Indentured servitude is wrong, unless the governemnt does it.

[max_cool]

Think about it on the basic level, indentured servitude is the agreement that one will work for another under certain conditions in a certain location for a certain period of time and for such work they will receive certain benefits. aren't government programs that say they will pay off undergrad or grad student loans if they work for a particular agency in a specific location for pre-determined amount of time, the benefits being payment of student loans and some sort of compensatory wage to live off of, pretty much the same as indentured servitude?

Further, is military service not also indentured servitude?

[MrAngryFace]

I think it has more to do with having no other options.

[max_cool]

how do you mean?

Indentured servitude was only generally agreed to by people that have no other options, how is that different from some one who has no other options than military service of some other form of service to the government?

[MrAngryFace]

I think your idea of 'no other options', and an actual person with 'no other options' are a bit different.

[Mandark]

I think ye olde analogue would be an apprenticeship, where someone commits to several years working for someone while they learn a craft that will let them have an independent career in the same field later.

Indentured servitude was more "You do whatever I say for X years, then start from scratch when you're done," AFAIK.

[Van Cruncheon]

also, you get PAID in the military. taking your definition, professional sports with their fixed-lengths contracts are indentured servitude.

[max_cool]

some good points. I guess it all relies on what one defines "indentured servitude" to include/mean.

In practice, it was not far from slavery as was mentioned above. When one dissects the words used, however, we get: indentured, to bind (as an apprentice) by or as if by indentures (indentures means, for the purposes discussed here: a contract binding one person to work for another for a given period of time -- often used in plural) and Servant, one that serves others.

So we end up with a plain language definition that means, someone bound by contract for a certain period of time that serves others.

interesting, it has no mention of compensation.

So we may be able to say that there IS in fact a difference between certain types of government service and other similar situations AND indentured service as defined above and especially as it is commonly understood.

neat.

[Van Cruncheon]

now let's talk about indentured erections

[max_cool]

that sounds painful 

[Fresh Prince]

This sounds like an essay question.

[Phoenix Dark]

Indentured servitude is usually marked by one party paying off their debts to another party through some time of service. For instance, the first Africans - and many of the first whites - who came to North America came as indentured servants. Their voyage to the New World was payed for by the powers that be in Europe; to pay off this dept they worked to build and maintain colonies such as Jamestown.

It has little to do with receiving "benefits", and instead is a process of paying off debt. As Drinky pointed out, the military doesn't fit this category because payment is involved - before and after the service; you can get a signing bonus in some cases for instance.

[max_cool]

Indentured servitude is usually marked by one party paying off their debts to another party through some time of service. For instance, the first Africans - and many of the first whites - who came to North America came as indentured servants. Their voyage to the New World was payed for by the powers that be in Europe; to pay off this dept they worked to build and maintain colonies such as Jamestown.

It has little to do with receiving "benefits", and instead is a process of paying off debt. As Drinky pointed out, the military doesn't fit this category because payment is involved - before and after the service; you can get a signing bonus in some cases for instance.

well, working only to pay off your debts and not receiving some sort of additional benefit (food, board, money) in order to sustain life makes it nigh impossible to work off those debts and thus requires some sort of additional benefit. I say additional benefit because the paying off of debt by labor is in itself a benefit of such labor.

[Mandark]

If you want to talk about possibly unethical use of workers by the government, look into prison labor.

Not that it's ever going to turn into a major political issue.  Felons have shit for lobbyists.

[Phoenix Dark]

Indentured servitude is usually marked by one party paying off their debts to another party through some time of service. For instance, the first Africans - and many of the first whites - who came to North America came as indentured servants. Their voyage to the New World was payed for by the powers that be in Europe; to pay off this dept they worked to build and maintain colonies such as Jamestown.

It has little to do with receiving "benefits", and instead is a process of paying off debt. As Drinky pointed out, the military doesn't fit this category because payment is involved - before and after the service; you can get a signing bonus in some cases for instance.

well, if working only to pay off your debts and not receiving some sort of benefit (food, board, money) in order to sustain life makes it migh impossible to work off those debts. Additionally, the paying off of debt by labor is in itself a benefit of such labor.

Think of it as a package: I pay for your trip, pay for your housing, etc. You provide the afore mentioned service for five years, after which your end of the contract is up.

You don't see many (if any) forms of indentured servitude in modern US history. I don't think education loans qualify because they don't meet the debt requirement. Indentureship often began when someone was in debt of another. Say I borrowed $100 from someone and couldn't pay it back. Today that case would most likely become a court case (or sensual quid pro quo  ). A few hundred years ago I would be forced to pay it off through some type of physical exchange (servitude). Students often apply for a loan; they don't borrow money, fail to pay it - and then get forced to become math teachers in Harlem or else

[cloudwalking]

my great grandmother was an indentured servant from britain when she came to canada. after she had done her time she became a nurse

[Phoenix Dark]

You know all about indentured servitude

[max_cool]

Indentured servitude is usually marked by one party paying off their debts to another party through some time of service. For instance, the first Africans - and many of the first whites - who came to North America came as indentured servants. Their voyage to the New World was payed for by the powers that be in Europe; to pay off this dept they worked to build and maintain colonies such as Jamestown.

It has little to do with receiving "benefits", and instead is a process of paying off debt. As Drinky pointed out, the military doesn't fit this category because payment is involved - before and after the service; you can get a signing bonus in some cases for instance.

well, if working only to pay off your debts and not receiving some sort of benefit (food, board, money) in order to sustain life makes it migh impossible to work off those debts. Additionally, the paying off of debt by labor is in itself a benefit of such labor.

Think of it as a package: I pay for your trip, pay for your housing, etc. You provide the afore mentioned service for five years, after which your end of the contract is up.

 Students often apply for a loan; they don't borrow money, fail to pay it - and then get forced to become math teachers in Harlem or else

The first part is true of many debt repayment programs, in fact 5 years is pretty standard. The second part where the government comes calling on the money you owe, well they can coerce you to pay it off, one way or another. That's government in it's base form (an institution that has the legitimate use of violence withing a given boundary). And that is where I came up with the initial hypothesis that indentured servitude is no different than oweing the government som dent through voluntary actions. We already established that the two are different

I appears to me that you are essentially agreeing the the initial hypotheses of the thread. It doesn't appear that you are explicitly stating this.

[brawndolicious]

well I read a story of this one construction company hired to build the embassy in iraq or something and there was basically a case of slavery in that company.  The story was told by this one american politician who oversaw the construction (I think he was the ambassador), he said:

the company (First Kuwaiti) hired a bunch of guys from the Philippines and told them they would work in Kuwait like building a hotel or something.  once they get on the plane they're told they'll work in baghdad, they say they wouldn't exactly be happy with that, so the guard waves a MP9 in the air and they shut up and get on the plane and work in baghdad.

I would say that's basically slavery.