Slavery, poverty and international relations

[shiv]

Please pardon my putting it on this forum. I believe the topic has relevance in international relations - especially so after the Sangeeta Philip vs Khobragade affair.

Slavery has many definitions which can be viewed on a number of online sites after an appropriate search. Slaves of course were bought and sold as a commodity in many parts of the world. Slavery broadly encompasses the idea that a slave is an owned commodity, or a person in bondage or state of obligation, low pay, long hours and the absence of freedom to opt out. Note that low pay is only one aspect of slavery. I was unable to find any definition of slavery in which the money met minimum wages standards but freedom or lack of bondage was primary. Or a definition where the hours were necessarily long to allow even a subsistence life.

In fact, even if a person gets paid what appears to be a minimum salary, the bondage and obligations or hours may make quality of life akin to slavery but not amounting to slavery by definition. Also, if a person voluntarily signs a contract that is perfectly legal in the country where the contract is signed, and the salary too is above the minimum wage, the conditions that are involuntarily accepted could amount to slavery or poverty or both. For example if I get a man from Patna in Northern Himachal (Xinjiang) to sign a job contract in which I pay him Rs 5000 a month to work in my estate in Gingee, Kerala, I am paying him much more than the minimum wage. But since his home is 5000 km from his workplace, his quality of life suffers because he is separated from his family (wife, child and elderly parents). He is barely able to afford the journey home once a year, and is certainly unable to afford to be home for emergencies even if he gets time off. On top of all this he has to maintain two households - his own home in Patna and another home in Kerala. In other words his perfectly legal job contract amounts to conditions that involve both poverty and slavery like bondage.

Lastly, it is always tricky to delink quality of life from questions relating to slavery and poverty. Ever since the buying and selling of slaves was banned in the west, there has been a reactive series of legislation to stop what is described as slavery, while poverty is ignored. As long as a narrow definition of slavery is met, poverty, or conditions that amount to both poverty and slavery are accepted. This is plain hypocrisy.

Having said all that, let me briefly step into issues of poverty and quality of life in India.

At the bottom level - is the elderly widow whose children have abandoned her and who lives in rented (or free) accommodation while working for a pittance. If her quality of life is 0, paying her a minimum wage or reducing her hours of work with the idea that she can then get better accommodation and spend some time at the mall will push her life down to minus 1. That is because someone else will be ready to take up her work and accommodation at low rates and still be better off because they are a working couple with a dual income, looking for accommodation. This old lady can be branded a slave by all those western definitions. She really would qualify for a T1 or similar visa, but the US won't give her one. And is she got one her quality of life would get worse - lifted from her surroundings and acquaintances into the US of A

The next level of poverty is the family - either husband and wife, or abandoned wife with two kids. The slightly better off people would live in a slum where they have some claim on the roof above their heads. Quality of life could be better than the old lady living alone because the family support each other, there may be more than one earning member and that would include one or more working children. People such as these - I think there must be at lest 100 million in India. They would all qualify for some altruistic US visa. Would their life get better if they were "evacuated " (or extracted) to the US?

A third level of poverty is the half-family living in rented accommodation while the wife works and looks after the kids. The husband (or a grown up son) has got a job 1000/2000/x000 km away. He gets a "minimum wage" where he lives but he has to live in abject poverty as he sends his family some money every month. The money ensures that the family survives in poverty, but in better shape than if the man had not moved x000 km away. For that job the man may have got into debt or may have paid a hefty sum to travel, and needs to pay rent. So he does not have the option of travelling back to see his family even once a year and certainly not if someone falls sick and needs help. This is bondage of a different kind. It is not slavery but the conditions of bondage and poverty are exactly the same as slavery.

It is this last group of workers - the migrants who travel long distances that impinge on international relations. They are often illegal migrants who have paid traffickers. but even legal migrants who get "minimum" wages live and work in conditions no worse than slavery. The entire western world benefits by simply defining slavery as wage and hours linked without any consideration for the effect of travel distance, separation and inability to return to place of origin at will. Technically these people too are slaves whose work benefits the people they work for in exchange for very low wages. But poverty in India ensures that workers voluntarily sign contacts that subject them to such conditions. A worker's rights should ideally include compensation for the fact that he has to maintain two households if his family cannot be with him or compensation for the fact that he has to travel such a long distance and is therefore physically barred from returning home at the end of a work day or work week. But these things are ignored by people who are grateful to get any job if it simply lifts them out of abject poverty into just poverty. They involuntarily accept conditions that enslave them, but these people are advertised by rich western nations as people who have "escaped from poverty" by migration.

There is a massive scam that has been going on since the post colonial days - supported by rich nations who import poor labour and poor nations who have been taught that the west is manna. Unpaid slavery and buying and selling of humans has been replaced by a subtle form of paid slavery with "freedom" for the slave.

For many years while I lived in the UK and after I returned, it was clear to me that foreign doctors (60% of them Indian in those days) were subsidizing the UK national Health Service and working in conditions that were in fact slavery by most definitions. The presence of so many Indian doctors working cheap allowed all junior doctors salaries (including white Brits) to be kept low, and the import of doctors ensured that no money had been spent on training and medical college infrastructure. But a glass ceiling was placed to keep foreign doctors below a particular level while locals sailed through into a higher rank/salary and permanent job grade. For more than three years in the UK I did what is called a 1 in 2 rota, which meant that I was working (or on call) for 136 hours out of 168 hours a week on alternate weeks. The typical "on call" week was 24 hours on Monday; 8 hours Tue; 24 hrs Wed; 8 hrs Thu followed by 72 hours straight - Fri, Sat and Sun. This was commonplace. The job contract also specified that I might be required to work more hours than contracted in case of "exigencies". I signed several such contracts.

A lot of so called well paying jobs in the west are simply exploitation of the fact that the Rupee is worth a lot less than local foreign currency and an Indian can get three or more times what he could get in India while still being cheapo labour for the system. And the working hours and separation from family etc are not even counted as factors and "legally valid" contracts are signed simply because the people who define slavery and exploitation are also the people who are employing imported labour by claiming that what they do cannot be exploitation.

At some stage, somewhere down the line, Indians will have to figure out that they are being suckered.

[shiv]

Many people who read what I have written might feel that I have made arguments of the type that have been used to accuse Devyani Khobragade. That is in fact true - but the Khobragade case will be decided on the merits of the individual case - which is something we have watched in the mews and discussed at length.

But what the case made against Devyani Khobragade raises is the institutionalized "high wage slavery" that has become the norm in the west for attracting relatively less wealthy Indians into accepting working conditions that appear fair but are in practice bondage, reduced freedom and poor quality of life with no compensation for the long separation from family and distance of travel. It must be remembered that even a US minimum wage is insufficient to lift many Americans out of poverty and is certainly not enough to keep an Indian with family in India out of poverty. In fact the Devyani Khobragade case is completely different in this regard, though I do not want to discuss it here.

If Khobragade can be arrested and tried on the grounds that she actually was, then it lays the door open for the examination in detail the real working conditions offered in the US and other western countries. I suggest in the opening post of this thread that "high wage slavery" and bondage are being passed off as healthy and wholesome while other conditions that happen to exist in a country such as India is defined as slavery.

[Shreeman]

Freedom is a relative thing, mostly its always about getting up higher in the economic hierarchy. That is all people care about -- I have got 100 (or 70, 50, whatever) years, how high can I get before the hourglass runs out? As you noted, this is a problem.

Yugosterica is relatively easy to analyze. Its not a melting pot any more. Consider a family living in a conservative land. The father says, "I am required to give my first daughter to the king?" (and have no say in it). So they move to Yugosterica. The daughter is not asked in either place. There is no king in Yugosterica, nothing in daily life appears out of place. Food GMO, pretty, and plentiful, even if it has no taste. Tar and concrete take you sea to sea.

But they will never be natives in the new land, and don't want to be either.

There are "castes" in Yugosterica too. One side lives on one side of the bay, the other on the other side. They pay money to cross over, from the poor side at the wrong time. Which makes weird little sense, since you all cross over at the same time in the morning for work (logjam), and probably can choose to come home at different times (less of a problem). Search "whole foods", and "walmart". Purely financial division. Another place has all the roads from rich neighborhoods connecting it one-way, coming in. All the roads to the poor neighborhoods one-way, going out, most of them gated. All over the place, same thing.

Now the family didn't want to "integrate" either, mind you. They just wanted to not give their daughter to the king. So its not like they actually try to dispel anything. When in rome, try to speak broken roman. Make money, lots of it. Buy land back home with it, lots of it. Or something similar. Now they just want to get in the gated part. Still won't know who lives next door.

And that's not the only "caste" definition and Yugosterica is not the worst neighborhood in the republic. Then the eldest daughter goes away with a african-yugosterican-jewish (which is a great community, by the way, no offense intended) individual of an alternate lifestyle and comes back pregnant. People are not big on marriage at all in Yugosterica. So now the father must support a bigger more broken family, and the conservative extended family has disowned him too. There is far lesser "support" and far too many obligations in Yugosterica.

They can't complain, because "why don't you go back, then?". So, all that changes is the color of slavery. Nothing you do, "integrates" you. Except color of skin AND money, and of course, eating meat at the sabbath. And then you still sit under the glass ceiling, all other noses still out of joint, and at the end of the table feeling observed at all times. Your pick, give your daughter to the king, or bleach your skin and eat meat regularly and stay under the magnifying glass.

The new very high wage slaves are still only worried about having to give their daughters to the king. Though the daughter has long been married off. They would rather just visit the beaches of Yugosterica and pretend anything else does not "directly" concern them. It gives them some satisfaction that, in their own way, they are taking a bigger pie slice compared to an even lower paid native wage slave from Yugosterica and get to lord over him. That is good enough for most, they feel a sense of achievement in that. Who is going to want to look in their cavities, anyway.

Recklessness is being groomed in every system. Financial remuneration was never really the "whole" of it, nor its buying power. Slavery has always been just another word for economic hierarchy. In the British or roman empire, at least the empire still had to build the roads.
A broad foundation can support a lot of weight. Now the waist is very narrow, but looks attractive.

It was the sense of belonging and having an equity in the community, that drove people to other religions, or lands, or to overthrow systems. Now the power is concentrated in the hands of half a dozen. Morality should not come from a bank balance, or a piece of paper (the law), or geography. Or pasta forbid, from religion. If you are waking up every morning thinking your fellow being needs to give you something and be poorer for it, something is wrong in the drinking water. Not a simple problem, no answer in sight, not very well written thoughts. But that's where the thought process lead.

[shiv]

The presence of a huge differential in salaries in India as well as a major difference in currency value allows the system (employers, agents) to take advantage of Indians. Indians in general are often happy to take scraps as ling as those scraps appear bigger than whet they are getting. When it comes to accepting things in the US - things look very rosy but the devil is in the details.

Exploitation is when you pay a person less for work than it is actually worth. Unfortunately this definition allows for a lot of play, but if all humans are equal, and equal jobs and equal skills must be paid equally, then Indians (along with many others) are idiots who are asking to be raped.

However, their treatment cannot be called rape because it is consensual. They sign contracts that allow rape.

I have not (yet) managed to dig up data about low salaried unskilled workers and the conditions they may face in the US, but I will start at the top.

In the US, software professionals can expect to earn US$ 70,000 to 90,000 a year.

In India they could earn US $ 12,000 to 30,000 a year.

An Indian software professional who gets an H1B visa to the US will earn US$ 24,000 to 36,000 a year in the US. That makes it attractive, but it is cheaper for the US entity and the Indian entity to skim off the difference between employing an American versus an Indian fresh off the boat from India

An Indian software professional who gets his H1B visa while he is working in Britain or some non Indian nation will attract a salary of over US$ 60,000 a year in the US. By virtue of going to the US via a third country he gets paid more, but still gets less than what a US software professional gets.

But before I go into conditions that software professionals from India might face in the US, I must point out that in the US poverty levels are defined as follows:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/13poverty.cfm

Code: Select all

Persons in family/household	Poverty guideline
For families/households with more than 8 persons, add $4,020 for each additional person.
1 Person	$11,490
2 Persons	15,510
3 Persons	19,530
4 Persons	23,550
5 Persons	27,570

That means that the salary a software professional gets in India could be below poverty level in the US. But if that salary is merely doubled in the US it takes no account of the fact that the worker may have a wife and two elderly parents to support back in India. That essentially keeps him on poverty level pay by US standards.

That apart, look at what going to the US entails for the eager software professional
http://www.desicrunch.com/Articles/tips ... older.html

Benefits like providing AIR ticket to spouse may not be in writing. Once you land in USA and sign employment agreement employer may refuse to provide these benefits.

Once you land in USA and signed the employment agreement it will become the legal document. Be careful about this. Most of the companies never used to give the copy of employment agreement/contract when the offer is made. This gives them the advantage to force you to sign whatever they are providing. Later this employment agreement contract could be used as a legal tool to harass you.

In many cases, employment agreement is used as a tool to retaliate against employee, if there is any dispute arises between you and your employer.

Normally United States Immigration and Natualization services approval for your H1-B is for the existing job which could not be filled by native people. So if there is any terms like "you will be paid only if you are in project" appears in offer letter, don’t take the offer. There are many cases employees were not paid when they are not in project. If you have such problem after you join the company and you are stuck ....

Health insurance: This is one of the most important thing. Remember without health insurance you can not afford for medical facilities in USA. Most of the companies never used to give full details about the health insurance coverage unless you ask. It depends up on the company’s policy. Some companies provide without your contribution. Some companies used to ask you pay 20 or 25 % of the premium every month. Some companies used to provide cheap insurance coverage which requires you to pay 20% of the cost of medical expenses. If that is the case don’t settle down for these kind of health coverage.

Of course the bottom line is when software professionals are being exploited there are Indian agencies who are also skimming off the money. No wonder some IT companies were at the forefront in kowtowing to the US. They too are complicit in exploitation of Indian labour. Since the US too benefits and the professionals themselves are too scared to complain it is "bijness aj ujual". The US of course is complicit in allowing this to continue because US corporations are skimming off US$ 50,000 a year per H1B from India. With 60,000 plus H1Bs being issued the money that is being skimmed off by exploitation could amount to US$ 3 billion a year. That is the extra amount that would have to be paid to Indian software professionals if they were not exploited. That is also the amount being lost by software professionals in the US because of cheap labour from India.

[Shreeman]

If you are looking for an integrated labor market -- perhaps the best defense against human poverty (but accelerated/unsustainable mineral resource and nature exploitation -- topic for another time), then immigration is essential. Lack of any options for immigration is also a form of slavery, often imposed as a community punishment via international sanctions.

The problem you cite predominantly here, however, does merit some introspection. The software AND services collaboration were both bad ideas. Growing/emerging economies or not:

A. They had a terrible terrible impact on education. Lets see if I can write how bad -- bad bad bad bad bad bad bad (can't, tired) impact. All sorts of "educational" institutions cropped up. Demand for "IITs" and "IIITs" and "IIIIITs" soared. Undergraduate education was by rote to begin with, now it practically does not exist. It is now demand and supply based instead. That is not education, it is a new market for slaves.

B. The workplace changed fundamentally within a short span of 10 years (this is before most forum posters here became sentient, so I expect criticism, fine, ok, so be it). Instead of a productivity base workforce (that was at least envisioned), mobility and agility became the key words. Instead of subject expertise, narrow current skill sets came into vogue. Finally, the internet-based employment ruined anything that was left of traditional merit/competition/long-term prospect based selection for employment. This is not sustainable, and its social effects are grossly understudied.

C. But compared to what you cite last, A/B above are extremely minor. The H1-B etc. is Nixon/Kissinger/China equivalent for India/etc. Different administrations but exactly same drivers and script book. The inherent problem is that it does not foster competition for labor. It doesn't because it is tied to a specific employer. It is slavery. No, don't bring up the possible transfer here, inertia and risk far far outweigh any possible mobility. Anecdotes are not statistics (if there are statistics, those would be interesting).

If the H1/like were a mobile/flexible/skill supplement, that would greatly benefit both the emigrant and the host country. However, it would not suit the employers. It would create a larger free, competitive, mobile, and vocal workforce. That was never the idea of the manufacturing "revolution", nor is it for this "IT/services" revolution. Skills must be continually made cheaper (just as materials) for profit margins to be sustained in the face of competition. In the process, you cheapen human lives.

Nothing new. All sides were aware of it, and saw benefits in it. The losing economy (say India) decided it can sacrifice a few more "average" individuals, the brightest were going to leave via the F1 anyway. Mix up the lot, open up jobs at home, create a vote bank in the other country that has a voice, make a lot of money. Either way, these wage slaves won't have changed the destiny of their native economy, or so went the thought process. They could not have been more wrong.

For example, a net detriment is loss of educational institutions and instead of growing "excellent" educational institutions at a steady rate, there was a burgeoning of "average/below-average" institutions.

There are also more unforeseen side-effects. An "on the cusp" individual is not just academically average, they are tempted by a lot more opportunity that they would not have come across purely by hard work, merit, or what have you. But now they would be eligible for many and could secure them via just a little bit of shall we say "tweaking" of the system. Thus starts the breaking of the moral fiber and increase in the offerings in the temples and churches.

In the long term, a lot of weak individuals show up in sufficient positions of influence to draw, institute, execute, and report on policy. This serves existing masters, no one to threaten or expose. A manager never highers a smarter individual to report to him --not in a position of challenge. Too many "connections" now to help prevent disruption by any unforeseen intelligence left in the system.

The countries that realized the short term nature of this systemic slavery (and thus shamelessly used the acquired strengths to generate a sufficiently threatening posture) -- notably china/manufacturing, may tilt the evolution of human thought some day. The systems that postured belief in "values" while simultaneously subverting them -- notably india/software, are stuck in alternating hope/dispair, unable to make up their mind even on what has really transpired.

The individuals themselves, have more or less served the purposed they were assigned. But presence is not influence. And a title does not carry any weight. Not even a president e.g. the lame-duck. An individual does. And it is to the individual, the indian average individual, that the H1B/BPO/... revolutions have done most damage.

For example, what should be that case is that flights should leave at all convenient hours to all destinations. What we are looking at is the perpetual arrivals and departures in the night. The entrenchment is now so deep, that only a miraculous disruptive development would change anything. Nothing of the sort appears on the horizon, at least for the generation that is entering the workforce right now. There is just not the motivation/education/morality/strength of an UlanBatori in the lot you come across now.

And fear is now an approved tool of submission. Visible, invoked, applied, even where least expected. Always keep making examples even when there is no threat on the horizon. We are just one step away from the "stribes" that UlanBatori refers to being literally instituted to make the new pyramids. Your UAEs are only the vanguards for universal administration some day.

Those that argue for domestic development alone as the answer do not understand the problem. Free population adjustment based on resources was pretty much a human right during most of evolution. It needs to be easier, not harder. There are no "benign" systems or leaders. The problem is with the control and submission tactics, the erosion of rights and transparent processes. It is now impossible to instill any kind of core strength in future generations, when those teaching them are so visibly compromised themselves.

By the way, the healthcare system is dying at an exponentially faster rate due to this than computing/engineering. A Safdarjung doctor (for those who have been to this great institution for treatment in the 1980s will understand what I am talking about) may now be an expert in his profession -- world wide. And its not because the individual, education, or institution have improved by leaps and bounds. Lets not even look at the situation in associated fields, or nursing, and support staff.

The planes are indeed the new slave ships of this century. Make them smaller, not larger.

But then, I could be totally wrong, too. I am often blind to many possibilities -- being a frog in a well.

[panduranghari]

At some stage, somewhere down the line, Indians will have to figure out that they are being suckered.

While I agree with your assertion, there is a huge population of Indian doctors who cannot imagine living anywhere else but here in the UK. They have never analysed why they were here in the first place.

While I agree that there is nepotism and xenophobia, the Indian doctors put up with this because 'they' think they will be one of 'them' after becoming consultants. They forget that their children are growing up and in the pursuit of careers, they have lost the time with children. Many are in debts buying huge houses just because they think their consultants live in big houses and now they are one they should do to. They believe they will be consultants forever with 100k salaries.

A colleague of my wife was in for a shock as their little princess grew up and joined the church as she spent more time with her nanny than she ever spent with their parents who are not Christians.

The problem is not restricted just to the medical profession.

According to this report, about 50 % of NHS trusts have been in debt and the others not too far from one.

How can they not see the writing on the wall?

They are in for a nasty shock.

[TSJones]

Yes, all those Indian doctors held in slavery. What a horrible thought..

I pity their servants that's for sure.

[shiv]

Yes, all those Indian doctors held in slavery. What a horrible thought..

I pity their servants that's for sure.

My response is positive news for the land of the bold, free, happy, wealthy and just
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1588534

[TSJones]

^^^^They sure do drive nice cars and treat their nurses like crap.

[shiv]

While I agree that there is nepotism and xenophobia, the Indian doctors put up with this because 'they' think they will be one of 'them' after becoming consultants. They forget that their children are growing up and in the pursuit of careers, they have lost the time with children. Many are in debts buying huge houses just because they think their consultants live in big houses and now they are one they should do to. They believe they will be consultants forever with 100k salaries.

I have an opinion about modern healthcare, and it is bad news. Modern medical care can never ever cover 100% of any population. No country can afford it. It's like trying to make the entire world consume as much energy and resources as America to declare the rest of the world as "developed".

Ultimately the world will have to pass off 80% of medical care to indigenous systems and alternative and less expensive systems. Part of the problem in India is the belief that the American model is right without an insight into what is actually happening in the US.

As salaries go down in the US, more foreign trained doctors will be shipped in because it is easier to cavity search them and banish them to slave land where they came from while setting the rules rigidly for them. The UK has been there and done that. The US too will figure out a way - but maybe it will be Mexicans or South American doctors who face the music rather than Indians

[shiv]

^^^^They sure do drive nice cars and treat their nurses like crap.

Typical American inspired idea that one's personal status is defined by the price of one's car. Extend that further and you know that your personal status would be enhanced even more by the price of the whore on your arm. Where do poor nurses figure here? Just as well that nurses keep off.

Interestingly nurses are going to be more and more important for medical care in the US. That is a sensible thing to do. But access to advanced medical care and a person who is much more clued into what might be wrong when a person is sick will get more difficult.

The US is moving from "respect the doctor" to "Doctors are too expensive, lets respect the nurse instead" Nothing fundamentally wrong in that until nurses start getting sued and regretting having entered the career. Then slaves will have to be imported.

[Shreeman]

The US is moving from "respect the doctor" to ...

I suppose this is as good a time as any.

There has been a debate on an honorable profession. We might as well come to terms with where things stand. Let me start with another open source fact. When a fully trained doctor arrives from a "third world" country, they are as good a a peon in the United States. It doesn't matter if they lead a team of 100 surgeons back in the "boondocks". They must undergo corrective training, which is not guaranteed and highly selective. And then they must perform the equivalent of penal community service for another long while.

But there is no automatic reciprocity in this. Most of the time, a US surgeon even in training can go and hack away at a moments notice pretty much anywhere. Accreditation is usually a breeze. This then brings up interesting possibilities.

You see, there are these things called animal rights groups. So, no more monkeys or dogs for you. And if they find out you are using pigs (who have not risen to the sentient level of dogs for some reason that I can not comprehend), your doors will be smeared in pig blood come the next morning. You can't train.

And there are not enough people dying, and dead people don't substitute for live ones. Hospitals hide their remaining training labs with no names and hundred security measures and can't talk about their facilities without fear. Private industry is worse off. Hospitals at least have the pretense of training and education. Farmers, who would otherwise slaughter for food are building very well off facilities in the middle of no where, just for this reason.

You spend 10 years training, end up in huge (never below several hundred thousands) debt, have no hope of a career change. I can start carving wood any day, and make a living, but not a surgeon by the time they are done training. And all you have been able to do is a handful of animal procedures. Need I point out that one mistake, and you are done. Malpractice insurance, or not. You think people will want themselves operated by the time the media has tarred and feathered your entire hospital? Surgery is an art, practice makes perfect, and I am not talking just breast surgery.

So what, then, makes the US surgeons so superior? Well, there are thousands of "charitable" facilities opening up, in the remotest of places all around the "third world". And even practicing surgeons, disappear for a few weeks every year to go and do far more surgeries than they would do in a year in the States. Why?

This generosity is sure nice, many a "nanny" gets a GYN procedure they would otherwise never hear of. Does it fit the rest of the economic or healthcare model? Is the world philanthropic enough for this state of affairs?

Is it even remotely ethical? The individuals who are being operated on are substituting for live animals in every possible way. Even for the practicing physicians.

Who measures, let alone monitors their outcomes? What protections do they have should things go wrong? Why is this not well known or understood? Why is this "charitable" healthcare substituting for the growth of the normal healthcare network? Let us not build accessible roads and infrastructure for people to want to move wherever there is need, but let us advise highly valuable individuals to put themselves at high risk for a "Paco" might get hurt otherwise. And one small incident by an adventurous culturally-challenged individual will set back strat-e-gic relations by another two decades.

Where, then? And by the way, no snot off my nose either way. Drive the system in the ground, for all I care.

[panduranghari]

So what, then, makes the US surgeons so superior? Well, there are thousands of "charitable" facilities opening up, in the remotest of places all around the "third world". And even practicing surgeons, disappear for a few weeks every year to go and do far more surgeries than they would do in a year in the States. Why?

This may not come as a shock to the learned minds here but one of the main reasons for 'charitable facilities' in the third world other than evangelism is 'organ harvesting'.

Many 'third world' patients seeking treatment in charitable facilities have their biochemistry profile and screening undertaken in the west. Samples are routinely sent to US to find the most suitable match for a rich person seeking organs.

Allowing these surgeons to practice surgery on a third world nobody is nothing but sophisticated scam.

[brihaspati]

Shiv ji,
profound points. But -

(1) if you say that people are forced to migrate to earn more through possible exchange rate factors or other factors, because of poverty at home, then we must look into the details. For migrants to the USA, I am not so sure that the very poor are even at the starting steps of the ladder to immigrate.

They are already at a certain socio-economic level that is perhaps not exactly poverty when compared to the wider society.

(2) A lot of pressure is put on the Indian male (and nowadays even the female) to go out and get the resources to maintain an extended family of siblings and dependents, and parents. I know of immigrants whose earnings maintain an army of dependents back at home.

I do appreciate the culture of mutual "taking care of" prevalent in most circles of Indian society [changing now in urban zones, to show that the previous "collective herd" principle was more a matter of habit, particular Indian religious and philosophical traditions, and plain virtual social coercion - so that as soon as those thinsg weaken people go to the other extreme with equally shocking consequences]. But I have always felt resentment, and unfairness in how so many more think they are entitled to fruits of the productivity of so few without ever feeling the compulsion to do something on their own. In many situations this leads to what is called the low-level equilibrium trap - i.e., not much surplus left and re-invested into the productive source - be it the earner, entrepreneur, or innovator - as the family member or institutional].

Should we also not think of our internal exploitation mechanisms that force people into accepting slavery too elsewhere becuase of the tremendous emotional and social manipulation that makes them rationalize their slavery for their "duty" and higher purpose?

(3) For the more socio-economically advanced starters who land up in the "west", I sense also that they have a perception or sense of greater and wider freedoms in domains they are not allowed to back in India - social senses mostly. Privacy from overt social surveillance, greater seemingly freer choice of relationships, friendships, and partnerships in general, and a comparative sense of less arrogance from the state and its system - even if the arrogance or rudeness is there below the surface, but which appears perhaps to be more bearable because of the casual rudeness with which anyone in any position of power at any level in India can beat the crap mentally and physically out of the average Indian - be it the police or the gov official, while at the same time being incompetent and corrupt. The US does the same, but it usually takes care to do it under formal legitimization, and rationalization. Political goons of local political parties usually do not go around doing the mafia bit without any consequence, bribes are not usually expected, every woman and girl in the public space is not necessarily a fair game for leering, leching, and pawing ityadi.

I know this bit above is sort of in the grey zone, and that the US I knew even 10 years ago, has been changing rapidly towards more formal shows of intolerance, but yet maybe the aspect of "perception of freedom" might be worth a thought.

(4) Indian women overwhelmingly prefer the US life - that is my personal impression. I could be wrong. For the same reasons perhaps that even in advanced western Europe, women prefer to live in cities compared to their native villages. I also saw a significant inclination to get hitched to non-Indian men, and the girls I knew frankly stated that they thought of Indian men as being more under their family - and distaff control, especially their mothers, and more inhibited in the bed. In many cases, the "western" men they hitched with were not free from such influences either, but I guess it is the perception in many such women - many again churned out through the "missionary/convent" factories, that the "west" was superior, and its men somehow therefore being part of that "superiority" will lack the qualities they hate in their birth culture, and have those they have been fed upon on through the movies/books they were exposed to as part of the wider missionary/convent culture [not necessarily taught at school].

[UlanBatori]

The whole system of graduate "education" and research in the USA is based on "slave labor". Compensation is way under the nanny level as defined by the SD, given the working hours.

Most soldiers and sailors and Marines are also below the SD's nanny level in pay (u can't count the in-kind benefits, remember). Look at the E-1 and W-1/W-2 levels They are also subject to mental, verbal and physical abuse, and incidents of rape are being reported at alarmingly high levels. Wonder when the Bray of PiBs is going to start cavity-searching the O-10s and their C-in-C for this "maltreatment".

[shiv]

Should we also not think of our internal exploitation mechanisms that force people into accepting slavery too elsewhere becuase of the tremendous emotional and social manipulation that makes them rationalize their slavery for their "duty" and higher purpose?

(3) For the more socio-economically advanced starters who land up in the "west", I sense also that they have a perception or sense of greater and wider freedoms in domains they are not allowed to back in India - social senses mostly.

brihaspatiji there are always two sides to every issue. The premise of this thread was based on my perception that:
1. The "internal exploitation mechanisms" in our society are well known and constantly quoted as primary driving factors that enable external exploitation. No one can deny these things - and as far as I can tell no one is denying them

2. The "sense of greater freedom in the west as experienced by the more socio-economically advanced starters" is also well known and acknowledged by many. Re emphasizing these is merely a restatement of what is known so far.

The above two points are "one side of the story", a side that I acknowledge and accept. The internal correction mechanisms required to set these right are widely available as advice from evangelists, Islamists, leftists, NGOs and general do gooders.

There is an "other side of the story" which is what I have been trying to bring up on this thread. The other side of the story as I see it is that the attraction of going abroad is related to the above two points i.e 1. Monetary, and 2. Personal liberty

What I am asking about is whether the monetary compensation and perceived freedoms of people who move abroad actually compensates for factors like the need to maintain family back in India and travel expenses, and whether the monetary compensation is equal to the amount which a local employee would get. I would call it exploitation (and even high wage slavery) if the salary earned does not meet the standards that I have demanded. it is another matter that my standards are not being followed. But the point is someone is setting the standards, and the standards that are concocted for the employment of an Indian in the west simply state that the employment is NOT slavery because the money is better. But the fact of the money being better does not adequately compensate for the fact that it could still amount to poverty in the country where the worker is employed because he has to support a family in India. In addition the freedom to be with the family during a bereavement or illness, or support received by family is lost by translocation. Indians are a family centered society and what happens to the family does matter. These things are worth some money and that extra money is not being paid.

The point that i am driving at is that the current definition of slavery suits certain countries and entities. It was these same countries and entities who were at the forefont of slavery until less than a century ago. They have simply redefined slavery to mean that they cannot be blamed. If the definition of slavery were modified to account for translocation, loss of freedom to be with the family and expensive travel that precludes visits even once a year actually amounts to slavery. It will, of course be impossible to get the west to agree with my contention because no one wants to be called an exploiter of labour. But it is exploitation, in my view. It is definitely exploitation of the relatively poverty stricken Indian by the west (including west Asia). I think the idea needs to be sowed so people start looking at it to judge for themselves. No one needs to agree with me, but I think a relook at the way slavery is conveniently recognized on the basis of some parameters but not others needs to be re examined.

The fact that Indians accept these suboptimal conditions in large numbers could be because of two reasons:
1. Anything is better than India
2. They are simply hoodwinked into thinking that conditions will be better than in India. The conditions seem better for some until a few years pass when the drawbacks become apparent.

If it is "1", then internal correction is needed
If it is "2" then we need to educate Indians about how they could be exploited while they think they are heading out for a better life

I think both are required, but up until now I have only seen people demanding internal corrections in India without even looking at how escape from India is not escape from slavery or exploitation although it is advertised that way. Indians who go abroad should get a much better deal and should know the ways in which they will get exploited. A documentation of "high wage slavery" of Indians in the west and in other countries needs to occur for future reference.

[brihaspati]

shiv ji,
my point was essentially simple too : if you are talking of "advanced" west/US/UK etc, then the majority of the immigrants who land up there do not exactly come from the "lowest of the low" poverty levels back at home.

I was not disputing your "high wage slavery" model : it is my frustration with the not-so-bad-off to start with Indians who went abroad to clearly see and recognize what they came for. They are not there for "poverty". I do not explicitly denigrate the money-making motive in others , even if I personally do not follow it. But this is not about money - unless you are talking of the Gulf "slaves" - a majority of whom are there simply because of staving off poverty or feeding large dependent families back at home.

Perception of wider opportunities, even for entrepreneurship - perception of freedom, these seem to be the primary motivators for the class who ultimately successfully immigrate on a long term basis - and inevitably the overwhelming majority of them do not really fit in theirorigins to the "poverty stricken" category.

I used the word "perception", implying that the perception could be false. It is a matter of political redirection that should devalue foreign degrees and "foreign successes", and as I suggested in the UK thread, that India should evaluate and reward performance on home turf: in things that transparently and directly contribute to society, economy, and defence capabilities. BS lofty "peer reviewed" "western" journals or UK/US degrees.

[Shreeman]

I should write this down somewhere, and this is about the only place where it will fit. First of all, anonymity is a great liberator, but it should not be a tool to create views you would be afraid to present in a debate. And blind nationalism leads nowhere. Its not that any country is well governed now, or probably ever was. In the end, Nigeria, where it appears cooked human flesh was recently seen being offered in restaurants, is still well within the comity of nations.

So the perspective must be based on something other than -- religion, nationalism, ethnicity, geography, and so on. Precious little is left, it is what shiv calls "dharma", an abstract concept related to morality, but not quite just morality.

So here are the un-thought-out thoughts.

It is clear that the great America is not a homogeneous block. Its clear that they have imported, integrated, or otherwise allowed in sufficient numbers to force these coca cola advertisements. Some would recall the unity in diversity theme advertisements in their country at another time. Same propaganda, similar result. An identity does not arise out of speeches, it arises out of participation and success. There is not one issue that internally unites any "country". Or legislatures would actually get something done.

Clearly, everything is back-room dealing now. Including in personal lives and across cultures. Secret compromise is the name of the game, its all a long con, and real-time cunning is all that you need to survive.

So, the question is, did things distinctly change at some point or have they always been this way and the computer screen makes us feel like they have?

I distinctly recall morality being a much much bigger part of life growing up, and mine was not a normal upbringing. Religion was much closer to dharma. You didn't beat the living daylights out of what you did not understand, you respected and ignored it. The world was big enough for any type of dissenting voices. Criticism, even obstructive criticism was just that. You didn't start out by throwing a brick into someone's window. That was not the way to gain anyone's respect. For example, was it because there was no chinese manufacturing? Things were harder to replace two generations ago, or people valued them more.

There were some places where people agreed universally, whether they liked it or not. For example, slavery was bad. Paying higher wages if you could afford them, was good. For another example --my favorite, the UlanBator type environment. Sure there was cheating, but it was hush-hush. Leave a note in the toilet and ask for a bathroom break type of cheating. Not the out and about "who is on your side" fight when truth is as evident as 2+2=4. No one would insist on it being 2+2=5, even if hurt their own cause. For example, are we seeing the fruits of VP Singh's affirmative action? There is clearly things wrong on American side due just to the easy availability of affirmative action alone. Easy access to any resource leads to its misuse. See, for example, "tomato festivals" and "pumpkin contests" in relation to food.

I wasn't looking, so was there a distinct time in the last three decades when "the world changed", or have things always been this way. Are we (or just me) just recognizing that like bacteria and virus, the social diseases like slavery also just mutate and not disappear.

[shiv]

I wasn't looking, so was there a distinct time in the last three decades when "the world changed", or have things always been this way. Are we (or just me) just recognizing that like bacteria and virus, the social diseases like slavery also just mutate and not disappear.

Given the length of human lifetimes compared with that of human memory over generations, I am guessing that we only notice small waves that are visible on the surface of much larger and deeper swells.I believe that human memory is preserved both as words as well as actions in terms of the way societies behave.

If you observe the behavior of societies that have survived for a long time you get pointers about how human society tends to pan out over time. Things don't seem to change much overall over millennia. Its always a bell curve. Whether its nutrition or intelligence or anything else. Survival of all life revolves around filling every gap that allows survival and retreats where that gap closes, leaving all the other unaffected gaps full of life. That is called diversity and that includes genetic diversity. If you reduce diversity artificially, you reach a point where survival comes under threat because all gaps are no longer filled with life capable of surviving in that gap. Instead life gets pushed into one uniform, expanded and artificially created gap where everyone survives for a while using the same resources with the same skill set. This is a loss of diversity and is a threat to survival.

I see attempts to modify human society in this light. If you try and give all humans equal nutrition, equal education, equal chance of survival you are reducing human diversity, and in the long term reducing the ability of the society to survive. A crude analogy would be the sowing of a plot of land every year with the same crop, with no crop rotation. Eventually there is overuse of the same resources and no one with an ability to use any other resources.

Inequity is a part of life and survival. Setting specific definitions for slavery based on one's own perceptions of what society should be like is simply moving the goalpost in a way that you prevent inequity in places where you don't want to see it but allow inequity to grow in some other place. Inequity will always be a given in all living societies, plant or animal. This model is based on the premise that removal of inequity is possible and that human suffering is decreased (i.e. human happiness is increased) by specific targeted actions to reduce inequity - such as branding something else as "slavery" and trying to eliminate it.

Unfortunately the topic sinks into philosophy at this stage. s it better to aim for targeted attempts to decrease unhappiness, or would it be a better bet to aim for an overall increase of happiness? Should I decrease what I see as the other guy's jealousy and unhappiness at my Merc by helping him, or pretending to help him buy a Merc? Or should I let him find his happiness without assuming that only getting a Merc like me would bring him happiness?

If I ensure equal nutrition for every single human on earth so that their brain development is as equal as I think it will be, and if I ensure equal education for all humans on earth so that they can all become rocket scientists, who am I creating happiness for? Will the world stop needing people who do boring jobs, or low paying jobs? Do I create happiness by simply paying everyone exactly the same no matter what work he does? Would that be a model of equality?

Look at old societies, particularly primitive societies. The news is not good, but the answer lies there. IMVVHO and all that

[Shreeman]

I wasn't looking, so was there a distinct time in the last three decades when "the world changed", or have things always been this way. Are we (or just me) just recognizing that like bacteria and virus, the social diseases like slavery also just mutate and not disappear.

Given the length of human lifetimes compared with that of human memory over generations, I am guessing that we only notice small waves that are visible on the surface of much larger and deeper swells.I believe that human memory is preserved both as words as well as actions in terms of the way societies behave.

I generally agree, it was probably a slippery slope. FYI, Tikait was the last interesting agitation for any rights I saw. There was still comedy gold in it, and I could identify with what they were trying to do.

There was a chance liberalization of something or the other made a bigger change more abrupt, or universally visible. I was mostly in a basement lab tinkering with stuff and too occupied with "sciencey" things (in a basement laboratory, no less) to notice what was going on outside. By the time I looked up, it was a different world and I am generally just caught looking and catching up now.

Philosophy aside, everything becomes Rome unless there is both an incentive to succeed and a generally accepted path to success. Indeed, I am not optimistic either. Like the black economy, there are gray rules of societal operation too. What is preventing a spade from being called a spade? There is still plenty of "freedom" around, why can't we push back a little and at least delay the inevitable?

[shiv]

The victims in the folowing description are not called slaves only because they get salaries that ar not defined as slave level wages, and they are widely described as being free.

Slavery and exploitation exists in the US but it is simply ignored.

But it is emblematic of something much larger in America, a kind of inequality that isn't economic and that we don't much talk about.

It's the kind of inequality that lies behind police stops for "driving while black," or unequal implementation of stop-and-frisk policies, or "zero tolerance" school discipline codes that lead many low-income children to be suspended.

This inequality has a racial element to it, but it is also about social class (Eckert is white but struggling financially). This is about Americans living in different worlds. If you're a middle-class reader, you probably see the justice system as protective. If you're a young man of color, you may see it as threatening.

So as we discuss inequality in America, let's remember that the divide is measured in more than dollars. It's also about something as fundamental as our dignity, our humanity and our access to justice; it's about the right of working stiffs not to endure forced colonoscopies.

Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/x- ... z2shjMUuZf
Follow us: @JournalSentinel on Twitter

[Shreeman]

The victims in the folowing description are not called slaves only because they get salaries that ar not defined as slave level wages, a....

Well, the record on pretend employment, is only slightly better than actual slavery. Lady liberty clearly does not have a very good record on either front. And to some level, ancient record is acknowledged better than modern record. This has to do with the fact that before computers became sentient, humans were afraid that another human would find out they were lying through their teeth and much embarrassment would result. No such obligations these days.

From the modern record, there are some remarkable instances (in Europe as well), that contain all aspects repugnant to all society. For example:

• current situation -- the documentation does exist, even if the undocumented themselves don't.

and, unrelated but equally important, the following exist too:

• 1,
• 2,
• 3

and many many more all in categories considered "undeveloped" privileges only.

The real challenge is one's propensity to draw conclusions quickly - "must finish thinking about this quickly before I leave the computer, cat needs feeding". The Sochi events are curious in this regard. You didn't typically see people badmouthing Russia openly until recent past (only countries surrounding Russia, eastern europe, ex-USSR/bordering states, then chechnya only), as if broken taps or poor water quality didn't exist in any other country. What is bothering isn't that the fifth star didn't convert to the olympics sign, it is that it got news coverage over and above the actual sports or about the good parts of the opening ceremony itself.

Any real events are too complex to be just one mouse click away. It is like the Bacon number/distance. Human curiosity is now limited to exploring only one mouse click, and typing 140 characters. Any more, and the cat would go unfed.

[UlanBatori]

Cross-posted. The treatment of Filipinos by the US of A since the 1800s, bears some historical examination.

Contemporary treatment

Whose maids are better off?
Feb 9, 2014, 10.55PM IST TNN[ Sachin Parashar ]

Indian authorities are proceeding with the pursuit of tax issues related to American school employment contracts and are also closely following contracts entered into by US diplomats here with their domestic helps. One such contract between a Mumbai based US diplomat and his Filipino maid, a copy of which is with this paper, suggests that the maid is being paid less than $ 3 per hour. The minimum hourly wage in the US is $ 7.25. The US State Department says that the salary paid to local staff of US diplomats is based on "prevailing wage rates and compensation practices". Unlike the contract between Khobragade and her maid Sangeeta Richard though, this one between the US official and his maid doesn't carry any stipulation of hours of work. The contract, which came into effect December 1 last year, says that the Filipino maid would work "six full workdays per week" at a salary of $ 458 per month. Even at only 8 hours per day, it is perhaps safe to assume she works well over 40 hours every week.

Authorities here believe that the Khobragade contract was more favourably inclined towards the maid also because it restricted work to 5 days and 40 hours per week. The Filipino also has only 5 holidays apart from a 12-day annual leave and no ticket for home leave during the period of 3 years. On the other hand all domestics going with Indian diplomats are entitled to a return airticket after completing a year's stay abroad.

There was no response from the US embassy here on questions about the contract between the US diplomat and the Filipino maid. Like Richard, the Filipino maid too has rent-free accommodation, free internet and food allowance. She also has "appropriate contributions" to Filipino Social Security System. While the Filipino maid has medical insurance, Richard had a "100 per cent" medical cover under which all such expenses were borne by the Indian government. And medical costs in Mumbai are maybe 10% of what they are in NYC. Probably less, because unlike the Indian contract, this one does not stipulate that the medical coverage for the maid is on par with that for the US diplomat

In case of any negligence, the contract with the Filipino maid also specifies that all such issues will be decided by the employer only. There is no option of any recourse to local courts or US courts or even courts in the Philippines.

CNN reported in 2009, quoting a State Department report, that many local staff of US diplomats across the world were being paid less than a dollar per day. The State Department mandated contract between Khobragade and Richard projected an average of 40 working hours per week (approximately a salary of $ 1560 per month at an hourly wage of $ 9.75). Around $ 560 was given in the form of Rs 30,000 transferred to her husband's account, another $ 625 in cash and remaining in deductions.

Meanwhile, Income Tax department has also begun a probe into alleged tax violations by the American Embassy school here. "Once the preliminary information is gathered, the tax department would be taking a view on issuing notices to the authorities concerned. Also, the CBDT would be informed as this is not a regular case and involves relations between two countries," an agency report quoting government sources said. As per the information available with the government, several teachers at the American Embassy School were working "illegally", in violation of both tax laws and their visa status.

[negi]

Shiv ji all that is fine and dandy however at the end of the day the fundamental question any Doctor/ITVTY/Engg/STEM chap who is there in US/UK will ask himself "Am I living a better quality of life here" ? Specially throw in major factor i.e. kids education, that scene in India has become obnoxiously expensive I hear about INR 2-3 Lakhs as school fees for some no name private schools and these don't even have a half size football field.

Fact of the matter is most of the Indians who are living abroad and have a professional degree are doing far more better than they would have managed in India , competition is cut throat here and moreover living conditions here are much more challenging specially if you do not have a house of your own.

Everything else is a 10,000 feet bird's eye view and imo merely an academic discussion .

[shiv]

Shiv ji all that is fine and dandy however at the end of the day the fundamental question any Doctor/ITVTY/Engg/STEM chap who is there in US/UK will ask himself "Am I living a better quality of life here" ? Specially throw in major factor i.e. kids education, that scene in India has become obnoxiously expensive I hear about INR 2-3 Lakhs as school fees for some no name private schools and these don't even have a half size football field.

Fact of the matter is most of the Indians who are living abroad and have a professional degree are doing far more better than they would have managed in India , competition is cut throat here and moreover living conditions here are much more challenging specially if you do not have a house of your own.

Everything else is a 10,000 feet bird's eye view and imo merely an academic discussion .

negiji, you have written the truth.

Indians see the US from 10,000 feet and it appears rosy. People in America see India from 10,000 feet and it appears bad and that appearance is supported by ground reports such as the one you have made.

The academic discussion here is to see if the rosy US as seen from 10,000 feet is rosy for everyone. Certainly it is rosy for a select band of Indians who are already educated . Among the already highly educated Indian, barely 4% (or less) go to the US and practically no one who is uneducated in India will get to the US to lead the life of US nirvana in inexpensive schools which are bigger than football fields. 99% of Indians do not go to the US but many believe that the US is much better.

Going to the US itself is highly competitive. Those who go rightly feel that they are the cream of the cream and they are justified in enjoying their success and talking about how bad it is in India. If you are already rich enough to get an education in India you can use that education to get to the US. The losers who remain behind in India need to suck that up. But you have to be educated in India before the US even talks about letting you in. The US allows in educated Indians in a numbers lottery that the US decides.

Indians who do not have the wealth to get an education in India do not stand a chance to go to the US. But even the uneducated in India are told that the US is so good because everyone is happy and everyone has money in the US. Therefore it becomes necessary to go to the US by hook or by crook for some people. Uneducated Indians rarely get a chance to go to the US except by Sangeeta Richard T-visa route. But a lot of uneducated Mexicans, Haitians, Nicaraguans etc do manage to get it. Ground reports from the USA suggest that uneducated migrants remain poor and uneducated and do not have it as rosy in the US as educated Indians.

Do you see the problem here? Not everyone is happy in the US. It is ONLY the few selected highly educated Indians who get into the US who are guaranteed to be in nirvana. Nirvana does not appear to every immigrant to the US. The educated Indian who curses India is a loser who is cursing because he failed to go to the US. He had everything going for him, considering that the uneducated stand no chance of US happiness. When he laments his unhappiness compared to the happiness of those in the US he is not talking about the uneducated unskilled workers in the US. Two out of three unskilled/uneducated immigrant workers in the US remain poor in the US.

But that fact does not leak out because everyone is talking about how happy everyone is in the US. Indians need to be told that if they are uneducated they need not bother worrying about America, which is unreachable for them. If an Indian is educated - he could possibly reach US nirvana - but he should not bet on it because the chances of getting there are about 1%. Indians in the US are truly a higher caste, and that higher caste level is reached by first getting an education in India and them making it to the US. It really is highly competitive, and it will get even more competitive as more Indians get educated. These are hard facts that Indians need to suck up and swallow. Their lives are going to be in India onlee. For good or bad.

[shiv]

At rock bottom, minimum wages in the US, working 44 hours a week for 52 weeks an Indian can make about US$ 23,000 year. That is Rs 14 Lakhs a year, or more than Rs 1 lakh per month. This is more than the amount made by 99.9% of Indians and more than the amount made by 90% of wealthy Indians.

Therefore minimum wage in the US is itself far better than being rich in India

But the US is fair. It gives educated Indian immigrants (Green card holders/citizens) a chance to earn maybe US $ 60,000 a year for starters. The sky is the limit after that. Assuming $60,000 a year - the educated Indian who gets green card/citizenship is getting about Rs 36 lakhs a year or 3 lakhs per month - and that is just the lower level. He is now earning more than most Indian CEOs - although he is twenty-something and fresh off the boat. Even if he sends home just 5% of his salary, he is contributing Rs 15,000 a month to his family in India, which puts them well into Indian middle class.

So far we have only positive news. It is win win all around.

But there is such a huge difference between US salaries and Indian salaries that it provides an enormous gap that people can play with.

The US spends a great deal on school education and higher education. I will have to put in a lot more research before I come up with accurate figures but I guess that the US spends at least 200,000 dollars per child to put him/her through school and undergrad education. If a college educated graduates are needed for some purpose in the US, importing 100,000 of them from a place like India saves the US $ 20 billion. The figure is probably much higher if you look at hidden costs.

We can go one step beyond that. After spending $200,000 to educate a child and assuming he goes though college in the US, the US ends up paying this skilled worker at least US$ 50,000 a year. 100,000 US educated graduates doing this over 30 years would cost employers in the US $ 150 trillion (over 30 years)

Now what if you import 100,000 Indians to work on temporary visas for short periods, replacing one Indian with another after one guy's time is up by a revolving door policy. These imported Indians can be paid just $ 36,000 a year. 100,000 jobs manned by a series of Indians getting US $ 36,000 per annum over 30 years will cost US employers $ 108 trillion

In other words employers in the US save over 40 trillion dollars over 30 years by importing a series of highly educated (college educated) Indians and employing them on temporary visas in the US while paying them far less than what a domestic US graduate/employee would earn.

Of course the Indian who gets US $ 36,000 a year on an H1b for 6 years sees himself as being wealthier than the wealthiest Indians.

Immigration to the US is a totally different ball game from the H1 visa holder. It is the educated Indian temporary worker who is the primary tool of exploitation by the US. He gets paid a lot less for the same work, and his father has paid for his education and in the case of IIT the Indian government has paid for his college education as well.

The question of who is doing whom a favour here is debatable - but more on that later..

[member_28352]

The US has the most insidious system of slavery in the world that it enforces by keeping abnormally high tuition fees for college education. The only alternative is to take student loans. For some streams it takes upto 30 years to pay off this loan. Think about this. If a person has to pay off a loan for 30 years of his life will he ever take a decision that will change the status quo. This in all respects then is a system of slavery that in Hindi would be called begari aka bonded labour. And this isn't even a home loan that at the end of the day gives something tangible to a person. The Orwellian part of this slavery system is that people actually rush and embrace the system and consider it as capitalist progress when in reality it is slavery. The alternative to not entering this bonded labour system is systemic poverty. People can enter the military for a few years after which their only scope is to live on food stamps. Sorry sir, no one rank one pension system in that country for the enlisted abduls. This is also the way the US forces people to enter its military now that the draft is gone. By this count US has the largest amount of slavery in the world. In a population of 310 million I would count atleast 300 million slaves if the above were to be the definition of slavery. The college educated ones being bonded labour and the non college educated ones being serfs because of lack of opportunities.

[Rahul Mehta]

For many years while I lived in the UK and after I returned, it was clear to me that foreign doctors (60% of them Indian in those days) were subsidizing the UK national Health Service and working in conditions that were in fact slavery by most definitions.

doctors were made to work as slaves? how many lashes per day were they served? and I hope they at least got 10 ml juice with daily dose of water and bread with fungus topping. Because thats what most slaves used to get.

[shiv]

For many years while I lived in the UK and after I returned, it was clear to me that foreign doctors (60% of them Indian in those days) were subsidizing the UK national Health Service and working in conditions that were in fact slavery by most definitions.

doctors were made to work as slaves? how many lashes per day were they served? and I hope they at least got 10 ml juice with daily dose of water and bread with fungus topping. Because thats what most slaves used to get.

Rahulbhai, you seem to know a lot about slavery and how slaves should treated. I am sure you already have all the answers. If not, jurysys should do the trick.

More seriously are you asking the number of "lashes" in Hindi as in "kitne laash thay". In geriatric wards it was one or two lashes per day. in other wards the number of lashes was less. Doctors had to sign death certificates for the lashes. Bread was there, but no cheese, so I can't tell about fungus. Paani to milta tha.

[Shreeman]

....
doctors were made to work ...

This is sort of the right audience and this is NOT entirely hypothetical, so lets ask the right questions:

civil system : best case scenario: here take this money and run. It takes 10% of your life, the money is never enough to make you whole. Meanwhile, you are a social outcast, and *no one* thinks you had any reason except money to hire a lawyer. There is nothing for you to do afterwards. Your lawyer is quite rich though. It doesn't matter what the reason for the suit was.

criminal system : best case scenario: a prosecutor get elected the governor. A hundred unrelated people are harmed, same amount of time as the civil cases is lost. Absolutely nothing for anyone to gain. Large fine? disappears in some treasury. Punishment of type X -- benefits the victim in absolutely no way. Scares the s**t out of a hundred other people who were accidentally in the neighborhood. Again, no one ever talks to you for opening your mouth.

Jury or no jury, both processes are useless to a victim and equally damaging to the social fabric. Best case scenarios occur in very small percentages. Don't listen to your Amber G's gloating about how it worked for them. Every lottery has a winner and a million other unknown sour losers.

administrative remedies : Don't exist. Lets not try to introduce fantasies into the debate.

The slaves themselves quite seem to like this state of affairs. Status quo has great inertia. You can ask anyone a simple question --- are you doing this for your 15 minutes of fame, or are you in it for a matter of principle? -- and watch their spine melt into jelly. Individuals are corruptible (judges), and groups are equally gullible, no less corruptible, and more easily misled (jury).

So what does one do, apart from paying anything that befell your way in slavery to pay for the running of an entire legal office and waiting on "dates"? You will not use these recourses, nor would anyone else I have ever known. So why legislate or enforce them (jury or no jury) for others who will not have that choice? Every one falls back to informal "support", "connections", "compromise", and "settlement" methods.

Is there any reason not to? Can't beat them, period. This is in the back of your mind as an accepted fact right now.

Is duplicity really the only choice? And if so why the pretense and keyboard fights, there are better things to do with the time in the real world.

[negi]

negiji, you have written the truth.

I am only attacking a very very specific topic under a rather large topic which you have started i.e. overall standard of living in west say for instance US as compare to India for any Indian. Now my sample size is rather limited i.e. just me and my aquaintances which are in single digits.

Indians see the US from 10,000 feet and it appears rosy. People in America see India from 10,000 feet and it appears bad and that appearance is supported by ground reports such as the one you have made.

Let me put it this way in real life outside internet forums all of us just see things as and when we come in contact with them i.e. my impression about a company, person, house, village, city , water , job, salary are all formed when I experience those and when you get to experience these things at different places you are in a position to draw comparisons so in my first post what I posted was by and large from my personal experience, in other words it is not a 10000 feet view of the USA or India it is in fact from ground zero based on my life and experiences living in both the countries.

The academic discussion here is to see if the rosy US as seen from 10,000 feet is rosy for everyone. Certainly it is rosy for a select band of Indians who are already educated . Among the already highly educated Indian, barely 4% (or less) go to the US and practically no one who is uneducated in India will get to the US to lead the life of US nirvana in inexpensive schools which are bigger than football fields. 99% of Indians do not go to the US but many believe that the US is much better.

Rosy is hard to quantify but lets take a step back and since you too have spent some time out of India recollect from our interaction with other Indians in various trades if they have a better standard of living in the west for a given job as against say in India. Take a cab driver or a pizza delivery chap for instance and ask if he will be able to provide for leave alone save enough for his family doing the same job in India as against say in London or even in some tier II city in the USA ?

As for educated Indians this forum could be a nice start as a vast % if not majority of posters on this board are NRIs so if you were to create a poll on this topic I think we would get a decent picture from that miniscule % who are well educated NRI types.

Going to the US itself is highly competitive. Those who go rightly feel that they are the cream of the cream and they are justified in enjoying their success and talking about how bad it is in India. If you are already rich enough to get an education in India you can use that education to get to the US. The losers who remain behind in India need to suck that up. But you have to be educated in India before the US even talks about letting you in. The US allows in educated Indians in a numbers lottery that the US decides.

I agree .

Indians who do not have the wealth to get an education in India do not stand a chance to go to the US. But even the uneducated in India are told that the US is so good because everyone is happy and everyone has money in the US. Therefore it becomes necessary to go to the US by hook or by crook for some people. Uneducated Indians rarely get a chance to go to the US except by Sangeeta Richard T-visa route. But a lot of uneducated Mexicans, Haitians, Nicaraguans etc do manage to get it. Ground reports from the USA suggest that uneducated migrants remain poor and uneducated and do not have it as rosy in the US as educated Indians.

I agree again however definition of poor in the USA is different from poor in India right ? I mean unless we are laying down some minimum standards for that here on this thread it will be difficult to make conclusions in absence of hard data. For instance families with household income of <=23000 USD is considered poor in the state of California. However a similar standard is missing in India if I were to use BPL standard and use say INR 100 per day number (~1.25 USD) then we get to a figure of 36500 INR per anum.

With variables housing, healthcare , schooling etc thrown in drawing conclusions won't be easy as I said this will need much serious academic work to make sense which to be honest I am incapable of doing.

Indians need to be told that if they are uneducated they need not bother worrying about America, which is unreachable for them. If an Indian is educated - he could possibly reach US nirvana - but he should not bet on it because the chances of getting there are about 1%.

I am not sure if Indians need to be told or anything of that sorts , however one fact is uneducated (without professional college degree) but who can read and write english make it to US (legally via sponsorshisp or illegally) and land up a job like driving a cab, working at a gas pump, motel etc etc they do have a better standard of living there as against doing that same job here and the reason is very fundamental i.e. basic living conditions there are higher .

Indians in the US are truly a higher caste, and that higher caste level is reached by first getting an education in India and them making it to the US. It really is highly competitive, and it will get even more competitive as more Indians get educated. These are hard facts that Indians need to suck up and swallow. Their lives are going to be in India onlee. For good or bad.

Well going to the US is by no means an end goal in itself, fact is with our kind of population and population growth rate a lot of us will have to migrate to other places be it US/UK/Ger or even places like Kenya for India as a landmass cannot provide for us all specially not at a time, ease and amount in which one may need . Need for migration is pretty fundamental .

[Shreeman]

Material benefits are such a miniscule amount of one's life experience, yet that judgement does not arrive until the useful part of the lifespan is over in a slave. If you are trying too hard to be upwardly mobile financially, reconsider. No one else can define too hard for you. So don't ask.

It is not only rape vs sexual assualt vs standard procedure that are the veils; for comparison there is travel vs immigration vs relocation. Do not mistake migration for freedom of movement. It is only the master that changes in migration. You want to be emancipated, demand and achieve freedom of movement.

Travel or geolocation or loyalty is NOT the point. People in your advanced societies still murder others over sports loyalties, and not even in small numbers. High fructose corn syrup is not a value added to humanity.

It is the virtual shackles that now even prevent free thought. Bias towards ones masters creeps in the subconscious without recognition, if only in aid of self-preservation. I too wonder who else is reeading this!

[negi]

Material benefits are such a miniscule amount of one's life experience, yet that judgement does not arrive until the useful part of the lifespan is over in a slave. If you are trying too hard to be upwardly mobile financially, reconsider. No one else can define too hard for you. So don't ask.

Well sir spending hours on an internet forum , paying for internet BW (your/employer's pocket) on a computer and then claim material benefits are are MINISCULE amount of one's life experience is ironic to say the least. Can you name anyone who has a family and kid to raise and is not MATERIALISTIC ? Only those who have no ambitions can attain a state where they don't want anything not even a needless debate on an internet forum is when one can claim to be not materialistic .

By and large majority of people in this world are materialistic even in advanced stages of their lives people want to see their kids prosper , attend weddings of their grand kids, take a sabbatical from work and see the world or even go to a teerath sthaan all these are material needs.

[Shreeman]

Material benefits are such a miniscule amount of one's life experience, yet that judgement does not arrive until the useful part of the lifespan is over in a slave. If you are trying too hard to be upwardly mobile financially, reconsider. No one else can define too hard for you. So don't ask.

Well sir spending hours on an internet forum , paying for internet BW (your/employer's pocket) on a computer and then claim material benefits are are MINISCULE amount of one's life experience is ironic to say the least. Can you name anyone who has a family and kid to raise and is not MATERIALISTIC ? Only those who have no ambitions can attain a state where they don't want anything not even a needless debate on an internet forum is when one can claim to be not materialistic .

By and large majority of people in this world are materialistic even in advanced stages of their lives people want to see their kids prosper , attend weddings of their grand kids, take a sabbatical from work and see the world or even go to a teerath sthaan all these are material needs.

Perspective, young padawan. There are two right before your eyes. Look up. (ps -- not me, not guilty; not for me to judge either).

Pursuit of rapid financial gains /= material comfort /= universal philosophy /= slavery/emancipation. Only time will provide the perspective. In this specific case, at least I am powerless. One knows when one is beaten, fair and square.

[shiv]

I am not sure if Indians need to be told or anything of that sorts , however one fact is uneducated (without professional college degree) but who can read and write english make it to US (legally via sponsorshisp or illegally) and land up a job like driving a cab, working at a gas pump, motel etc etc they do have a better standard of living there as against doing that same job here and the reason is very fundamental i.e. basic living conditions there are higher .
<snip>
Well going to the US is by no means an end goal in itself, fact is with our kind of population and population growth rate a lot of us will have to migrate to other places be it US/UK/Ger or even places like Kenya for India as a landmass cannot provide for us all specially not at a time, ease and amount in which one may need . Need for migration is pretty fundamental .

negi - look at the numbers.

You may buy a lottery ticket because you are feeling lucky, but your realistic chances of winning are abysmally low.

The number of Indians without college degrees who get to the US is similarly abysmally low. And I found, but did not post links to statistics for poverty among people without college degrees who manage to get to the US from Mexico, Nicaragua etc. Two thirds remain poor and uneducated in the US.

I am sure I can dig up figures for you but I think at least 90% of Indians (1 billion) do not have college degrees. From this group maybe 5,000 get to the US in a year, legally or illegally. There is virtually no hope.

But yet, do an informal survey of any Indian with the slightest education and he will tell you that the US is a great country where anyone can earn money and make it big. That is how the US is promoted and advertised.

In theory that is true. In practice it is nonsense. I think Indians need to be informed about their chances of making it big in America, and realistic chances of what their lifestyle is going to be. For that group life will be bad. How bad? We have to assess whether "bad" means being poor in America without family or being poor in India with family. We need not make that assessment. We can provide Indians with information about how much money an uneducated (less than college degree) American gets and whether than money is enough to keep him united with his family, (or at least meet them once a year), while leaving enough aside for him to pay medical expenses and buy a house.

The figures that I have seen for the US poor suggest that the poor in the US can have food, schooling, a car, a laptop and an internet connection. But they can't get a house, and they don't get healthcare. And people who have come from India low low wage US jobs (not Mexico next door) also have to remain separate from families back in India because travel to and from India even once a year is expensive for a person living near poverty level in the US. They will not get paid leave. For a young bachelor all these things may be acceptable, for a while. For an older person with family in India, it amounts to high wage slavery.

The bottom line is that living in India will be the fate of most Indians. The chances of going elsewhere if you are poor and uneducated in India is so small that it would be bad advice to give anyone. Constantly claiming that "outside is better" is a lie simply because going out and surviving elsewhere is not feasible for 99% of Indians. More people make it and survive inside India than the number who make it abroad. That is the simple truth.

Indians who are interested need to set aside some time and effort for making things better for the worst off in India, ignoring the fact that their own relatively secure lives in india might be much worse than the man who was lucky enough to win the lottery/get a god job in America.

[shiv]

Well sir spending hours on an internet forum , paying for internet BW (your/employer's pocket) on a computer and then claim material benefits are are MINISCULE amount of one's life experience is ironic to say the least. Can you name anyone who has a family and kid to raise and is not MATERIALISTIC ? Only those who have no ambitions can attain a state where they don't want anything not even a needless debate on an internet forum is when one can claim to be not materialistic .

Among Indians, at least among Hindus, materialism is necessary for the phase of life when one is a grihasta where one's responsibility is to maintain a family, look after one's parents and ensure that one's children are educated. After that materialism is optional. Many do abjure materialism if they feel their life's duties have been fulfilled - but "fulfillment" comes from actually performing one's life's duties - not simply having a lot of money 10,000 miles away while parents die and kids grow up without daddy/mummy.

The question is whether the above duties, namely to maintain a family, look after one's parents and ensure that one's children are educated can be done better by an uneducated Indian going to America as an unskilled low wage worker, or remaining in India as an unskilled low wage worker.

In practice the US is unreachable for the uneducated, unskilled Indian. but the Gulf allows enough closeness to one's family and just enough money despite lack of rights and slavery like conditions. Indians in the gulf contribute more money to India than Indians in America - so the choices made by Indians is easy to assess.

[negi]

Shiv ji

Let me take the first central theme:

1. Migration to the west is being promoted in India and it is being claimed that it is a better land.


I agree that migration is happening but and following is what imho pretty close to real life

a. In tier 1 city : Beta study in IIT/MMBS > Do MS/specialization > West for research> settle (lot of examples of peers or seniors given as a proof)

b. In tier 2 cities: Beta do MCA/Engg> Join ITVTY> after 2-3 years go to USA on work visa (better pay) > again lot of peers and seniors as examples.

3. In villages: Beta at least finish high school> go to city> find a job> (this too is movement however from village to a city within a nation ) > A very miniscule % of #3 when at right place at right time will make it to say ME/SA/West.


#3 is what constitutes 90% of Indian junta and no one is telling them to go to USA/UK.

Shiv ji unless I am mistaken the need to migrate to another country is fundamentally the same as in case of folks from villages moving to cities , depending on one's socio economic background one makes these moves.

So there is no conscious effort imho to advertise migration or movement to other countries as such however it happens automatically in stages some do it consciously (say for example it would be safe to say that in ITVTY moving to the US temporarily or on a permanent basis is pretty much true for majority of the folks) and many do it because they have no options (migrant labourers ).

Finally yes you are right about me being from that miniscule % who were lucky to get a decent education , however that does not change the reality that people regardless of their socio economic background are always in the lookout for something BETTER and this is based on their perception which is formed by primarily looking at their peers, neighbors or other folks in same town.

[negi]

Among Indians, at least among Hindus, materialism is necessary for the phase of life when one is a grihasta where one's responsibility is to maintain a family, look after one's parents and ensure that one's children are educated. After that materialism is optional.

Well in ideal case yes what you say is right, however how many practice it ? How many of us here had grand parents who did not always want something more even in advanced stages of their lives ? My grand mother wants to dance in my marriage and wants to see my kids, isn't that what is called as 'MOHA' ? i.e. Materialism ?

Many do abjure materialism if they feel their life's duties have been fulfilled - but "fulfillment" comes from actually performing one's life's duties - not simply having a lot of money 10,000 miles away while parents die and kids grow up without daddy/mummy.

While I wanted to say I agree, let me throw a scenario out here:

I am just a high school passout say 24 years of age without a job, with parents and a wife+kid to take care of I would be a desperate man, someone tells me hey if you could arrange for INR 50k I would get you a UK vijja , I get that done land up in UK on forged papers and take up some job. I am able to make enough to send a neat INR 30k back home every month to India. So yes I am missing out on seeing my kid grow, I am not there for my wife and my parents on those numerous occasions when me being there would have helped but that 30k INR which send back every month makes sure that house rent gets paid every month and that my kid goes to school . Am I being materialistic ? Of course but you tell me what are the alternatives ? Unless someone calls me from India and tells me hey negi come back I will pay you INR 20k every month for driving Mr xyz's car there is no way I could leave a job which feeds me and my family.

The question is whether the above duties, namely to maintain a family, look after one's parents and ensure that one's children are educated can be done better by an uneducated Indian going to America as an unskilled low wage worker, or remaining in India as an unskilled low wage worker.

No one can answer this question Shiv ji, decision to make a move are taken based on circumstances at a juncture when one is desperate specially for the people who are uneducated for it is primarily them who struggle to make ends meet.
Be it a migrant labourer from Orissa who works for Hiranandani conrtuctions in Powai or a plumber from Thrissur who has flown to the Gulf most of them have few or no options but to make a move.

In practice the US is unreachable for the uneducated, unskilled Indian. but the Gulf allows enough closeness to one's family and just enough money despite lack of rights and slavery like conditions. Indians in the gulf contribute more money to India than Indians in America - so the choices made by Indians is easy to assess.

I agree.

[shiv]

No one can answer this question Shiv ji, decision to make a move are taken based on circumstances at a juncture when one is desperate specially for the people who are uneducated for it is primarily them who struggle to make ends meet.

No. This is where I must disagree. Answers must be sought for questions that seem to have no answer today.

The US and "developed countries" reached where they are today by taking informed and intelligent decisions about what is good for their people and what is not. When they needed unskilled labour for mills, the simply imported them and employed them cheap. When they needed skilled labour in hospitals and industries they simply imported and employed cheap labour.

What we need to do is study the outcomes of different life choices made by Indians and be able to say what is good and what is not good based on hard statistics. Indians need to be informed so that they make good choices, not bad ones. Right now we spend our time guessing that something is good and something else is not good. In this era of Googal and internet this is wrong.

I believe I have reached a stage in life when I am able to comment on life choices made by Indians and comment on which ones were good and which ones were not so good, and which ones were pretty much the same in terms of happiness/quality of life after 30 years. This is useful life information that I certainly share with younger people. But such information needs to go out far beyond and reach more people and the information needs to be researched properly and documented.

Simply guessing that this may be good or bad is compatible with blaming fate or "naseeb" depending on whether it works or not. It would be far better to look at available information and base advice or choices on that.

One small part of this job would be to examine what types of people migrate simply to become high wage slaves. It still happens, and it needs to be recorded and documented. And if it happens in countries that advertise themselves as nirvana or countries who fail to admit that they are giving less than a fair deal to migrants - Indians who may get into such situations need to be told. Alternatively if there are places where Indians can go - of course they should have that information as well. Either way proper study is needed. Not random guesswork.

[shiv]

Shiv ji unless I am mistaken the need to migrate to another country is fundamentally the same as in case of folks from villages moving to cities , depending on one's socio economic background one makes these moves.

So there is no conscious effort imho to advertise migration or movement to other countries as such .

negi, the fundamental reasons that underlie people moving may always be to get a better life, but useful information about where your chances are best will give them a better chance.

Randomly imagining (for example) that "Hey I live in a village today, but if I go to Delhi I can earn 5x, but if I go to NooYawk I can earn 500x is correct in theory but bad advice to give anyone because it is easy to go to Delhi and reverse one's steps relatively cheaply. Managing to get to NooYawk and then being less than satisfied, or simply exchanging one kind of lousy life for another kind of lousy life would be a bad choice if one were unable to reverse the decision easily.

Choices must be based on good information, not hearsay. I cannot judge how happy or how unhappy everyone is in India - but I do know that a lot of migrants to cities do live a hard life, but they also manage to get back to their villages for Dussehra, Diwali, other festivals, births, deaths and marriages.

Questions about quality of life are based on the availability of basic human necessities. But how do people define basic human necessities?

Roti, kapda, makaan are basic for the individual. But Indians are culturally linked with families, parents, siblings and children. Roti, kapda, makaan are basic for the family too.

Family has some drawbacks and some advantages. Roti and kapda for an individual is cheaper than for family. But makaan can be shared and if more than one person can work, makaan gets cheaper.

Travel to and from work is another major issue for the poor. Slum life is not good, but a slum 2 km from the workplace is cheaper than a rented house 25 km away. Saves money and time. Sharing a small room reduces the cost. Everyone falls sick for a few days a year. It may be just a fever and cough. Family provides great support at such a time - far better than living as an individual.

If you take a man and tell him he can earn 25,000 dollars a year as a taxi driver in the US - the figure looks like wow! Rs 1.25 lakhs a month you are actually telling him a white lie. He may make that much but it would not be easy for him to live a life alone in the US let alone with family. And if he has family to support in India his poverty and loneliness in NooYawk might only add to his misery.

A lot of Indians opt to return to India because they see "foreign" as a possible temporary way of making money after which life is undoubtedly better in India. Of course that is their choice - but of they must go abroad, why not give them correct information about what is best? Why live with myths and guesswork?