mother who studied law and fell down the rabbit hole and is now 120k in dept? Not only can she support her child with a degree, she has nothing to provide him with because she will die with that debt. People are fooled and coaxed into getting art degrees. Kids wanting to follow their dreams. They take advantage of that and latch onto it like a leach. They give you a painting degree at the cost of 50k. There goes another student's life, washed down the toilet to pay for advertising to get more victims. I disagree with you mario that colleges should still have the same level of funding so that they don't collapse. I think they can go without a few statues or ballroom staircases. I think they can go without the private ranches and multiple elegant pools and private jets of the for-profit colledges. Take a look at the money trail. How much of that money is actually going to the teachers to provide the service in the first place?

@Gudmoore it doesn't sound like you read what I said. Since my text is quite long let me point out that specifically said I have no qualm with the term debt slavery. I then went on to explain the definition, which as you pointed out is recognized by the UN. But what you don't seem to get is that just because a person owes a massive amount of money, they aren't necessarily a debt slave by definition since they aren't bound to the labor. Agregioius yes, but the definition is the definition, and I even said that this extrapolation is reasonable. @Arc I never commented on the amount of funding colleges should receive, so I don't know how you can disagree or agree with me about that. I also specifically pointed out how my experience is different from the undergraduate experience - you refer to falsified job placement rates, and I can't confirm the truth of that but I did very clearly mention the importance of the job market. Also, I would completely agree that your examples are agregious, but I hope you realize that a single mother with 120k education debt is rare. I know you're just trying to point out an example, but exaggeration doesn't help your argument. Certainly universities appear to pull off some con jobs. I recently read about an MFA program at USC that is now getting flack for not living up to their educational promises. And shame on them for that. But that are many terrible things that happen to people financially that put them in debt and doesn't necessarily qualify for the full definition of debt slavery. And I'm sure there are some debt slaves in this country. However, in general student debt doesn't equate to debt slavery. Perhaps there should be some sort of new term, or maybe the UN should update their definition. As it is now, forced labor is an absolute requirement of the definition.

@drmario I was referring to this: " We can't just make college cost less, because then taxes go up a lot and the people who are already in debt will carry an unfair burden." The thing is, you can make college cost a lot less. My specific case was no exaggeration. To be exact she was 126k in the hole. But does it matter if I cite an example from somebody who is 100k rather than someone who is 50k in debt? It ruins lives regardless. When you have a trillion dollars in debt from a couple million graduates, there is an obvious problem that needs to be addressed. About what you said about debt slaves term coined by the UN: I haven't researched what exactly it means by U.N. standards, but the wage slavery from these college loans is not something you can just stop paying. College grad wage slaves are bound to pay back the loans by any means until it is payed in full, or until they are rendered comatose, or if they die. Even then, the loaners hound the grieving family members. I suppose one could refuse the loans and default on all of them. The taxpayers pick up the tab, the graduate lives in poverty with destroyed credit and no way to ever save up money for retirement. It all depends on how you define "bound to labor".

"We can't JUST make colleges cost less." Just as in only, as in not something to be fixed with a magic wand by doing one thing, lowering cost. It should be obvious that I think college should cost less, but it's part of a whole economy and cannot be isolated by itself. And surely you understand that the very nature of debt is that you have to pay it back. And most people would need to work to make the money to pay it back. But most people aren't forced into labor by the debtee to do what the debtee wants them to do or forced to work at low wages with no way out or alternatives, hence the addition of the word slavery. What you're talking about aren't people who are bound to labor because they can get paid reasonable wages or change jobs. Their problem is the amount of the debt and the job market, not that they are in forced labor because of their debt. Both significant problems, but they are different problems. Now, I will also say again, that it is reasonable to extrapolate the definition to cover those people, especially since there is no term that I know of that is more appropriate. However, there is a sense of not acknowledging the millions of people across the world who are true debt slaves and work for terrible or no wages in poor conditions because of a debt. They have zero prospect for changing jobs. The reason the UN had to address this problem is because so many people are taken advantage of due to their debt by entrapping them into what would have be slavery if not for the debt. The UN needed to show that this is just as much a form of slavery as if these people were forced into labor without a debt. In essence, having to work to pay something doesn't equate to bonded labor. People have to work to pay for food, shelter, taxes, etc. In some respects people are "forced" to work because of this, and having to pay a debt is no debt. Bonded labor comes in when the debtee uses the debt to gain access to a low-wage workforce that must do their bidding (I.e. you owe me money so I'm going to have you work in my sweatshop 16 hours a day for a penny on the dollar for the next ten years and you can't do anything else with your life). It doesn't really matter how much debt someone is in that you cite. That's why I said it doesn't help your argument. Debt slavery isn't determined by the amount of debt that someone is in. Makes for a crappy life, yes a thousand times over. System needs to be changed, again, no question about it. But most of these people simply don't meet the definition for debt slavery. What would qualify as debt slavery is let's say a company gives a loan to a student so he can finish college. Now in return, the student then works for the company 80 -100 hours a week as a low level employee paid minimum wage or less and no opportunity to change position or jobs. The thing is that the company would have no way of forcing this graduate (assuming he's a citizen) to do things their way and thus this is purely hypothetical. However, I am aware of debt slaves in this country who are illegal immigrants and owe someone for helping them, but they can't do anything about it without being deported. I think the main point is that most graduates are free to try and find a way to pay off their debt (limited of course by the job market and by how much debt they have), and debt slaves lose their freedom to their debtee. By the way, thanks for this conversation, it gives me a break from studying and I am also learning from it.

Well, it's always good to debate with someone who isn't stupid. There are varying levels of debt slavery in the world, but the one thing that they have in common is that they are all on a leash. The leash may be longer in some aspects. For example, the american graduate. They don't care how you get the money as long as you get the money. However in places like Dubai, immigrants are taken in to work on construction projects with the promise of a better life. When they get there the only way they can get paid for work is to give their greencards over to the construction company. The company charges a greencard renewal fee, which keeps them perpetually locked in their job because they can't pay it. That is a debt slave in the worst form of the term. As for the title of this thread that has "modern day slavery" in it, this article I will reference has the exact same title: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-debt-matrix-consumption-and-modern-day-slavery/5359923 If anyone wants to give me flak for it you can start by sending an e-mail to the Center for Research on Globalization. Also, the article is an interesting read so I decided to share it. It's a couple of years old, so the situation is even worse than when this article was written.

Dude that's totally not a reliable website. It's rife with unfounded conspiracy theories. But even the author of that piece did use the word debt in the title. And everyone has some sort "leash" as you call it. When people talk about freedom, it doesn't mean you can do anything you want. If you borrow money, it should in good conscience be paid back. If you borrow 50k from the government, then you should pay back that 50k. Whether that's a good investment or not is a different story. You even said "they don't care how you get the money as long as you get the money." Which is exactly why it isn't debt slavery. The graduates are forced to do things against their will, except to fulfill the responsibility of paying back the debt. And that word responsibility is important, you can't just take money from someone and go merrily on your way. You are responsible for paying that money back. How you do that is up to you. If you struggle to pay it back because it's too much, then that's a different kind of problem. When you are a debt slave, how you pay that money back is not up to you. For debt slaves, they fulfill their role of subjugation rather than a responsibility. Your example of Dubai is indeed an example of debt slavery.