Conquer Club

Slavery Is Everywhere

“There are tens of millions of people trapped in various forms of slavery throughout the world today. Researchers estimate that 40 million are enslaved worldwide, generating $150 billion each year in illicit profits for traffickers.”

“New slavery has two chief characteristics—it’s cheap and it’s disposable. Slaves today are cheaper than ever. In 1850, an average slave in the American South cost the equivalent of $40,000 in today’s money. Today a slave costs about $90 on average worldwide.”

“Slavery flows into our homes, offices, and schools through many of the products we buy. Slaves harvest cocoa in West Africa, and it ends up in our chocolate. Slaves make charcoal in Brazil, which is used to run smelters that make steel for our cars. Many food products and raw materials are tainted by slavery—such as tomatoes, tuna, shrimp, cotton, diamonds, iron, sugar, and gold. ”

“We all have a role to play in bringing slavery to an end. Although there are more people in slavery today than ever before, slavery represents the smallest percentage of the world’s population than at any other time in history.”

https://www.freetheslaves.net/our-model ... ery-today/

armati wrote:Slavery Is Everywhere

“There are tens of millions of people trapped in various forms of slavery throughout the world today. Researchers estimate that 40 million are enslaved worldwide, generating $150 billion each year in illicit profits for traffickers.”

“New slavery has two chief characteristics—it’s cheap and it’s disposable. Slaves today are cheaper than ever. In 1850, an average slave in the American South cost the equivalent of $40,000 in today’s money. Today a slave costs about $90 on average worldwide.”

“Slavery flows into our homes, offices, and schools through many of the products we buy. Slaves harvest cocoa in West Africa, and it ends up in our chocolate. Slaves make charcoal in Brazil, which is used to run smelters that make steel for our cars. Many food products and raw materials are tainted by slavery—such as tomatoes, tuna, shrimp, cotton, diamonds, iron, sugar, and gold. ”

“We all have a role to play in bringing slavery to an end. Although there are more people in slavery today than ever before, slavery represents the smallest percentage of the world’s population than at any other time in history.”

https://www.freetheslaves.net/our-model ... ery-today/

When 3 Billionaires own as much as the bottom 50% of American families....slavery in America is real. Theft from the working class and the decline of the Middle Class is a fact that needs to be corrected.

Tax cuts to the rich who have seen their real income increase the last few decades and the stagnant wages of the working class needs to be corrected by government. Capitalism with regulations and a true progressive tax system will protect us from a revolution that could tear our country apart.

Bernie Sanders wrote:

armati wrote:Slavery Is Everywhere

“There are tens of millions of people trapped in various forms of slavery throughout the world today. Researchers estimate that 40 million are enslaved worldwide, generating $150 billion each year in illicit profits for traffickers.”

“New slavery has two chief characteristics—it’s cheap and it’s disposable. Slaves today are cheaper than ever. In 1850, an average slave in the American South cost the equivalent of $40,000 in today’s money. Today a slave costs about $90 on average worldwide.”

“Slavery flows into our homes, offices, and schools through many of the products we buy. Slaves harvest cocoa in West Africa, and it ends up in our chocolate. Slaves make charcoal in Brazil, which is used to run smelters that make steel for our cars. Many food products and raw materials are tainted by slavery—such as tomatoes, tuna, shrimp, cotton, diamonds, iron, sugar, and gold. ”

“We all have a role to play in bringing slavery to an end. Although there are more people in slavery today than ever before, slavery represents the smallest percentage of the world’s population than at any other time in history.”

https://www.freetheslaves.net/our-model ... ery-today/

When 3 Billionaires own as much as the bottom 50% of American families....slavery in America is real.

It exists in the US anyway:

More than 400,000 people could be living in “modern slavery” in the US, a condition of servitude broadly defined in a new study as forced and state-imposed labor, sexual servitude and forced marriage.

Note the inclusion of state-imposed labor. Prisoners who made to undertake manual labor for free are slaves.

400,000 slaves in the US in 2018. Only an estimated 350,000 slaves in the US back in the era of the cotton plantation. You do the sums.

Bernie Sanders wrote:When 3 Billionaires own as much as the bottom 50% of American families....slavery in America is real. Theft from the working class and the decline of the Middle Class is a fact that needs to be corrected.

That has got to be the biggest pile of crap I have seen on the internet all week. It's a good example of a "first world" problem. You don't know real slavery.

When 3 Billionaires own as much as the bottom 50% of American families... it is clear to the casual observer that wealth is both non linear and abstract. I find it interesting that you mention "American families."

So let's start with a brief search of the internet. Let's start off with wiseGEEK

In fact, the poorest Americans living in the United States are financially better off than people living in Brazil, China and India. Overall, US citizens who account for the lowest 5% of income in the nation are richer than just under 70% of the remaining citizens of the world. When factors such as the gross domestic product (GDP) are considered along with average country income or individual GDP, the degree of income inequality is even more apparent.

At the other end of the spectrum, the poorest Americans in the lowest 5% income range still enjoy a greater level of wealth than the richest 5% in the nation of India.

So, yea, being wealthier than the richest 5% of India isn't slavery. So what is? Well in order to know slavery you have to know liberty, because slavery is the opposite of liberty. Of course socialists like you don't understand liberty and thus cannot understand slavery, because socialism in effect mandates slavery.

if liberty is "The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing" then slavery is the opposite, being forced to act, believe or express oneself in one's own manner of choosing.

If liberty is "The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor," then confinement, servitude and forced labor is slavery.

In short, the wealth of a third person has squat to do with my own liberty. It is only when that wealth is used to deliberately force my labor, induce my servitude, and confine my expression that it becomes slavery.

Standard of living/quality of life is more a more meaningful measure than a simple measure of how many USD someone has.

$15,000 a year would get you a pretty comfy life in most Chinese cities, whereas in the US that would probably barely even have you living in some shitty bedsit eating toast every night.

"In fact, the poorest Americans living in the United States are financially better off than people living in Brazil, China and India.

Overall, US citizens who account for the lowest 5% of income in the nation are richer than just under 70% of the remaining citizens of the world.

When factors such as the gross domestic product (GDP) are considered along with average country income or individual GDP, the degree of income inequality is even more apparent.

At the other end of the spectrum, the poorest Americans in the lowest 5% income range still enjoy a greater level of wealth than the richest 5% in the nation of India."


Sumtin smells here.

Wouldnt be yankee propaganda would it?

armati wrote:"In fact, the poorest Americans living in the United States are financially better off than people living in Brazil, China and India.

Overall, US citizens who account for the lowest 5% of income in the nation are richer than just under 70% of the remaining citizens of the world.

When factors such as the gross domestic product (GDP) are considered along with average country income or individual GDP, the degree of income inequality is even more apparent.

At the other end of the spectrum, the poorest Americans in the lowest 5% income range still enjoy a greater level of wealth than the richest 5% in the nation of India."


Sumtin smells here.

Wouldnt be yankee propaganda would it?

Tzor believes in the failed policies of "trickle down economics" You can't help stupid.

Bernie Sanders wrote:Tzor believes in the failed policies of "trickle down economics" You can't help stupid.

Bernie believes that in spite of the fact that Socialism has a 0.000 batting average, if we try it one more time it will result in a home run.

The irony is that socialism always to lead to slavery, only the slave owners are the government.

tzor wrote:

Bernie Sanders wrote:Tzor believes in the failed policies of "trickle down economics" You can't help stupid.

Bernie believes that in spite of the fact that Socialism has a 0.000 batting average, if we try it one more time it will result in a home run.

The irony is that socialism always to lead to slavery, only the slave owners are the government.

Somebody should really tell the Swedes that they're all slaves.

But seriously, tzor, what does socialism mean to you?

Tzor could be right about socialism, its communism light or communism by the back door(where have I heard that before?)

On the other hand Tzor may have drank yankee propaganda kool aid concerning his Wisegeek claims.

spurgistan wrote:Somebody should really tell the Swedes that they're all slaves.

But seriously, tzor, what does socialism mean to you?

The Swedes are the Swedes. Just because you have high taxes does not make your socialist.

Townhall: Sweden Isn't Socialist

"Sweden is not socialist -- because the government doesn't own the means of production. To see that, you have to go to Venezuela or Cuba or North Korea," says Norberg.

Now before I comment on what socialism means to me, perhaps we need to look at Wikipedia.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management,[10] as well as the political theories and movements associated with them.[11] Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[12] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] with social ownership being the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

Now that's a broad definition there and we can see that the definition runs afoul of the Townhall quote. But Sweden does have private ownership, so the argument is still valid. Government (at any level) ownership, collective (for example union) ownership, or even "citizen" ownership (I suppose everyone has a voting share in the company) are all variations of socialism. Indeed there are probably some interesting variations of socialism out there, but I've never seen anyone actually talk about them.

And that's the problem in a nutshell. Socialism doesn't work because not because it's socialism but because everyone attempts centralized socialism, either the single government, or the single collective, etc. It effectively promotes monopolies and without competition, such structures fail to adapt, improve or even maintain themselves and will eventually collapse.

With that definition, most of the world doesnt need to be concerned as the majority landowner is Queen Elizabeth II. She is Queen of 32 countries, head of a Commonwealth of 54 countries in which a quarter of the world's population lives, and legal owner of about 6.6 billion acres of land, one-sixth of the earth's land surface.Mar 17, 2011

The rest is pretty much owned by the banks,(arguably, the rothchilds alone own 50% of the worlds wealth) maybe an insurance company gets a crumb here and there, so really, what are we talking socialist? Most of the earth is privately owned.

Maybe this socialism is simply a ploy to get the lemmings to believe they have a share of something.

armati wrote:With that definition, most of the world doesnt need to be concerned as the majority landowner is Queen Elizabeth II.

The "means of production" ... not land.

I just googled it, it says as I posted.

About 100 years ago I found out the queen owned all the fishboats in Canada, I found that interesting,(no idea if its the same now) I had to swear allegiance to her when I joined the forces too.

In any case, I think this socialism bs is simply an attempt to get the lemmings to believe they have a share of the wealth. even if it is collective wealth.

Another point, I doubt if any of it matters, capitalist socialist etc, there is a very good chance the world goes cashless, when that happens all loss of liberty is gone anyway.

People that think they will retain it dont know what it is, history has shown over and over, socialism doesnt work and when liberty is givin up for security you end up with neither.

O well, cashless is easy.

tzor wrote:

Bernie Sanders wrote:Tzor believes in the failed policies of "trickle down economics" You can't help stupid.

Bernie believes that in spite of the fact that Socialism has a 0.000 batting average, if we try it one more time it will result in a home run.

The irony is that socialism always to lead to slavery, only the slave owners are the government.

Huh? Socialism in, say Sweden, means slavery? Weird argument Tzor.

Tzor is saying Sweeden is not socialist as the government doesnt hold the means of production, the facilities and resources for producing goods.
"in a socialist society, the means of production are communally owned"

Is China socialist or capitalist? What tzor's head explode as he tries to answer.

Social v capitalism is such a dead meme. I can't believe people in America are still debating it. Next it'll be eugenics.

There was never a true Communist country....

Tzor just can't wrap his head around what Democratic Socialism is. His loyalty to Party before Country is apparent.

True American patriots want all Americans to have a right to healthcare, a decent working wage for 40 hours of work, affordable education, clean air, clean water, civil rights to all and a President who isn't a selfish, lying, treasonous crook.

A communist country is a libertarian country. The only difference between communism and libertarianism is the motivation of the people advocating for it.

Symmetry wrote:Huh? Socialism in, say Sweden, means slavery? Weird argument Tzor.

One can argue that Sweden isn't technically "Socialist."
One can also argue that there is no way in hell people like Bernie would ever implement what is implemented in Sweden anywhere else.
These are the types of people who look at narwhals and say, "see, unicorns do exist."
Try another nation please.

mrswdk wrote:A communist country is a libertarian country.

That's like saying "matter is antimatter."
No, it's the opposite in every possible way.
EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.

Bernie Sanders wrote:There was never a true Communist country....

Oh wow, the broken clock analogy really does work.
So tell me, why was there never a true communist country ...
(And with that Bernie goes back to telling the wrong time again.)

mrswdk wrote:Is China socialist or capitalist? What tzor's head explode as he tries to answer.

I am afraid the correct answer is no longer politically correct so I won't say it. Suffice to say it is neither. It's that thing we don't talk about anymore.

show