iPod City: Apple criticized for factory conditions

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

And of course denying them any money at all is sure to improve their economic condition sufficiently that they can afford those controls... no it's not, that's retarded.

You don't get it do you? It doesn't cost a dime to enact a law and a good police state like China which has time to go after priests and democracy advocates should have plenty of time to enforce the new labor laws. If they don't then BAM! Absolute embargo of anything remotely related to China. Free trade for those countries who have democracy, protection of human rights, and safe working conditions for workers. Everyone else can go **** themselves.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Arrian

I'm sorry, Oerdin. Because that's crazy, on multiple levels.

-Arrian

On the contrary. Instead of racing towards the bottom where everyone else must cut wages and working conditions to compete against what is an evil and repressive police state we would instead be acting as a force for good in the world. Want to get the wealth from trade with the first world? Then you must make yourself into a democracy, respect human rights, and enact a minimum standard of worker protections other wise you don't get to ship one thin dime's worth of goods.

That's a proper carrot and stick approach. What we have now is we give the farm away and then hope that maybe the Chinese Communist Party will maybe enact a few reforms later if they feel like it. **** that. They jump now and every time we say or they go back to living as peasant rice farmers like they were in the 1950's.

[Dis]

I didn't bother looking at the facts (why would I? ). It just seems like this happens everytime a product becomes popular. From Nike, to Walmart, and now Ipods.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
You don't get it do you? It doesn't cost a dime to enact a law

You're the clueless one. Any economic regulation costs or creates money, even if implementation costs none.

What you're proposing is to cause incredible suffering to tens or hundreds of millions of people because they have a bad government.

[Jaguar]

Kuci, Arrian, etc, are right. You're being a moron again, Oerdin.

[Dinner]

Haha, don't you get it? It costs them time and effort but use nothing other then inflation which can be off set by production from other low cost countries like Latin America or Africa or India if they want to follow or rules,

I'm afraid Jaguar is guilty of having a small mind and not being able to think outside of the box.

[notyoueither]

Oh yeah, protectionism worked soo well the last go 'round.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Haha, don't you get it? It costs them time and effort but use nothing other then inflation which can be off set by production from other low cost countries like Latin America or Africa or India if they want to follow or rules,

That sentence is not remotely grammatical. WTF are you trying to say?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Oh yeah, protectionism worked soo well the last go 'round.

That's the point. This wouldn't be the old style of protectionism. Instead there would be free trade among all ****ries which are democracies, which respected basic worker rights (a right to unionize, a right to a set work day (8 hours), a right to health care), and which respected human rights. A look at the globe shows that the EU, the US, Canada, Latin America (minus Cuba), Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, India, South Africa, and several other African Nations (along with possibly Russia and several other CIS states) could qualify.

That would be free trade with the majority of the world's population. The difference would be that the other states would have to give up dictatorship and one party rule if they wanted to partake in the fabulous creation of wealth which is trade. Would it be worth it to pay Indians, Africans, and Latin Americans $2 per day instead of $2 per day to Chinese if it meant massively encouraging Democracy and our way life in the process? I say yes. I say free trade for people who respect or way of life and no trade for dictatorships. Lock them out until they prove they can live with in the rules. It worked for the USSR and it can work for China. All we have to do is accept paying slightly higher wages to Indians and African in exchange for agreeing to support democracy.

If we are not willing to support our values then our values mean nothing. If we are willing to give up our values in exchange for 5% cheaper goods then what does that say about our commitment to democracy and human rights?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

That sentence is not remotely grammatical. WTF are you trying to say?

uci, if you can't follow that then you are either being deliberately obtuse or you are an idiot. Which is it?

[Dinner]

Ladies and gentlemen, Kuci and Jaguar do not have an anwser. They propose continuing to give China extraordinary trade concessions in the hope that sometime in the next 100 years they will adopt democracy and human rights standards which the rest of the world takes for granted. I reject this. Instead we realize that the Chinese export economy is highly dependent upon foreign markets and that its very continued existance depends upon access to foreign markets.

All it takes is a coordinated effort by the world's Democracies to say "this is the minimum accepted standard of conduct" and the world's dictatorships will either have to comply or be locked out of 3/4 of the world's economy. Instead of simply accepting all conduct we would instead become a force of good which would be enforcing the minimum stardards of conduct and all the nations which embraced democracy and human rights would be welcomed with free trade. The fact remains that free trade is the best path to wealth in the world, that the EU has proven that free trade with minimum standards does indeed create vast wealth, and the dictatorships would be forced to choose between wealth or continued dictatorship. That's the way to improve the world instead of simple accepting Tienamen Squares and hoping the dictatorships change if we will keep making them wealthier.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
That's the point. This wouldn't be the old style of protectionism. Instead there would be free trade among all ****ries which are democracies, which respected basic worker rights (a right to unionize, a right to a set work day (8 hours), a right to health care), and which respected human rights. A look at the globe shows that the EU, the US, Canada, Latin America (minus Cuba), Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, India, South Africa, and several other African Nations (along with possibly Russia and several other CIS states) could qualify.

If you're going to cut it off at our values, you're basically saying "free trade within the West." Great. Cut off the rest of the world from any sort of outside economic investment. That's really going to improve conditions in those countries.

By cutting off trade with China, or any other country whose labor rights aren't up to par, we'd hurt both ourselves and them and benefit nobody.

If we are not willing to support our values then our values mean nothing. If we are willing to give up our values in exchange for 5% cheaper goods then what does that say about our commitment to democracy and human rights?

It says we realize that completely severing trade with countries that don't have our standards isn't going to do them any good on those fronts, and will probably do a lot of harm. It's piontlessly destructive.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Ladies and gentlemen, Kuci and Jaguar do not have an anwser.

Do too.

They propose continuing to give China extraordinary trade concessions in the hope that sometime in the next 100 years they will adopt democracy and human rights standards which the rest of the world takes for granted.

Yep. It helps us tremendously and it helps them tremendously.

I reject this. Instead we realize that the Chinese export economy is highly dependent upon foreign markets and that its very continued existance depends upon access to foreign markets.

And if the Chinese export market disappeared we'd be back in the 60's. How much progress were they making then, Oerdin?

Almost all the liberalization occuring in China is a direct result of Nixon's visit and the normalization of diplomatic relations and the opening of trade between the West and the People's Republic.

[Dinner]

Trade helps people and is a powerful motivatove because it creates wealth. We are putting a condition on them becoming wealthy by saying you must become a democracy and respect human rights before we will trade with you. That helps everyone because it spreads human rights, it spreads democracy, and it takes that most basic of human desires (the desire for money) and says "if you want it you must protect human rights and honor democracy". That does more for the people living in dictatorships then a hundred years of our current policy of giving the dictators everything they want and requiring them to do nothing.

[notyoueither]

You're assuming ruling elites will give a damn what is good for the cannon fodder of their regime.