Small Business

Asian Nail Salon Staff Demand Apology From The New York Times for Poverty-Porn Series That's Costing Them Jobs

Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

|

Jim Epstein

On Tuesday morning, New York City nail salon owners and employees mobbed The New York Times' office in protest of the paper's coverage of their industry. "We've all come together because of the New York Times' misleading article," one protester told Jezebel's Helen Holmes. "I couldn't say discrimination, but the New York Times is not doing the fair thing for our community." The article in question (actually a two-part series, called "Unvarnished") was published by the Times in May. Reporter Sarah Maslin Nir said she wanted to highlight the pervasive worker exploitation she believed took place in the city's Asian nail salons.

Response to Nir's "expose" was swift and emotional, with fashion-bloggers crowing about how they would rethink their weekly mani-pedis and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo ushering through a package of "emergency protections" for salon staff. The state also launched a Nail Salon Enforcement Task Force which, by mid-July, had issued 1,799 new citations to nail salons. Officials heralded this as a step toward stamping out salon-worker exploitation, while activists and Twitter bleeding-hearts took it as proof that Nir's prognoses was right: these salon owners were out of control, and needed the government to put them in their place.

New York authorities had been on a crusade since at least year to regulate nail salons more tightly. It seems Nir's article provided the impetus and public support enabling the city to do just that. 

But you know who hasn't been so psyched about the new worker "protections?" The people who actually work at nail salons. Because of citations and new regulations, some salons have been forced to close, costing the women who worked there their jobs. Because of rules mandating extra pay for overtime work, manicurists saw hours cut back. "I know the article tried to help us," an Upper East Side salon employee told the Times in July. "But for some employees it created a worse situation."

Lindsay Robertson/Flickr

In August, nail salons across New York City closed for several days in protest. Signs posted on their shuttered doors mentioned the city's "unfair regulations," suggesting that worker protection was merely a convenient excuse for a government looking to wrest fine-money small businesses.

In September, several hundred salon staffers and owners rallied at Manhattan's City Hall against a requirement that all salons purchase a wage bond by Oct. 6, 2015 or face significant fines and possible shutdown. The Korean-American Nail Salon Association and the Chinese Nail Salon Association also filed a lawsuit in New York's high court seeking to overturn the wage-bond requirement. A wage bond serves as a sort of insurance if a business is found to have stiffed workers on pay, but for the vast majority of nail salons that aren't exploitative, it's simply an extra annual cost—no small deal for small businesses with small profit margins.

The wage bond was also a target of last Tuesday's protest, where many of those gathered wore shirts saying, "No Wage Bond. Stop Squeezing Small Business!" Other signs at the protest were emblazoned with messages such as "New York Times Please Don't Lie!" and "Apology Now! Fire Nir!" What's more, "wage bonds are not readily available in the marketplace," according to the nail-salon lobby's lawsuit. The state has "imposed these wage-bond requirements despite countless pleas from nail-salon owners to lift or delay the requirements until wage bonds are readily available to them in the marketplace, as required by law." They also claim "there is ample evidence that (the state is) selectively enforcing wage bonds requirements against Asian-American nail salon owners." 

Matt Chabin/Twitter

Reason's Jim Epstein was at Tuesday's protest, and he has been re-interviewing many of the folks mentioned in Nir's story. All I'll say for now is that … his discoveries have been interesting (stay tuned next week!). But while Epstein's upcoming work goes above and beyond other rebuttals of the Times' "Unvarnished" series, he won't be the first to question the accuracy of Nir's reporting and storytelling. In July Richard Bernstein, a former Times staffer who owns two New York City spas with his Chinese wife, challenged several central claims in Nir's work, including her assertion that pay as low as $10 per day was common in the city's Asian nail salons. 

Epstein and I have both been covering this nail-salon saga at Reason, and were among the first to criticize Nir's article and its conclusions. At the time, I received a lot of snarky, impassioned social-media messages and blog mentions from people condemning libertarians' alleged disregard for workers and poor people and immigrants—nevermind that my central critique all along has been that actually, the "protections" Nir and her allies wanted would make marginalized and immigrant laborers worse off. Rather than be right, I'd much prefer to see these people's struggles eased, so it's bittersweet being vindicated here.

If there's a silver lining… well, I'd like to think that the massive outcry from salon staff against their self-appointed saviors may actually change minds a little on the liberal side—make them rethink whether excessive regulation is always the best way to end alleged exploitation, and whether lurid advocacy journalism is the best basis for public policy. Perhaps even consider that maybe, just maybe, libertarians oppose this shit not out of some childishly rebellious attitude or yearning for the robber-baron days but precisely because it hurts those in precarious positions the most. But I won't hold my breath. For a lot of people, it's much easier to see the world as a black-and-white struggle between vulnerable workers and exploitative bosses, between honorable pro-regulatory types who care for the poor and their greedy, small-government foes. It's much easier not to think too hard about these things. 

When asked about her biggest takeaway from writing the "Unvarnished" series, Nir said: "The only way that you can have something decadent for a cheap price is by someone being exploited." I think Nir's statement might be right in this case, just not in the way that she intended it. I'm reminded of all the online outrage- and sympathy-mongering in the wake of the articles' publication, all the pearl-clutching about these poor othered Asian ladies, the indignant responses to anyone with objections, the unalloyed praise when Cuomo passed his new laws. Moral righteousness is pretty decadent, especially when it comes as cheaply as reading a free newspaper article and sending off a few meticulously earnest tweets. All it costs is more exploitation of the same people this moral majority pretends to care about. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

155 responses to “Asian Nail Salon Staff Demand Apology From The New York Times for Poverty-Porn Series That's Costing Them Jobs

  1. Huh. Is the New York Times covering this story?

    Just kidding.

    1. They will try to smother it, either in silence or in more lies.

  2. Nice ENB, good article, and I can’t wait to see the re-reporting article next week. I hope your right and this will cause a few liberals to look closer at what they take for granted, but honestly I hope the reporter will lose her job. We need some examples out there of what happens when you do bad fact checking in search of a lurid head line, because right now it looks like you get a couple awards, then weather some bad press while keeping your job, then go on with your life.

    1. She was sooooooooo awful and dismissive on Twitter when people have challenged her too

      1. Wow her Twitter feed is…something alright.

      2. ORLY? I’ll take it from here.

      3. Does she have a Masters from Columbia?

      4. You know what other reporter was awful and dismissive on Twitter when Reason called her out on BS?

        You guys need a trophy wall.

        1. Something tells me that the right answer isn’t Hitler….

    2. I hope the reporter will lose her job

      Refresh my memory: did Erdely lose her job at Rolling Stone after the UVA gang rape hoax story? If not, I wouldn’t hold my breathe on Nir being fired over a phony nail salon expose.

      As for leftist shitheads actually learning anything from this: fat chance there too. They’ll dust themselves off and then jump right back on their moral high horse and move on to their next smug, moralistic crusade, comfortable in the knowledge that they’re better than you, and me, and pretty much anyone else who disagrees with them.

      1. Last I checked Erdely still has her job. In fact she was who I was referring to in the last half.

      2. Well, those workers are obviously suffering from false consciousness and don’t know what’s good for them.

      3. She’s still there, but I think they stuck her in the sandbox. She has enough dirt to bring down the entire operation, so she’ll be getting hush money for quite a while.

      4. Progressives don’t really care what happens to Asians as a result of progressive policies. I don’t believe I need to explain why.

        1. Is it because they aren’t black or hispanic?

        2. They should quit stealin’ all our math then!

      5. Their “moral high horse” was made by Greek sailors, no doubt.

    3. Agreed, good article.

      I especially like how she’s working comedy into her articles now.

      If there’s a silver lining… well, I’d like to think that the massive outcry from salon staff against their self-appointed saviors may actually change minds a little on the liberal side

    4. I hope your right and this will cause a few liberals to look closer at what they take for granted

      ROFLMAO!!! Stop it!! I’m gonna’ pee!!!!!!

      Oh, wait…you were serious, weren’t you?

  3. Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

    DING DING DING DING.

    1. Liberals love _____________ in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

      Seriously. Whoever they pretend to be “helping” is a pure pretext for moral preening.

      Consequences be damned.

    2. No. Liberals do not love laborers. Liberals SAY they love laborers. Abusive men SAY they love their victims. If we judge Liberals by what they do, and by whatnthey keep doing even after the results are clear, then we must conclude that Liberals hate laborers, minorities, amd women.

      1. Why do you think I keep calling Tony a racist POS?

      2. Some don’t even claim to love laborers or minorities. They just think they need to be managed carefully so they don’t get out of hand. Which is why unions often get a pass on their more violent and destructive tactics.

        1. What it really comes down to is the desire to rule.

          I call the whole boiling bunch of them LIRPs, for Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressives. And what they are is the Clerisy. They went to college and got an education, and they think that makes them special. God knows why. Since WWII, all you’ve really needed to get a college Undergrad degree is passable high school grades and a willingness to enter into debt-slavery. Furthermore, most of the silly bastards aren’t educated in anything in particular. They’re just Educated, like the third son of an Earl in the regency era. No good to anyone, nothing for them to do other than get into trouble.

          But they think their education makes them ideally suited to tell the rest of us what to do.

          This is what the guillotine is for.

          1. ^^This^^

  4. OT:

    Now this is a first. Workers are filing discrimination suits alleging that they are being discriminated against because they ARE US Citizens…

    What’s being challenged in sum is the job replacement system created by the H-1B program. US IT workers as a condition for their severance are being made to train H-1B visa-holding contractor replacements to take over their jobs

    While I don’t generally agree with anti discrimination law and think this is a rather spurrious expansion of what that law means I can’t say I am entirely unsympathetic to what they are alleging. Basically the H1B program creates a group of second class workers that are legally cheaper to employ than the native citizens and green card holders putting those individuals at a serious disadvantage in the labor market

    1. VOTE TRUMP, HE WILL MAKE THOSE CHINESE BUILD A GREAT WALL!!!

      1. Well, they DO have pretty good references for that.

        1. Because they run City Wok?

    2. Are they legally cheaper to employ or simply cheaper to employ?

      1. Both.

        Cheaper in direct costs, and the leverage given to the employer by our hideous immigration system makes them cheaper and easier in almost every way.

        1. and the leverage given to the employer by our hideous immigration system makes them cheaper and easier in almost every way.

          Seems like that would be a complaint for the visa holders not the displaced American workers though.

          1. Not really, being legally a second class citizen in the US is both significantly more lucrative and a better life than living as a programmer in India

            1. Obviously it is, at least to them, because they are choosing to come here. But the suppression of their wages due to the leverage is an infringement on their freedom of association, not the american workers.

        2. Cheaper in direct costs, and the leverage given to the employer by our hideous immigration system makes them cheaper and easier in almost every way.

          So another government failure that is blamed on the “free market.”

    3. It’s a good point on how the regs are killing their jobs, but the precedent that would be set if this made it anywhere would be terrifying. They would essentially be saying you can’t discriminate based upon pay. The guy being paid $90,000 must be considered equal to the guy being paid $60,000. That is just a whole bunch of no.

    4. What’s being challenged, in sum, is the job replacement system created by the H-1B program. U.S. IT workers, as a condition for their severance, are being made to train H-1B visa-holding contractor replacements to take over their jobs.

      And how is this different than the industry’s standard practice of having older employees train younger greenhorns to take their jobs?

      1. Well those are fine young AMERICAN greenhorns not dirty foreigner greenhorns.

    5. I entirely believe that H-1B visas should not be sponsored by the employer, who can then use that position for leverage over the employee.

      I wonder if the complainants here believe that? Actually, I don’t.

    6. Maybe someone can explain to me why a company hiring an IT guy from India is an act of treason, but if you hire an undocumented Mexican to cut your lawn, that’s just kosher.

      I supposed if foreigner are taking jobs that you don’t want, that’s fine. But if the Mexicans ever come for tech jobs, watch out.

      1. The difference is if you abuse the Mexican, he can just stop working for you (I guess you could call immigration on him, but that doesn’t really happen all that much), whereas the Indian essentially has no leverage because you can get him booted from the country essentially whenever you want, so you can essentially use the threat of government force to pay him way below market wages and benefits.

  5. Perhaps even consider that maybe, just maybe, libertarians oppose this shit not out of some childishly rebellious attitude or yearning for the robber-baron days but precisely because it hurts those in precarious postitions the most.

    They will never concede this point. In their minds, every argument you make is a lie or motivated reasoning to keep the capitalist class in power. It is their faith and it can not be reasoned with.

    1. So what you’re saying is, you favor child labor?!?!??!!??

      Hey everyone, Microaggressor wants to return us to the time of the Industrial Revolution where children had to work as child laborers for the first time in human history!!!

      1. But industrial labor makes their meat extra juicy with all the suffering! How shall we have our monthly Child Feast otherwise?

        1. Me, my father, and a couple friends actually had this conversation a couple days ago.

          We were discussing, for some odd reason, what makes meat taste so good. The only reasonable conclusion that we could come to is that it’s the fear and suffering of a dying animal that imparts the best flavors. Now all we need to do is figure out how to increase the overall misery to promote maximized flavorness.

            1. Ding ding ding. FMSS has it 100% bass-ackward.

              We need to flood slaughterhouses with pot smoke, that’ll fix all the problems. And then that “Laughing Cow” company can sell beef, too!

          1. Adrenaline makes meat taste good. That’s why the Japanese will hang dolphins upside down conscious and drain their blood. The adrenaline makes the meat taste better.

            1. That’s why the Japanese will hang dolphins upside down conscious and drain their blood.

              I thought that was just because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “FUCK YOU DARPHIN! AND FUCK YOU WHAYRE!!1!!!!!”

              1. No no, they’ve been enlightened now. They hunt and kill Cow and Chicken for framing Dolphin and Whale just like westerners.

            2. Maybe dophins.

              For red meat, adrenaline makes it tough and gamey. Trust me on this; anyone who has made a less than optimal shot on a deer will confirm.

          2. The only reasonable conclusion that we could come to is that it’s the fear and suffering of a dying animal that imparts the best flavors.

            Actually I’ve heard the opposite. The adrenaline that gets released into the blood stream ends up causing the meet to taste bad. That’s why farm raised animals at slaughter houses are killed quickly and suddenly. It’s partially to be humane and not allow them to suffer, but also so that they’re adrenal glands don’t dump a shitload of adrenaline into their system. Same with wild game: an animal that’s been killed quickly and cleanly tends to have better tasting meat than one that suffered. Or so I’ve heard. Too lazy to google and provide a citation.

            1. Whelp, now someone who isn’t lazy is going to have to use their google fu to settle whether adrenaline makes meat taste good or bad.

                1. It may be the difference between long term stress and short term stress. You don’t want to eat an animal that has been stressed for a while because that means something was wrong with it. Short term omg I’m going to die stress is just part of a meal and meant the thing gave you a chase.

              1. I was going to post links to some of the results from the google search, but for some reason couldn’t get it to post (fucking skwirrelz), so here’s the google search results. Skimming a couple of the links, it looks like some people say it’s bad, some say it doesn’t matter. Probably comes down to personal taste. Try both and see which you like more, I guess.

                1. I don’t care what any of you say, I know what I believe and I’m sticking to it. You can stick your fancy Internet facts right up your collective bungholes.

                  That’s how this works, right?

                  1. That’s how this works, right?

                    I’m gonna have to mark off for not calling us all a bunch of fancy talkin’ fags. D-

                    At least you didn’t fail. You can still get your degree in Internet Assholery.

                  2. That’s how this works, right?

                    I’m gonna have to mark off for not calling us all a bunch of fancy talkin’ fags. D-

                    At least you didn’t fail. You can still get your degree in Internet Assholery.

                  3. That’s how this works, right?

                    I’m gonna have to mark off for not calling us all a bunch of fancy talkin’ fags. D-

                    At least you didn’t fail. You can still get your degree in Internet Assholery.

                    1. FUCK YOU SKWIRRLZ, YOU TALK LIKE FAGS AND YOUR SHIT’S ALL RETARDED.

                  4. That’s generally how everyone argues on the internet and how progressives argue in person, yes.

        2. But industrial labor makes their meat extra juicy with all the suffering!

          But all their juices get compressed out when the machinery crushes them!

    2. It is their faith and it can not be reasoned with.

      So frustrating, so true….

  6. this must be one of those unattended consequences or something.

  7. The socially conscious writers and readers of the New York Times care so much for the marginalized that it hurts… the supposedly marginalized.

    1. I am stealing that for a tweet.

      1. You clearly have good taste in one-liners.

    1. BOAT PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!

    2. Australian/Asian relations are known to be ‘complex’

      1. Such an enlightened and peaceful civilization they have, you know, without all the guns.

    3. +1 Asiatic Exclusion League

      Hilariously, the only place that admits 1907 Race Riot in Vancouver (bunch of assholes trashed Chinatown, moved to Japtown, where they got beaten up) came as a part of organized labor parade is Marxist.ca. I remember doing a presentation on Immigration to BC at college, and the article from Vancouver Sun was titled “A Splendid Display of Organized Labour”, and journalist must have went to bed/office early, because it said nothing about riot afterwards.

    4. THE MALE GAZE!!!!

    5. Looking “up on” Australian women??

      LLLLACIST!!

  8. Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

    Seem? It’s clear as day what their priority is, and it isn’t anyone outside themselves, that’s for sure.

    “I know the article tried to help us,” an Upper East Side salon employee told the Times in July.

    No, dude. In no way, shape, or form did it try and do that. It wasn’t for you, or even really about you. The sooner you understand that, the better off you’ll be.

    1. “It wasn’t for you, or even really about you.”

      If only people realized this was *most true* about The Environment-as-excuse-for-social-policy….

    2. Intentions, Epi. Intentions. Hater!

  9. Reporter Sarah Maslin Nir said she wanted to highlight the pervasive worker exploitation she believed took place in the city’s Asian nail salons.

    Clearly, she wasn’t about to let her preconceived notions write the story for her.

  10. “Officials heralded this as a step toward stamping out salon-worker exploitation”

    How to succeed in politics

    – take note whenever rich socialites suggest “problem” may exist, regardless of facts
    – impose unnecessary costs on people with least political influence
    – declare problem “being solved” by your Urgent Action
    – enjoy cocktail parties with rich socialites, pumping up their egos by saying what Good they have wrought through their ostentatious concern.

    This is why you can’t take a horsey-ride in the park anymore.

    1. This is why you can’t take a horsey-ride in the park anymore.

      I thought it was because of the canned Beefarino.

      1. “Rusty!”

      2. +1 marble rye from Schnitz’s

    2. Well-done, Gilly.

  11. The NYT specializes in rolling non-stories into tidy tight cylinders and selling them as phantom blunts to wide-eyed morality tourists clamoring for shit to save all the fucking time.

    1. “”morality tourists “”

      ooh, i like

      1. kisses

      2. “Morality tourists,” FTW. I’m using that.

    2. Agile, you continue to bring the goods, eloquence-wise.

      That phrase from yesterday about how someone’s position rings authentically on the marble of our context (or words to that effect) was pure gold.

      1. He does use his mouth better than a twenty-dollar whore. /Mr. Taggart

        1. I’ve come to the conclusion that he is either a person completely ripped on some drug or other or a monkey banging on a keyboard. In either case, he ain’t no Shakespeare.

          Signed,
          Not Impressed

          1. The former is certainly sometimes the case. Unless he’s been around for a few billion years, I don’t think the monkey hypothesis is very likely.

          2. Well, with the Agile One you have to do some sifting and winnowing (like damn near everybody). But the nuggets are pure platinum.

            YMMV, of course.

    3. They split into morality tourist, and morality terrorists. The terrorists proclaim to serve some moral ideal, and the people. For some reasons they don’t blow themselves up. Instead they “inadvertently” blow up their wards. Then the (very much living) terrorists claim to be martyrs*. And then they lecture religious people, saving those from irrationality and hubris. Adorable.

      *Not getting to ask for sex women irritates them.

  12. A couple of things will come out of this:

    1) Unions will move in.

    2) Unionized shops and local government will collaborate to drive non-union shops out of business.

    If you’re in a profitable and relatively unregulated industry in New York City, you have to be unionized and regulated to stay in business for the long term. The ultimate purpose of regulation is to drive businesses outside the scope of the unions and the bureaucracy out of the market.

    Next on the list is probably quinceanera shops.

    The New York Times should offer something like Yelp, where you can pay them not to write bad things about you. It wouldn’t really be a protection racket because the people you’re “protecting” them from isn’t some mob goon squad. The Times would be offering protection from the government. Why not capitalize on that potential revenue stream?

    Scruples? Who cares about scruples? Is there anything that can’t be justified by claiming you’re fighting for a living wage?

    1. 1) Unions will move in.

      Teamsters versus the Triads? Everyone is a winner.

      1. I’ve seen that episode of the Simpsons.

  13. Paving the road to you-know-where with you-know-what.

    1. Paving the road to re-election with the suffering of the proles?

    2. Paving the road to perdition with Tom Hanks movies?

  14. “Reporter Sarah Maslin Nir said she wanted to highlight the pervasive worker exploitation she believed took place in the city’s Asian nail salons.”

    I want to highlight the abuse of unicorns I believe happens at the NYT offices. I’m sure I can find some anonymous sources.
    Can I get page 3?

    1. They don’t put boobs on page 3.

      1. ba-dum *crash*

  15. It would also be helpful when covering this story to point out that the people who seem to be pumping the narrative of “exploitation” aren’t the actual workers themselves, but un-affiliated SEIU/AFL-CIO goons who seem to think putting the screws on small business owners is the path to long term viability.

    The last piece on this topic seemed to get close …

    (*someone interviewed ‘counter protestors’ at city hall, and it was clear that the union had hired non-english speaking day-laborers to do their protests for them)

    …but the obvious connection was never made.

    1. NYT is never going to report that for fear of cheesing off the unions. Suspect that their printers are all unionized. Plus, right-thinking people.

      And if Reason does cover that it’s just more Kochtopus union bashing.

      1. Specifically, i thought it should be important to point out who the organizations are backing the political persecution of salon owners.

        And who are the people behind that “NY Healthy Salon” organization?

        Quick hint = its not an association of small-business owners looking out for themselves.

        1. Suspicions confirmed.

  16. Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

    No shit. There’s nothing – NOTHING – “liberals” love more than feeling morally superior to someone else. I think it’s probably the only way they can get hard.

    1. You trying to get people fired?

      1. Honestly, any employer would find visiting the comment section here to be more egregious.

        1. But the porn site is more likely to be noticed.

          1. Unless you’re a Federal government worker.

    2. Even if I wasn’t at work, I don’t think I want to know what that link yields.

      1. Whatever you think it is, it’s worse.

        1. So… bookmark for later?

    3. I’m at work you jerk. .

      1. What, you’re too good to jerk yourself at work? You need someone to do it for you?

  17. Read the comments at Jezebel for to-be-expected nuclear-grade Derp levels.

    Basically, the theme seems to be = “these people are so ignorant for exploiting themselves and i’m offended they’re playing the “Woman”-card”

    Bravo, Jezebel. You really *get it*

    1. It’s always false consciousness when a poor, immigrant or minority person does something progs don’t like.

      1. The white woman’s burden is hard to bear.

        1. Well, they have false consciousness too. Though I have no idea which feminist council determines that. I guess they take turns. (“Sex-positive” feminists would make for the most nonsensical council. No matter, sex might beat coherence.)

    2. I blame white men.

    3. I did notice a couple strains of comments pointing out that most exploitation of immigrants is by other immigrants and not evil white men. Then a bunch of commenters being sick to their stomachs that its not white men who can be blamed for this situation. Someone tried a it’s society’s fault argument, but their heart wasn’t in it.

      1. “I did notice a couple strains of comments pointing out that most exploitation of immigrants is by other immigrants and not evil white men.”

        Why was that necessary?

        I guess being anti-male is so important that it transcends the boundaries of acceptable racism?

        So in this instance, it’s okay to hate men of other races, too?

        P.S. I’d bet the overwhelming majority of nail shops are owned by women.

        1. Well if anyone was interested, I could up the abuse and eploitation of immigrant women by evil white men, by going to a salon and making them trim my toe-nails.

          That would be truly evil.

      2. ” that most exploitation of immigrants is by other immigrants and not evil white men”

        WHICH IS WHY WE NEED BIGGER GOVERNMENT. TO HELP THEM HELP THEMSELVES

        1. Either that or prohibit manicures.

          And sugary soft drinks. Don’t forge the sugary soft drinks.

          And horse drawn carriages.

      3. “Someone tried a it’s society’s fault argument, but their heart wasn’t in it.”

        Aww.

  18. DEY TUK LLLLLLLLLLLLLLL JELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLBZZZ!!!

    /Asian nail worker

    1. Not coo, loundeye lacist!

      1. You like a Shitty Wok! Take a order?

        1. No thanks, I’m heading down to SODASOPA to gawk at Kenny’s family and pretend to be care about those poor people, then stop by Whole Foods on my way back to my trendy condo at The Lofts. /progtard

          1. Enjoy our authentic shitty food!

  19. “(…)Because of rules mandating extra pay for overtime work, manicurists saw hours cut back. “I know the article tried to help us,” an Upper East Side salon employee told the Times in July. “But for some employees it created a worse situation.””

    Overtime pay, one more thing America just can’t afford anymore.

    1. More like “Overtime pay for a mani-pedi: something wealthy NY women just won’t pay for.”

  20. “It seems Nir’s article provided the impetus and public support enabling the city to do just that.”

    Gee, if I were a somewhat cynical person, I might conclude that someone in the regulatory agency placed a call to Nir to “encourage” her to write the story…

    Naa…

    1. All the news the state sees fit to print.

  21. Poverty-porn is a great word.

    1. Are SatanicBunniesOfDeath related to killer rabbits? Do they guard the gates of the cave of Kyre Banog?

  22. Lochner, again. Anyway, what are the Jezebels doing in this, contradicting the hell out of themselves?

    1. Bitching that there’s no old rich white man they can blame for this.

      And calling on old rich white men to “help” these poor souls, thus fucking them over good and hard.

      1. That’s not very creative.

        1. Well, they ARE pretty retarded…

          1. Yeah, some are crazy, though. One would expect some creativity from that.

  23. Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

    Absolutely. Fits the whole generic “lefty syllogism”. Boils down to the same argument.

    Lefty sez, in effect:
    Premise 1) I, a morally upstanding citizen, am very concerned about the plight group X.
    Premise 2) Policy Y will help the oppressed people of X
    Conclusion) Therefore I support Policy Y.

    Libertarian sez:
    Well that’s a fine argument, but your 2nd premise is unsound. What about unintended consequences A, B & C (e.g., usually some wonkish points) that will probably do the exact opposite of what Policy Y intends?

    Lefty sez a bunch of crap that makes it obvious they haven’t a clue to the details of Policy Y. Therefore, can’t address the unsound premise 2.

    So Lefty makes it about premise 1; “you don’t care about the poor people of X like I do”. Cue the usual “you’re a tool of the Kochs”, other ad hom, etc. Their own moral superiority thus validated in their eyes, QED

    1. Well that’s a fine argument, but your 2nd premise is unsound.

      So is the first premise. Grouping people together arbitrarily by ethnicity, race, or other such attributes is meaningless as a basis for government policies.

  24. I admit I was among the ones fooled by this article. I’ve worked for some despicable Asians and dealt either old world patriarchy, so I was a bit biased.

    But my observation stands, though – you can’t have lax immigration policy, which is “unregulated” by nature, and then pretend to be shocked when unregulated activity becomes the result. If something like this does become prevalent, the state either has to enforce immigration laws or slap all affected businesses with increased regulation. But the cost of business and regulation is why small business seek cheap labor in the first place.

    I expect the left to counter by citing examples of other instances of exploitation. And they’ll find it, especially on farms. I don’t think either the left or the libertarians will recognize why people need cheap illegal labor and mistreat those workers. It’s not because the immigration system is broken.

    Anyways, this was excellent work by Reason. Their ACA coverage was always topnotch. I don’t agree with them on immigration, but they certainly make some credible arguments on some points.

  25. I fucking hate “liberals” I hate them with a blood seething rage and I am not afraid to admit it. Their control freak scumbags, they like to call themselves “progressives” but their anything but. What they are are regressives, people who would take us back to feudalism ruled over by nutbag, pseudo intellectuals. Fuck them.

  26. Liberals love laborers in theory but seem to love their sense of moral superiority more.

    Finally, something I am 100% agreement with ENB on.

  27. “I know the article tried to help us,” an Upper East Side salon employee told the Times in July. “But for some employees it created a worse situation.”

    It’s the good intentions that should count! And it’s not racism if the intentions are good! (So my progressive friends tell me)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.