Ethical Shopping Means More than Comparing Price

[GGG]

I think one thing that is productive is watching amenesty internationals reports and other ngos on how companies treat their people. Publicaly identifying the worst companies factories shames them to improve.

Generally I perfer to avoid buying American made goods as they dont provide health care for the working poor.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Just to respond to this a little. China and India to an extent are success stories. But I don't know if enough time has gone by to prove if they are outliers or not. Because they are very special cases.

China was going to be advancing anyway. They have a very strong government and a plan to get into the 21st century. We were hearing for about 30 years how China was an up and coming superpower.

And actually, I'm pretty sure the biggest thing for China's increase in wealth, both personal and the country, has been internal spending. Not increase in foreign investment and international corporations. But public works, the mega cities they've built, etc.

Don't get me wrong, international trade is a large block of it, but to single it out as the reason it turned China around would be incorrect.

Also, they have a huge population, which increases their international power and appeal. And that brings us to India, which also has a monstrous population. India also has a democratic (if pretty corrupt) government.

A lot of the advantages that China and India have, most of these other developing countries don't have. I don't know if we can really say globalization has been a positive influence on a lot of these countries yet. Bangladesh has been poor and in the news for aid for longer than I have been alive. It's hard to see any real improvement there.

Again, don't get me wrong, globalization can be a force for good, and having cheap labour is a good thing for both sides. It just needs to be done better than it is now.

I don't know, and I am sure somebody can correct me if I am wrong, but I feel certain that China's fortunes, and maybe India's, are due almost entirely to the leveraging of cheap labour, lax environmental, health and safety regulations, etc. People who have connections to the global markets take advantage of this are the ones that become rich in China.

I visited one factory, where the workers were paid about 40,000 RMB / year, had to work 6 days a week, 8 hours a day and pretty much just build whatever the factory owner told them to, in this case, knock-offs of Siemen's electric control valves. No safety measures were in place, no ventillation in paint booths.

I feel like China is just a slave colony to the western world. I wouldn't advocate buying anything manufactured there unless the companies adhere to the same standards that North American ones do (should). If North America was more innovative and found solutions for manufacturing that didn't generate toxic waste or pollute the air, some products would be cheap here as well. What we're doing in some ways is outsourcing our pollution to other countries, letting them ravage their own lands, and make them feel happy for producing cheap crap for us.

[Daradon]

Can you say it without being smart? If you have a point, say it. I actually am confused, thank the internet. I don't know if it's sarcasm, or purposeful sarcasm.

If you have a mature point it's ok to speak up and announce it. I will not mock you.

[Daradon]

Tranny, CrispyCrunch, it looks like I may have to argue the conservative on this one.

Just wanted to let you know, because...

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I visited one factory, where the workers were paid about 40,000 RMB / year, had to work 6 days a week, 8 hours a day and pretty much just build whatever the factory owner told them to

That's actually not bad. Assuming that they get 0 vacation days and work 52 weeks at 6 days 8 hr per, they're earing 16 RMB/hr, which is more than some other professions.

Comparatively, a waitress I was chatting with in Tianjin last week (I've since moved on to Beijing) earned 12 RMB/hr (and they aren't allowed to accept tips) and was only given 30 hours a week in shifts. Though I have hope that her wage will only go up as Tianjin has the fastest growing economy in China (possibly Asia) at the moment.

If you look at how cheap food (and oh god, it's cheap), housing (gov't subsidized) and general goods prices are here (hell, even cars have dropped more than 300% in price in the last 10 years in China), especially in areas that house factories, 40k isn't a terrible wage. Sure, Western clothing and Starbucks and whatnot are still exorbitantly priced (20 RMB for a drip brew coffee? Get ####ed Starbucks), but your typical Chinese isn't buying that crap. It's for stupid tourists like me to blow $3.30 CDN on a Grande drip.

Sorry for the derail, but I've met a lot of people here that would love to earn 40k RMB a year. As someone said earlier in the thread, what matters is buying power, not wage.

The working conditions however, are a whole other kettle of fish. Though, the AQI in Tianjin hit 427 last Thursday, so I'd assume they're already used to inhaling copious amounts of crap.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Sorry for the derail, but I've met a lot of people here that would love to earn 40k RMB a year. As someone said earlier in the thread, what matters is buying power, not wage.

As long as you never plan to leave your country, then yeah.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by pylon

As long as you never plan to leave your country, then yeah.

Way to go Sun Media. Way to take it out of context.

I'm guessing you just browsed.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Daradon

And actually, I'm pretty sure the biggest thing for China's increase in wealth, both personal and the country, has been internal spending. Not increase in foreign investment and international corporations. But public works, the mega cities they've built, etc.

Where do you suppose they got the money to pay for all of that? China has huge foreign reserves because of manufacturing and the income that comes from that.

[Itse]

Sweatshops are not a thing of the past in the western countries btw. Here's one example.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...rehouses-labor

"Just everybody else is usually really sad or mad by the time they've been working here this long."

It's my 28th hour as an employee.

and here's another from Spain

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...aves-charities

The Guardian's findings include:
• Migrant workers from Africa living in shacks made of old boxes and plastic sheeting, without sanitation or access to drinking water.
• Wages that are routinely less than half the legal minimum wage.
• Workers without papers being told they will be reported to the police if they complain.
• Allegations of segregation enforced by police harassment when African workers stray outside the hothouse areas into tourist areas.

Speaking generally, I believe that boycotting is effective especially when it's done in a mostly irrational, all-or-nothing, over-simplified way. This is because a single boycott will not change a thing by itself, but if boycotts have a noticable impact on some companies profits due to, say some overly emotional documentaries or news pieces, than the long term result tends to be that companies become afraid of that kind of publicity. And really to acquire that, it doesn't even matter if the target of the boycott is actually responsible for the problem, because you are not really targeting any one company.

And while in the short run they will simply try to fight that publicity, in the long run it's really just cheaper and easier to take care of at least some of the actual problems. Because most safety costs and labour issues don't really cost that much to fix. (And especially when it comes to labor, taking good care of your labor is actually often more profitable than not doing it. Which is why the worst sweatshops generally are in new fields of industry instead of old established ones.)

But really, the best way to improve working conditions, the exploitation of the poor and the safety of products sold is "old-fashioned" laws and enforcements of those laws. It's impossible for consumers to have a significant impact on the capitalist system themselves, simply due to the ridiculous amount of information this process would require each consumer to have and process.

And it's not necessarily just laws than ban things. For example, studies have shown that the best way to cut down child labour is demanding minimun salaries. If the salaries are sufficient, adults will take over even those harsh and demeaning jobs that are otherwise regurarly left for children. Which in turn tends to improve the working conditions.

[valo403]

Links to a number of articles by well respected journalists and economists who have taken pro sweatshop positions. I agree with them pretty much across the board, particularly this one as it echoes exactly what I heard from the people of Phnom Penh.

"While it shocks Americans to hear it, the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don't exploit enough.
"Talk to these families in the dumps [of Phnom Penh, Cambodia], and a job in a sweatshop is a cherished dream, an escalator out of poverty, the kind of gauzy if probably unrealistic ambition that parents everywhere often have for their children.
"I'd love to get a job in a factory," said Pim Srey Rath, a 19-year-old woman scavenging for plastic. "At least that work is in the shade. Here is where it's hot."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexrees/8-a...weatshop-labor

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by valo403

Links to a number of articles by well respected journalists and economists who have taken pro sweatshop positions. I agree with them pretty much across the board, particularly this one as it echoes exactly what I heard from the people of Phnom Penh.



http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexrees/8-a...weatshop-labor

I get this, and I own "sweatshop" articles, but, I am pretty sure most would be happy to leave the dump, for any type of work. I am sure it is only rationalising, but if the first world didn't purchase these goods, what would the second/third world economy be like.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I get this, and I own "sweatshop" articles, but, I am pretty sure most would be happy to leave the dump, for any type of work. I am sure it is only rationalising, but if the first world didn't purchase these goods, what would the second/third world economy be like.

Of course they would, that's the point. Sweatshop jobs are sought after because the alternatives are worse. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't seek higher standards in sweatshops, but a course of action that results in the closure of sweatshops negatively impacts the people that most people think they're helping.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by valo403

Links to a number of articles by well respected journalists and economists who have taken pro sweatshop positions. I agree with them pretty much across the board, particularly this one as it echoes exactly what I heard from the people of Phnom Penh.



http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexrees/8-a...weatshop-labor

Because it's better than scavenging for plastic doesn't make it moral.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Because it's better than scavenging for plastic doesn't make it moral.

So what's moral then, removing manufacturing from these countries and returning these people to the back breaking life of rural subsistence farming?

We may see sweatshops as exploitative and abusive, these people see them as a chance to earn a decent wage under better conditions than the available alternatives. You're telling me it's moral to deny them that?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Because it's better than scavenging for plastic doesn't make it moral.

Sure, it is. It's also way better than prostitution. That is certainly moral.

It would be really nice if we all lived in a Star Trek-like egalitarian paradise, but the truth is, the world doesn't work this way.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by valo403

So what's moral then, removing manufacturing from these countries and returning these people to the back breaking life of rural subsistence farming?

We may see sweatshops as exploitative and abusive, these people see them as a chance to earn a decent wage under better conditions than the available alternatives. You're telling me it's moral to deny them that?

IMO these companies could pay better and could give better safety standards but short term greed makes them pay the least they can get away with. If they really want to achieve long term success in the countries they set up shop in, they would pay fair wages so that the people making the product would be able to afford the product. What it comes down to is that these corporations are using these peoples unfortunate circumstances to take undue advantage of them.

[lazypucker]

Talk about ethical shopping, tell the Canadian government to stop gouging us consumers first and have competitive pricing with the US. I can't understand why we are taxed so much on items such as airfare. Canada is losing billions of dollars with people driving down to the States to catch flights that are sometimes 70% cheaper than our Air Canada...

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Talk about ethical shopping, tell the Canadian government to stop gouging us consumers first and have competitive pricing with the US. I can't understand why we are taxed so much on items such as airfare. Canada is losing billions of dollars with people driving down to the States to catch flights that are sometimes 70% cheaper than our Air Canada...

I just did this a couple of weeks ago.

4 flights, plus car rental for a week. $1200 all in. The prices are crazy.

[peter12]

I am always startled as to how little average people understand economics. It's a science, people.

[Huntingwhale]

I buy whatever I want, whenever I want, however I want.