Making the Case for Sweatshops (1 Viewer)

[Buzzo]

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009...y-job.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this,but it seems a bit over-simplistic. Love to hear what someone who's more familiar with the issue has to say.

 

[nooleen]

what a retard. 'here's some people choking on toxic fumes in a dump. now, wouldn't they be better off in a sweatshop?'

 

[Wobbler]

Can't view that clip in work, but I'm actually undecided about the whole issue. Conditions in sweatshops are supposed to be absolutely horrible but may be slightly better than the alternative ie trawling through dumps looking for rubbish, begging on the streets or prostitution. Obviously, many of the practices that go on in sweatshops should be banned (forced overtime, savagely long shifts etc.) but the fact that it gives a marginally better existence means, that maybe thewy're possibly a good thing.

Also, children of people who work in sweatshops (I think) are more likely to get an education. Blah blah blah.

Flame away. I'm sure from reading the above, it's clear that I'm seriously ill informed, but I'm not sure if I completely wrong.

 

[BonsaiSuperstar]

there was a debate one time on Matt Cooper about this a while back.
a fella was defending large companies sweatshops in places like vietnam as the paltry wages (30p an hour) is 10 times as much as they would get in other jobs in the area or from rival smaller brands sweatshops.
the increased wages was helping develop the economy there.
He said that better paid sweatshops were just part and parcel of 3 world countries development.
he didnt seem to think the people were being exploited.

 

[broken arm]

I think the question is framed incorrectly.

It shouldn't be presented as a choice between scavenging on a dump and working as a slave in a sweatshop.

It should be a question of what types of employment are best suited to sustainable national growth, poverty reduction, social capital, employees rights, education attainment, gender rights, sexual rights, human dignity and what not.

do sweatshops contribute to this? I'd say 'no' so if someone is offering this as a solution they need to think again.

low-cost manufacturing can be great for many regions but as long as it is conducted in a fair and humane way - payment of a living wage so there is no need for forced child labour, extreme overtime, removal of children from education, protection of workers health, protection of local environment etc etc.

There is a need for greater international co-operation in sharing knowledge on sustainable production and consumption, standard and regulations to help weed out the worst impacts of global low-cost consumption and production. Things like the Marrakech process only go so far but are a start- http://esa.un.org/marrakechprocess/index.shtml

 

[RSJ]

I think the question is framed incorrectly.

It shouldn't be presented as a choice between scavenging on a dump and working as a slave in a sweatshop.
http://esa.un.org/marrakechprocess/index.shtml

I was just thinking the same. Why can't there be a third option where the price the worker is paid in some way correlates to the price of the goods they produce. I've always thought that there should be a law that, in any one company, nobody should earn more than, say, ten times ANYONE else in the same company. If the managing director of GM Motors wants to earn half a million a year, no bother, just as long as the cleaning lady earns fifty grand. Job.

Also, while we're on the subject of wages, i'm staying with a mate here in phuket in thailand, he's a yank working in a mexican restaurant with six thai dudes. He makes around e1850 a month, the lads he works with make e140. What's that about? Madness.

 

[nooleen]

Can't view that clip in work, but I'm actually undecided about the whole issue. Conditions in sweatshops are supposed to be absolutely horrible but may be slightly better than the alternative ie trawling through dumps looking for rubbish, begging on the streets or prostitution. Obviously, many of the practices that go on in sweatshops should be banned (forced overtime, savagely long shifts etc.) but the fact that it gives a marginally better existence means, that maybe thewy're possibly a good thing.

Also, children of people who work in sweatshops (I think) are more likely to get an education. Blah blah blah.

Flame away. I'm sure from reading the above, it's clear that I'm seriously ill informed, but I'm not sure if I completely wrong.

no, that's pretty much what the clip was saying. but i think that guy's argument is retarded because it's totally avoiding any suggestion that manufacturing companies should be accountable for conditions in their factories.

 

[Wobbler]

But, in the real world there are only two options - sweat shops or no sweat shops.

If people can find a way to force textile companis to poay their staff a fairer rate with better conditions, obviously that would be ideal. I don't see how though.

 

[broken arm]

But, in the real world there are only two options - sweat shops or no sweat shops.

If people can find a way to force textile companis to poay their staff a fairer rate with better conditions, obviously that would be ideal. I don't see how though.

It may seem that way but there are things like voluntary standards, supply chain initiatives, global trade agreements, subverted maket mechanisms (e.g. fair trade) and loads of other shit.

but all these mechanisms need to be placed in the context of broader sustainable economic development agendas.

 

[Wobbler]

It's a really interesting area and I'd love to read further on what real alternatives there are.

 

[Scientician 0.8]

I believe The Economist's position on sweatshops can be summarised thusly. Sweatshops/child labour are necessary evils that will raise the standard of living in those countries to the point where sweatshops will no longer be needed for economic development. They say that those parts of the world are like the UK was in the 19th century. Conditions were atrocious there but eventually they enriched themselves and didn't need to do so much of this work in these conditions latterly.

I don't necessarily agree with it but it's an interesting perspective.

 

[Wobbler]

Pete, please merge with this thread.

http://www.thumped.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=69848

Thanks

 

[Wobbler]

I believe The Economist's position on sweatshops can be summarised thusly. Sweatshops/child labour are necessary evils that will raise the standard of living in those countries to the point where sweatshops will no longer be needed for economic development. They say that those parts of the world are like the UK was in the 19th century. Conditions were atrocious there but eventually they enriched themselves and didn't need to do so much of this work in these conditions latterly.

I don't necessarily agree with it but it's an interesting perspective.

Korea and Vietnam are experiencing an economic recovery.

Of course, that doesn't make it right.

 

[broken arm]

this is going to get complicated depending on how we define "sweatshops" and low-cost manufacturing or describe the corelation bewteen microeconomic and macroeconomic conditions etc

Economic development is (at least partially) born out of a series of choices and it isn't a benign force that is solely dependant on historical practice. This is one of the big fallacies of the “it was ok for the 19th century so it’s ok now” argument.

People often talk about the historical (and no doubt current) choice between starvation and slavery but nobody will openly put forward slavery as a solution to global starvation or poverty…. The same principle applies here.

 

[Wobbler]

Economic development is (at least partially) born out of a series of choices and it isn't a benign force that is solely dependant on historical practice. This is one of the big fallacies of the “it was ok for the 19th century so it’s ok now” argument.

But......

Korea and Vietnam are experiencing an economic recovery.

 

[broken arm]

But......

I know what you mean but I think it would be more difficult to say that "Korea and Vietnam are experiencing an economic recovery because of sweatshops"

In fact the sweatshop scandals in Vietnam a decade or so ago could have potentially damaged the economy and may have restricted growth.

there are so many layers even in that statement....

 

[Wobbler]

I know what you mean but I think it would be more difficult to say that "Korea and Vietnam are experiencing an economic recovery because of sweatshops"

I'm on such shakey ground here so I won't comment until I know a little more

 

[broken arm]

I'm on such shakey ground here so I won't comment until I know a little more

ah here - I'm not an economist either

(but I do have a professional research interest in regional innovation systems, regional development, firm-level innovation, sustainability !zed!zed!zed!zed)

 

[nooleen]

i've lost interest in this thread now that it's degenerated into reasoned and civilised argument.

 

[RSJ]

What are the factors of Vietnam's economic recovery and how long is it going on? Tourism is a big market there, they've only allowed western tourists for 14 years and it's only taken off proper in the last four or five years. I could be talking out my arse, but it could be that (and it's knock on effects such as tourists buying the wealth of knock off stuff they sell there) that is bringing on much of this.