5 ms·

My mother-in-law worked in a factory in Taiwan in the 1960s. They didn't believe in providing ear protection to their workers and the loud machinery caused her

My mother-in-law worked in a factory in Taiwan in the 1960s. They didn't believe in providing ear protection to their workers and the loud machinery caused her permanent hearing loss in both ears that she still suffers from to this day. She can only hear out of one ear with a hearing aid, and her family has to shout at her just to barely communicate. Apparently you have no idea how bad it really is there. Here in the US we went through the industrial revolution in the 1800s, when they used to have child labor in factories, letting thousands of children get harmed or injured by unsafe machinery, sending children on suicide missions into mine shafts, chimneys, etc. We learned over a hundred years ago that those labor practices are barbaric and unnecessary to provide a healthy economic condition for our country. Why shouldn't we expect the countries we purchase products from to treat their workers with a modicum of respect and humanity?

potatolicious 17y ago
> " They didn't believe in providing ear protection to their workers and the loud machinery caused her permanent hearing loss in both ears that she still suffers from to this day." My mother lost a segment of her right middle finger, and my grandfather eventually died of hazardous substances breathed in during his work. My father survived a chlorine tank breach by a hair - a low wall was the only thing between him and certain death. None have regretted working there despite this. This isn't an argument against workplace safety - this is an argument against enforcing non-safety-related labor policies in developing countries where that is their chief advantage, and removal of it will harm economic development. Industrial jobs, shitty and brutal as they may be by our living and working standards, is a crucial part of the economic development of these countries. Note that the author of the article's chief points are all based on how "bad" life is for these workers, and only one point is even remotely related to safety hazards in the workplace. His complaints range for anything from not being allowed cell phones in the factory to terrible food to hot-bunking in the employee dormitories. These are not at all safety issues, and thus IMHO something we must allow economic development and time to fix. If the author has some real meat about flagrant safety violations in a factory, I would like to hear it, otherwise I stand by my assessment that this is nothing more than sensationalist reporting.
- dnsworks 17y ago
  My mother lost a segment of her right middle finger So she couldn't even properly flip-off her manager when she quit? That sucks.
- codexon 17y ago
  This sounds like the old "walking uphill bothways" tripe to me: My father/mother/uncle lost a limb/eyeball/lung and were happy about it too, so they shouldn't even complain. Sweatshop trinkets are not a requirement for industrialization or lucrative economies.
  - potatolicious 17y ago
    "My father/mother/uncle lost a limb/eyeball/lung and were happy about it too, so they shouldn't even complain." That's not what I said, please to be not putting words in my mouth? kthx. "Sweatshop trinkets are not a requirement for industrialization or lucrative economies." Straw man - "sweatshop" labor produces a whole lot more than mere trinkets and souvenirs - they are, in this case, producing valuable electronics in great demand elsewhere. Like I said in my previous post - safety should be utmost, even in developing countries, but what this article brought up is not safety, it's quality of life standards. You can work people like dogs, make them hot-bunk, and serve them watery gruel, and maintain effective safety measures at the same time. This isn't to say that you should, but rather that we are talking about two distinct and separate issues. This article pecks halfheartedly at one, but fails to address the other (IMHO more important) one.
    - codexon 17y ago
      That's not what I said, please to be not putting words in my mouth? kthx. You are trying to one-up illumin8 to support your argument that sweatshop labor was good. This is the gist of your argument: Your parents suffered even more and said it was great, so illumin8's argument is invalid. Straw man - "sweatshop" labor produces a whole lot more than mere trinkets and souvenirs - they are, in this case, producing valuable electronics in great demand elsewhere. I think we can live without the 4th or 5th shoddily crafted electronic mouse or hand-held gaming device so someone can profit by a couple of cents.
khafra 17y ago
> We learned over a hundred years ago that those labor practices are barbaric and unnecessary to provide a healthy economic condition for our country. I really don't think that's the way it worked. I think that a sufficient amount of hard work and suffering in unendurably harsh conditions built up productive capital much faster than humane treatment and safe working conditions could have. Then, this massive advantage we'd built allowed us to expend more resources making work more tolerable, and export the less pleasant parts of building modern civilization abroad.

potatolicious 17y ago

> " They didn't believe in providing ear protection to their workers and the loud machinery caused her permanent hearing loss in both ears that she still suffers from to this day." My mother lost a segment of her right middle finger, and my grandfather eventually died of hazardous substances breathed in during his work. My father survived a chlorine tank breach by a hair - a low wall was the only thing between him and certain death. None have regretted working there despite this. This isn't an argument against workplace safety - this is an argument against enforcing non-safety-related labor policies in developing countries where that is their chief advantage, and removal of it will harm economic development. Industrial jobs, shitty and brutal as they may be by our living and working standards, is a crucial part of the economic development of these countries. Note that the author of the article's chief points are all based on how "bad" life is for these workers, and only one point is even remotely related to safety hazards in the workplace. His complaints range for anything from not being allowed cell phones in the factory to terrible food to hot-bunking in the employee dormitories. These are not at all safety issues, and thus IMHO something we must allow economic development and time to fix. If the author has some real meat about flagrant safety violations in a factory, I would like to hear it, otherwise I stand by my assessment that this is nothing more than sensationalist reporting.

dnsworks 17y ago
My mother lost a segment of her right middle finger So she couldn't even properly flip-off her manager when she quit? That sucks.
codexon 17y ago
This sounds like the old "walking uphill bothways" tripe to me: My father/mother/uncle lost a limb/eyeball/lung and were happy about it too, so they shouldn't even complain. Sweatshop trinkets are not a requirement for industrialization or lucrative economies.
- potatolicious 17y ago
  "My father/mother/uncle lost a limb/eyeball/lung and were happy about it too, so they shouldn't even complain." That's not what I said, please to be not putting words in my mouth? kthx. "Sweatshop trinkets are not a requirement for industrialization or lucrative economies." Straw man - "sweatshop" labor produces a whole lot more than mere trinkets and souvenirs - they are, in this case, producing valuable electronics in great demand elsewhere. Like I said in my previous post - safety should be utmost, even in developing countries, but what this article brought up is not safety, it's quality of life standards. You can work people like dogs, make them hot-bunk, and serve them watery gruel, and maintain effective safety measures at the same time. This isn't to say that you should, but rather that we are talking about two distinct and separate issues. This article pecks halfheartedly at one, but fails to address the other (IMHO more important) one.
  - codexon 17y ago
    That's not what I said, please to be not putting words in my mouth? kthx. You are trying to one-up illumin8 to support your argument that sweatshop labor was good. This is the gist of your argument: Your parents suffered even more and said it was great, so illumin8's argument is invalid. Straw man - "sweatshop" labor produces a whole lot more than mere trinkets and souvenirs - they are, in this case, producing valuable electronics in great demand elsewhere. I think we can live without the 4th or 5th shoddily crafted electronic mouse or hand-held gaming device so someone can profit by a couple of cents.

khafra 17y ago

> We learned over a hundred years ago that those labor practices are barbaric and unnecessary to provide a healthy economic condition for our country. I really don't think that's the way it worked. I think that a sufficient amount of hard work and suffering in unendurably harsh conditions built up productive capital much faster than humane treatment and safe working conditions could have. Then, this massive advantage we'd built allowed us to expend more resources making work more tolerable, and export the less pleasant parts of building modern civilization abroad.