I just went into walmart for the first time in months... I feel physically ill

[Wraith]

Dang. This thread reminded me why I don't participate in the economic/political discussion on this forum any more.

Look. If you don't like Wal-Mart, don't shop there. It's pretty simple.

Wraith
"Electric lighting is no great boon to anyone who has money enough to buy a sufficient number of candles and to pay servants to attend them.... The capitalist achievement does not typically consist of providing more silk stockings for queens but in bringing them within the reach of factory girls in return for steadily decreasing amounts of effort."
-- (Capitalism, Socialism, & Democracy, P. 67)

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui But if he is making MORE money than others in the society by working in sweatshops, obviously has enough money to feed his family and the extra can be saved up for retirement. So that argument is invalid.

I asked you what someone could buy working at a sweat-shop as compaired to someone who isn't working at one, and you didn't answer me.

Can you answer me now? What are the alternative jobs, anyways?

I said before that I don't know much about sweatshops and the circumstances around them. But i was under the impression that the choices where basically 1. work in a factory and make enough to feed your family or 2. do something else and not make enough to feed your family. Making more then nothing isn't much of an acomplishment. How many sweatshop workers enjoy retirement, anyways? I figured the life expectency wasn't long enough for that to be a realistic expectation of anyone working in a sweatshop.

But since you are apperently knowledgeble about sweat-shops and their societal impact and whatnot, why don't you enlighten me. Just remember, lawyers aren't sweatshop workers.

What I meant was that factory clothing is MUCH better now than those made by weavers.

And what I meant was that that's completely wrong. I bet you haven't even seen clothing made by a trained weaver, anyways. What are you making this comparison on?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I asked you what someone could buy working at a sweat-shop as compaired to someone who isn't working at one, and you didn't answer me.

I did. Take someone making $100,000 and one $20,000. What can the $100k person buy that the $20k can't?

i was under the impression that the choices where basically 1. work in a factory and make enough to feed your family or 2. do something else and not make enough to feed your family.

No, you can always work in agriculture and feed your family that way (sustinance). The sweatshop allows you to have enough money to feed your family, plus some extra. Which is why agg workers flocked to the sweatshops... in every economy in history.

I bet you haven't even seen clothing made by a trained weaver, anyways. What are you making this comparison on?

I've seen homemade clothing. Besides being insanely expensive, they aren't as good as stuff I can buy at Macy's.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I did. Take someone making $100,000 and one $20,000. What can the $100k person buy that the $20k can't?

I told you, lawyers aren't sweatshop workers.

No, you can always work in agriculture and feed your family that way (sustinance).

Then why are so many third-world farmers starving?

The sweatshop allows you to have enough money to feed your family, plus some extra. Which is why agg workers flocked to the sweatshops... in every economy in history.

I know you're just making this up as you go along, but I really would like to see some sort of report about how much working in a sweatshop actually provides for the people there.

I've seen homemade clothing. Besides being insanely expensive, they aren't as good as stuff I can buy at Macy's.

'Homemade' clothing by a trained, proffesional weaver/tailor? The reason it's expensive is because it can't be mass produced, and it's not a very common art anymore.

But you'll find that in societies where they don't have mass produced clothing, and weaving is a common proffesion, it's quite affordable.

[Dr Strangelove]

Unfortunately Walmart has driven so many other stores out of business that it's often the only place in town that offers a particular item, so what are you going to do.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I told you, lawyers aren't sweatshop workers.

And I told you, I don't care. The point still stands.

Then why are so many third-world farmers starving?

And why are so many living ok? Just because some are incompetant at farming doesn't disprove anything.

I really would like to see some sort of report about how much working in a sweatshop actually provides for the people there.

Are you REALLY stating that sweatshop workers and worse off than other workers? And are you saying that before the sweatshop arrived the people were starving?

http://papers.nber.org/papers/w9669

This paper assesses the evidence regarding the effects of multinational production on wages and working conditions in developing countries. It is motivated by recent controversies concerning whether multinational firms in developing countries exploit workers by paying low wages and subjecting them to substandard conditions. We first address efforts of activist groups, universities, and colleges in the Anti-Sweatshop' Campaign in the United States, the social accountability of multinational firms, and the role of such international institutions as the International Labor Organization and World Trade Organization in dealing with labor standards and trade. We then consider conceptually how foreign direct investment might affect host-country wages. Available theories yield ambiguous predictions, leaving the effects to be examined empirically. We therefore, finally, review empirical evidence on multinational firm wages in developing countries, and the relationship between foreign direct investment and labor rights. This evidence indicates that multinational firms routinely provide higher wages and better working conditions than their local counterparts, and they are typically not attracted preferentially to countries with weak labor standards.

http://www.aworldconnected.org/article.php/580.html

"I'd like to work in a factory, but I don't have any ID card, and you need one to show that you're old enough," she said wistfully. (Since the candidates are unlikely to find the time to travel to the third world anytime soon, I put an audio slide show of the Cambodian realities on the Web for them at www.nytimes.com/kristof.)

All the complaints about third world sweatshops are true and then some: factories sometimes dump effluent into rivers or otherwise ravage the environment. But they have raised the standard of living in Singapore, South Korea and southern China, and they offer a leg up for people in countries like Cambodia.


Here in Cambodia factory jobs are in such demand that workers usually have to bribe a factory insider with a month's salary just to get hired.

http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/pubaffairs/we/current/henderson_0200.html

Many workers in third-world sweatshops have left even harder, lower-paying jobs in agriculture to move to garment factories. Moreover, sweatshops are a normal step in economic development. Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, and Hong Kong all had sweatshop jobs thirty years ago. They don't now because workers in those countries have acquired skills and employers have accumulated capital. That's what will happen in Honduras, Nicaragua, and other poor countries—if we only let it.

reason it's expensive is because it can't be mass produced, and it's not a very common art anymore.

Yep... thus not worth it.

But you'll find that in societies where they don't have mass produced clothing, and weaving is a common proffesion, it's quite affordable.

And not as good as the stuff I can buy in the US from my local department store. I'm sure Pakistani weavers are very good, but I'll pass.

[OzzyKP]

Meijer is much better than Walmart. Anyone know Meijer? Its a midwest thing.

I've never seen a Walmart with a real grocery component. Just like 4 isles of basic food stuff. Meijer has all the clothes, automotive, pet supply, hardware, electronics, etc that Target or Walmart has PLUS a high quality grocer. Almost half the monstorous store is food.

Meijer ownz!

[Barinthus]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

American companies should be required to treat their overseas peons... err workers as they would an American employee in the States. Benefits, wages that are approirate for their living cost standards and so on.

Yeah, and then these countries suffer massive inflation and everyone who doesn't work for a American company can't afford jack. That's smart .

Read again what I said. Don't give them American wages. Give them wages that fits their living cost standards in their own specific country.

[OzzyKP]

Plus Meijer is open 24 hours a day 364 days a year. Now that I've moved to Maryland I'm lost without Meijer.

You wouldn't believe how many times I've needed a roll of ducttape, shoe laces, and fresh pineapple at 3 in the morning.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Give them wages that fits their living cost standards in their own specific country.

In that case... that already happens. I think you forget how much the living cost is these countries. $2/day is above average in some countries.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And I told you, I don't care. The point still stands.

What point, that you can buy more with $100,000 then youc an with $20,000? Not very rellevant to the discussion, but thanks for the fact of the day.

Are you REALLY stating that sweatshop workers and worse off than other workers? And are you saying that before the sweatshop arrived the people were starving?

What I'm saying is that sweatshops are all there is, and that the arrival of them disrupted the previous way of life.

I don't have the time to read through all of your links, so I just scimmed through the last two, but the first one is just comparing multinational sweatshops to sweatshops owned by the host country. I can buy that, I'm sure that the western owned factories pay a bit better, and have somewhat better conditions - although not as much as they should. Still, it only comparing sweatshops to sweatshops doesn't say much about the alternatives. If anything, it's only reinforcing my thoughts that there are no viable alternatives.

The second link you post seems to be about a little girl who sifts through a garbage dump for food and dreams of working in a sweatshop. Yeah, i can buy that too. This is only backing up what I've been saying.

And the third article, well, it's defending child labour.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Not very rellevant to the discussion

It is 100% relevant!

Still, it only comparing sweatshops to sweatshops doesn't say much about the alternatives. If anything, it's only reinforcing my thoughts that there are no viable alternatives.

If there are no viable alternatives it is because people don't want to work on farms for sustinance. Like I said, do you think the people were starving before the sweatshops came in?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Like I said, do you think the people were starving before the sweatshops came in?

No, but I think they will starve without them now that they are there.



EDIT:

If there are no viable alternatives it is because people don't want to work on farms for sustinance.

And yeah, because they'd rather sift through garbage dumps then sustain themselves, right? Obviously their society has changed so that farming for sustinance, or whatebver their previous way of life was, is no longer viable. Specifically why, I don't know - as I have already said - and I still await enlightenment.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, but I think they will starve without them now that they are there.

Where has the farmland gone?

because they'd rather sift through garbage dumps then sustain themselves, right? Obviously their society has changed so that farming for sustinance, or whatebver their previous way of life was, is no longer viable. Specifically why, I don't know

I don't know why sustanance farming is not viable for these people either. So saying there are no viable alternatives doesn't seem to wash with me. Is it because they are ashamed to go back to their families after leaving for the factories? Who knows?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Where has the farmland gone?

Maybe it's been paved over, or turned toxic from the waste of the factories. Or maybe it's taxed too much, or not even owned by the people who live there anymore.