Hacker News Reader

Comment by akshtest | Hacker News Reader

Typical idiotic argument by NYTimes, As someone who had multiple servants working at my home (a cook and cleaner), so that my mother could work at her job. I find the argument "If you can't pay a decent wage, don't hire one" idiotic. Wages are determined by market, and in case of our house, we routinely had to give a raise as well as bonus near holidays. Simply because reliable servants are hard to find. Who determines the "Decent" wage, idiots at NYTimes?

This is the same misguided argument against garment factory workers from Bangladesh and FOXCONN workers in China. Rest of the world does not have the luxury of Social Security, Food Stamps, Medicaid and a ridiculous minimum wage.

View on HN

> Wages are determined by market

Yet there is a minimum salary you ought to pay in the USA. Your comment is rather idotic too if you ignore that fact.

> Who determines the "Decent" wage, idiots at NYTimes?

yeah , who?

> This is the same misguided argument against garment factory workers from Bangladesh and FOXCONN workers in China. Rest of the world does not have the luxury of Social Security, Food Stamps, Medicaid and a ridiculous minimum wage.

ok,I wont even bother answer that. When you find yourself in a dire situation , remember that comment you've made.

Market! Market determines the wage.

>> minimum salary you ought to pay in the USA

Yes, but it was an Indian diplomat, and the comment is made wrt indian society, where there is no prevailing minimum wage. There are other issues such as visa status of the maid as au-pair.

>> ok,I wont even bother answer that. When you find yourself in a dire situation , remember that comment you've made.

Oh we as a humanity are already in that dire situation. The pseudo intellectuals at NYTimes, don't want anyone to work. This cute worldview is only held by affluent people in USA. Even Germany does not have a minimum wage and it is reflected in their unemployment rates. In USA it just means hiring illegal aliens.

I think the disconnect between the author and you is that the author has empathy for impoverished people.

Try to understand their plight. They are born poor and die poor. Why? Because they were unlucky enough to be born poor. You were lucky to be born into a family that could afford servants.

Poverty is relative, the servants who worked at my home were paid close if not more than median income India.

The daughter of both cleaner and the cook, went and graduated from a degree college. Guess what my mother who works for an Airline in India as a manager makes less 7.5 dollars per hour.

The word servant conjures a completely wrong image. The difference is not in empathy, its in understanding of economic conditions. India with its excess population, allows cheap labor, not utilizing it is idiotic.

i don't understand. for years my mom worked at her job (12hrs night shift, hard labor, without most of her fingers on one hand which she lost in an accident), cooked and cleaned, and took care of her young children

while I respect what your mom did. I think the point the OP is trying to make is that - there were people willing to work for the amount of money that his mother could afford to pay for them to do it. Its really not any different from when you hire people on Mechanical Turk to solve tasks that you're time isnt worth spending on.

i understand the surface argument. but it read as if they thought a servant was some kind of necessity, when it's clearly a luxury. this is probably a misunderstanding on my part, but that's the vibe i got

well - if you understand society in India - depending on where you live - it can very much be a neccessity as well. It may be a clear luxury for someone living in the west. But there cant be 2 more different places than a developed country in the West and India.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com