[kergonath]

I cannot voluntarily not work, and I don’t get to choose who gets the benefits of my work. And I am in a privileged situation because I could lose my work and still pay rent for long enough to find another one, but this is not the case for a vast class of people in western countries. These people are effectively bound to their employer because losing their job means losing their home and means of subsistence.

The world is not black and white, and the fact that a situation is not as absolutely terrible as a sex slave in Mauritania should not shut down any discussion. There are shades of involuntary work.

[matkoniecz]

> These people are effectively bound to their employer because losing their job means losing their home and means of subsistence.

Even in this case it is still significantly better than being enslaved.

Even with the worst wage labour people still have option to leave it. Slave owner can force slaves into mine and never let them out and force them to work in horrific conditions until they die. Happened in many places across history, likely still happens somewhere.

With enough stuff like company scrip, company stores, ensuring that laws outlaw being homeless and deliberate breaking of relationship allowing people to escape you can get situation undistinguishable from slavery.

But just "if I will be fired then I am instantly homeless" is still markedly better than "my owner can force me to work to death in a mine".

> The world is not black and white, and the fact that a situation is not as absolutely terrible as a sex slave in Mauritania should not shut down any discussion. There are shades of involuntary work.

Definitely! I am not claiming that oppression does not exist but "wage labour is tantamount to slavery" is an absurd claim.

[kqr]

You work for somewhere between 6 and 14 hours per day, and the rest of the time you can choose to spend anywhere you're able to go, and tie relationships with whomever you're able to attract, and your owner can't decide these things for you. That's a categorical difference, not one of degree.

[heavyset_go]

Mandatory on-call duty exists, as do drug tests, background checks, security clearances, etc. Employers can certainly decide how "free time" is spent and with whom you associate.

[kqr]

For employees under such rules, it certainly is a notch closer to slavery. I would guess the vast majority of people on this site are not under such rules.

[heavyset_go]

There are plenty of people on this site whose free time is constricted by their employers because of things like non-compete agreements and anti-moonlighting clauses.