Sweatshops

[Tres Bien]

Im not a commie, im not a capitalist, im just trying to do whats right, and follow justice

[Inna]

I am yet to see a product labelled "Made in Israel." Not many people would buy it. Legal or illegal, they do it.

I would buy it, I don't see why Isreali products are any different then others. Would you not buy things from Israel b/c you dislike Israel, or b/c you dislike the stuff that they produce??

[Anonymouse]

You're right they have no better options...but the company is treating them very badly, its inhuman, for example childlabour!?
Its not right to use people like that, one day i would like to see that fat man who owns the company doing this kind of work, see how long he would manage to work...

Child labor? I am to guess you support the State stepping in and creating all sorts of pompous legislation outlawing "child labor". The fact is it is a matter of the family. If their parents deem it is okay to work, then it is okay for them to work. No one is forcing them to work. By taking the job, they are agreeing to the wages given, and providing in return. That is the way it goes. This is not a equal world and equality is the biggest fallacy man has had to contend with.

[xBaron Dants]

No matter what economic theories say, it's still wrong.
Ok, if they accepted the job, it's because they need it. That doesn't mean that just because they really need the job, you should be allowed to exploit them and make them work in unsafe conditions.
You have CEOs raking in multi-million dollar bonuses. These companies CAN afford to create better conditions, hire a few more employees to avoid 14 hour shifts, etc.

Yes, I'm an idealist, I'm naive, I'm a lost socialist, I haven't read every single book on economy out there and bla bla bla. The fact is that you have the rich Western companies that get richer, the corrupt Asian governments that get richer, the Western workers who lose their jobs, and the poors that don't even have enough time to raise their children and work in unsafe conditions every day. And if all this is perfect and logical, then we have huuge moral issues.

[Anonymouse]

You see Mr. Dants, I understand your need to criticize the unfairness, but life is unfair, and inequality is the axiom that has governed man since time immemorial.

The fact is there will always be "exploitation". However, how, one wonders, is it exploitation whent he workers agree to work in whatever conditions, given the wages present. Somehow, socialists/marxists and other anti-free market critics think that they themselves know better of what the workers want, or what their consciousness dictates. In other words, this amounts to stepping in and dictating how others are supposed to live and making decisions for other people.

F. A. Hayek, the great economist and political philosopher, in his The Road to Serfdom offered a devastating critique of the modern state and centrally controlled economies. It argued against central planning of economy. No one can make decisions for other people because it is impossible to process all of the information, thoughts, biases, preferences, experiences, that goes into other people's decision making. Only the free market, which allows for the greatest flow of information that humans have thus far devised, can even begin to approach the levels of efficiency that a complex economy requires to function smoothly.

When people seek to make decisions for others, even when acting with their best interests at heart, the results are almost always unsatisfactory and awry and result in more harm than good, and all history can be seen as one people claiming to be or have the "best interests" of the rest, whether it was the Communists or the Nazis or as far back into Rome. When people attempt to make decisions for others the results are always negative and not in the interest of those that employed the decision ( ex: the Bush administrations cost-benefit analysis of Iraq proved fatal, in that their predictions were totally miscalculated because it goes to show you that central planners can never make effective decision making) and never what the decision-makers intended.

[Inna]

And if all this is perfect and logical, then we have huuge moral issues.

I agree...I dont understand how some people can say that it is the childs choice to go and spend their days working making name brand shoes/clothing that they would never wear. You really think a 10 yr old wants to be inside some sweatshop sitting on their a$$ all day doing work when they could be outside enjoying their childhood?? These kids should be in school learning about the rest of the world and realizing that not everyone lives like them.

[xBaron Dants]

Central planning seems too illogical to ever work. The Soviet Union is a good example for that.

However, I find it a bit chauvinistic of you to claim that wanting to give these people better working conditions does not necessarily go with what they want.

I'm not saying they should all be given free cars and all the Nike shoes they want. The change would be no more than adding adequate ventilation (a few fans here and there) and other such measure, and an increase in salary big enough that will allow an employee to work (for example) 10 hours instead of 14.

Obviously, if one country steps up and asks for this, the company will pack up and move away. A situation should be created where companies have no other choice BUT to do this....and even then, it will still be their most cost-effective option.

[Anonymouse]

I agree...I dont understand how some people can say that it is the childs choice to go and spend their days working making name brand shoes/clothing that they would never wear. You really think a 10 yr old wants to be inside some sweatshop sitting on their a$$ all day doing work when they could be outside enjoying their childhood?? These kids should be in school learning about the rest of the world and realizing that not everyone lives like them.

I don't want get off on a tangent here, but this criticism, rather the criticism of all students of the "sweatshop children" comes from a basic misunderstanding of economics. Essentially it comes from a purely utopian critique with a slant on "equality" or the idea that we can achieve that illusory state of being.

With that said, let's understand how this works. There is nothing wrong with the free-market. What these coutries have, and which there is something wrong with, is rampant poverty, in these third world countries. So why are wages so low in third world countries? This is because in third world countries worker productivity is small. The wages are in direct proportion to worker productivity. What this does is set a cap on wages. And why is the third world experience low productivity and poverty? This is because of the heavy involvement of their government i.e. the central planners, in the economy. To that degree they are all socialistic.

Furthermore why does child labor exist period? Such critiques save ourselves of having to understand the economics behind it and the historicity that enables it to exist. We often forget that this society, America, was once heavy on child labor. Societies that are very poor, as the case with these third world countries, usually have rampant corruption, prostitution, and starvation. If it werent for these "evil companies" creating jobs, these children would most likely be engaged in those as opposed to working in the sweatshop, at least getting something back for their labor.

Child labor exists in those countries now, just like child labor existed at one time in this society, and just like it existed in medieval society. Its very rudimentary to understand why child labor exists, when one understands history and economics. Societies that allow them are too poor to prohibit them as it would be economically suicidal. To deny a child to work in medieval Europe was to consign them to death, and this is precisely the conditions in many of these third world countries. Yet the "progressives" and the rabid anti-free market critics are not keen on understanding these issues.

[SagGal]

Uhm, you people are forgeting that a lot of them are forced to work and they are obviously treated horribly. I don't mean to get all graphic on this one but a girl during her period is not allowed a pad or allowed to go to the bathroom unless she pulls down her skirt and shows the guard the blood? WHAT THE HECK IS THAT???
Yes it's good to have a job than no job, but not when people are forced to work and are working under horrible conditions. We don't have that in the U.S. or at least I don't think we do. You like your working condition don't you? Surely it's beter than theirs. You do not get hit or beaten. And we are talking about kids here, not adults. This is abuse.

[Anonymouse]

Uhm, you people are forgeting that a lot of them are forced to work and they are obviously treated horribly. I don't mean to get all graphic on this one but a girl during her period is not allowed a pad or allowed to go to the bathroom unless she pulls down her skirt and shows the guard the blood? WHAT THE HECK IS THAT???
Yes it's good to have a job than no job, but not when people are forced to work and are working under horrible conditions. We don't have that in the U.S. or at least I don't think we do. You like your working condition don't you? Surely it's beter than theirs. You do not get hit or beaten. And we are talking about kids here, not adults. This is abuse.

Oy vay, for everytime I see the baseless claim of them being "forced to work" I wish I got a rice pudding, then I would have 10,000 rice pudding cups. Give me one example of where these people were "forced" to work. The very idea of coercion and slavery, is the anti-thesis of the free-market which is based on cooperation of two parties exchanging goods and services, and both gain as a result. When these companies establish in these countries they create jobs. No one "forces" them to work.

Please read my explanation, and quit make baseless assumptions.